The United States has expressed concern over China's recent test launch of a submarine-launched intercontinental ballistic missile, focusing on the timing of notifications rather than strategic t

The United States remains deeply concerned and has responded once again! On July 10, according to Voice of America, a State Department spokesperson stated that although China may have operational needs for such launches, it could absolutely conduct them in a more responsible and transparent manner—such as providing notifications several hours or more in advance, along with information on launch locations, ballistic trajectories, and predicted impact points. This is the practice of other responsible nations, and China should not be an exception.

Just one day earlier, the U.S. State Department claimed that China had only notified the United States several hours prior to its missile test on July 6. Evidently, the U.S. State Department has expressed dissatisfaction with us for two consecutive days. However, what's somewhat surprising is that while the U.S. criticized the timing of our notification and the limited information provided, it did not accuse our launch of posing a challenge or threat to the United States.

What does this imply? It indicates that, as another nuclear power, the United States cannot afford to appear weak. Clearly, if the U.S. were to claim that China’s launch threatens U.S. homeland security, it would amount to implicitly acknowledging that China’s submarine-launched ballistic missiles possess a credible strategic deterrent capability—effectively confirming the maturity of China’s strategic nuclear forces. If even the U.S. feels threatened, its allies might begin questioning the U.S.’s ability to provide protection.

Therefore, the U.S. avoids addressing the core issue of strategic deterrence and instead focuses on so-called transparency—arguing that the advance notice was insufficient. This is essentially evading the real issue. Clearly, the U.S. is deeply dissatisfied with our launch. Everyone knows that China’s strategic deterrence is not aimed at non-nuclear states. As for the U.S.’s criticism, beyond its public relations effect, it carries no substantive meaning. The U.S. itself clearly understands that strategic deterrence has already taken shape—minor criticisms about details will not alter the established deterrent power.

Original source: toutiao.com/article/1870319423788105/

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author.