Thread by @james_acton32

<THREAD>@nukestrat and @mattkorda have discovered ~110 new Chinese silos, bringing the total to 230.

In my opinion, this reinforces the shell game hypothesis--the idea that only some of the silos will have ICBMs in.

nytimes.com/2021/07/26/us/…
(1/n)

The shell game idea was originally developed--but never implemented--in the Cold War by the US, which planned to hide 200 ICBMs in 4,600 silos (seriously!) to complicate Soviet efforts to destroy them preemptively. (2/n)

washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/…

.@DeptofDefense assesses that China's current "operational warhead stockpile" is in the low 200s and that China has enough fissile material on hand to double its warhead stockpile. (3/n)

media.defense.gov/2020/Sep/01/20…

This statement needs careful parsing (I've been guilty of sloppiness here before). The warhead stockpile that could double (or more) appears to be the larger *total* stockpile, not the smaller *operational* stockpile. (4/n)

So, I @DeptofDefense as implying that China could build very roughly 250 new warheads and conceivably 300 or even 350.

Now, superficially, that appears to be enough for 230 new silos.

BUT...

(5/n)

The new silos are likely for DF-41 ICBMs, which can carry multiple warheads. They've reportedly been tested with two warheads, but there's press leaks (of questionably provenance) saying they can carry more. (6/n)

washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/…

I guess it's possible that China will arm its silo-based DF-41s with only one warhead, but that seems unlikely.

But putting a two-warhead DF-41 in each new silo would need 460 warheads.

(And, if you think the DF-41 is more highly MIRVed you need even more warheads.) (7/n)

Crucially, the silo-based DF-41s are not China's only source of demand for more fissile material.

China probably needs additional warheads for:
👉mobile DF-41s
👉additional submarine-launched ballistic missiles
👉new air-delivered weapons.

(8/n)

China's force of nuclear-armed and dual-capable regional missiles may be expanding too (in particular, the DF-26 force). (9/n)

When you add up all this demand, it's very difficult for me to see how China can meet it from its existing fissile material stockpile...

...which provides evidence for the shell game hypothesis. In fact, the more silos there are, the more likely it becomes. (10/n)

Now, to be clear, China could be planning to produce more fissile material.

But, China surely needs plutonium for its warheads and plutonium production is fairly time consuming and visible, and there's no evidence it's started yet. (11/n)

In summary, I'd assess with ~70% confidence that the new DF-41s silos will be a shell game--at least initially. However, over time (measured in years), China may produce more fissile material and warheads and fill more silos. (12/12)

Addendum: I do think it's very possible that China will arm some DF-41s with one single-warhead glider each. I strongly doubt that'll alter the basic fissile material math. (13/13)