• Research
  • Diwan
  • About
  • Experts
Carnegie Middle East logoCarnegie lettermark logo
PalestineSyria
{
  "authors": [
    "Tong Zhao"
  ],
  "type": "other",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
    "Carnegie China"
  ],
  "collections": [
    "China’s Foreign Relations",
    "Hypersonic Weapons",
    "Carnegie China Commentaries"
  ],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie China",
  "programAffiliation": "",
  "programs": [],
  "projects": [],
  "regions": [],
  "topics": [
    "Arms Control",
    "Security"
  ]
}
Other
Carnegie China

Conventional Challenges to Strategic Stability: Chinese Perceptions of Hypersonic Technology and the Security Dilemma

Chinese experts are increasingly using the term “strategic stability” to refer to a bilateral nuclear relationship of mutual vulnerability. Maintaining such a mutually vulnerable relationship with other major nuclear powers, especially the United States, is of ultimate importance for Chinese decisionmakers.

Link Copied
By Tong Zhao
Published on Jul 23, 2018

Traditionally, within the Chinese strategic community, strategic stability constituted a comprehensive concept for describing the overall stability of a bilateral relationship that was affected by a wide range of factors—military, political, diplomatic, and economic. In recent decades, the Western literature on nuclear weapons and deterrence issues has started to be introduced to and embraced by the Chinese strategic community. As a result, Chinese experts are increasingly using the term “strategic stability” to refer to a bilateral nuclear relationship of mutual vulnerability. Maintaining such a mutually vulnerable relationship with other major nuclear powers, especially the United States, is of ultimate importance for Chinese decisionmakers. However, despite Beijing’s efforts to enhance its nuclear retaliatory capability through modernization programs, it sees itself facing significant new challenges.

The emergence of advanced conventional weapons is widely recognized as one of the major challenges to strategic stability in the so-called second nuclear age. Such conventional weapons can travel at extremely high speeds and strike targets with extraordinary accuracy. Among all conventional military capabilities, hypersonic weapons present perhaps the greatest challenge. These types of weapons, which are currently under development in both the United States and China, can potentially travel long distances at speeds of more than Mach 5, and they have a much greater capability to change flight trajectory than ballistic missiles. This emerging conventional military technology is potentially capable of disrupting mutually vulnerable relationships between nuclear powers by blurring the lines between conventional and nuclear warfare.

The United States has the most advanced hypersonic technology development program, and it has expressed interest in deploying such weapons. According to the Obama administration’s 2010 Nuclear Posture Review Report, for instance, conventional weapons are slated to play a more important role in the U.S. deterrence posture. Hence, the US investment in the development of hypersonic weapons is causing major Chinese concerns.

This paper draws directly on the Chinese literature to answer these questions: What are China’s specific concerns about hypersonic weapons? How do Chinese experts expect hypersonic technologies to alter future nuclear relationships and, therefore, affect traditional understandings of strategic stability? Also, what are the major mutual misunderstandings regarding each other’s hypersonic technology development, and what are the implications for maintaining U.S.-China strategic stability in the future?

A revised version of this paper was published in the bookThe End of Strategic Stability? Nuclear Weapons and the Challenge of Regional Rivalries

Read Full Paper

Tong Zhao
Senior Fellow with the Nuclear Policy Program and Carnegie China
Tong Zhao
Arms ControlSecurity

Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    Baku Proceeds With Caution as Ethnic Azeris Join Protests in Neighboring Iran

    Baku may allow radical nationalists to publicly discuss “reunification” with Azeri Iranians, but the president and key officials prefer not to comment publicly on the protests in Iran.

      Bashir Kitachaev

  • Commentary
    Diwan
    Beirut Can Do More on Tom Barrack’s Proposal

    In addressing Hezbollah’s disarmament, the Lebanese state must start by increasing its own leverage.

      Michael Young

  • Commentary
    Diwan
    Iran After the Battle

    The country’s political and military establishment is still debating how to interpret the recent war’s outcome.

      • Nicole Grajewski Profile Picture

      Nicole Grajewski

  • Commentary
    Diwan
    The United States Has Attacked Iran’s Nuclear Facilities

    Spot analysis from Carnegie scholars on events relating to the Middle East and North Africa.

      Mohanad Hage Ali

  • Commentary
    Diwan
    Hezbollah’s Israeli-Iranian Quandary

    Will the party remain bound to Iran or prioritize its organizational survival and the needs of Lebanon’s Shiite population?

      Mohanad Hage Ali

Get more news and analysis from
Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center
Carnegie Middle East logo, white
  • Research
  • Diwan
  • About
  • Experts
  • Projects
  • Events
  • Contact
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
Get more news and analysis from
Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.