A recent tabletop exercise hosted by the Centre for a New American Security (CNAS) in Washington, D.C., has raised alarming concerns about the possibility of a Sino-American nuclear war in 2032. The exercise explored the dangers of nuclear escalation resulting from a conventional conflict over Taiwan, with grave implications for both nations involved.

The exercise scenario suggested that after 45 days of intense fighting over Taiwan, China might resort to using "theatre" nuclear weapons. These weapons, which have shorter ranges and lower yields compared to strategic nuclear missiles, could target vital American military assets such as Guam, Kwajalein Atoll, and an aircraft carrier strike group, aiming to pressure the United States into submission.

The study, led by experts Andrew Metrick, Philip Sheers, and Stacie Pettyjohn, utilized two tabletop exercises named "Spike the Ball" and "Cold Stop." These simulations tested the dynamics of nuclear coercion and China’s potential use of nuclear weapons to either gain a strategic advantage or overcome a disadvantage. The results highlighted the challenges of managing nuclear escalation and the tough decisions U.S. leaders could face.

Currently, the United States possesses a more extensive and sophisticated nuclear arsenal compared to China. The U.S. maintains a diverse triad of nuclear forces, including land-based intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs), and strategic bombers. This extensive arsenal provides a robust second-strike capability, ensuring effective retaliation if attacked.

In contrast, China, which traditionally had a smaller nuclear force, has been significantly modernizing its arsenal. Recent advancements include new mobile missile systems, upgraded submarine-launched ballistic missiles, and the construction of numerous hardened ICBM silos. By 2030, China is expected to have around 1,000 operational nuclear warheads.

Hans M Kristensen, an expert from SIPRI, noted, "China is expanding its nuclear arsenal faster than any other country. However, almost all nuclear-armed states are either planning or significantly pushing to increase their nuclear forces."

Although China has historically adhered to a no-first-use nuclear policy, its recent expansion efforts suggest a shift toward a more flexible and potentially aggressive nuclear strategy. This could involve adopting a launch-on-warning posture and incorporating nonstrategic nuclear weapons into its conventional military strategies.

The study found that a prolonged conflict, especially over Taiwan, could make nonstrategic nuclear weapons more appealing to China. As conventional military resources become strained, China might consider limited nuclear strikes to achieve its objectives or force the U.S. to de-escalate.

Should China initiate limited nuclear strikes against U.S. military targets or allied territories in the Indo-Pacific, the U.S. would face a critical decision. The study indicates that U.S. decision-makers might find it challenging to respond uniformly. Some may advocate for a proportional nuclear response, while others might argue that protecting U.S. interests in Taiwan does not warrant escalating the conflict further.

The exercises also revealed that China might have advantages due to the numerous American military targets in Asia. The U.S. could face difficulties responding effectively, as many potential targets for retaliation are located in China, raising the risk of full-scale nuclear war. America's most advanced non-nuclear missiles could be depleted by day 45 of the conflict, and the U.S. no longer possesses nuclear-tipped anti-ship missiles, limiting its options.

The report also highlighted the potential role of U.S. allies in the region. China could use nuclear coercion against allies such as Japan or Australia, aiming to weaken the U.S. alliance network and challenge U.S. resolve, potentially leading to a fragmented alliance.

The global consequences of a nuclear war between the U.S. and China would be catastrophic, with far-reaching economic, political, and environmental impacts. The notion of "winning" such a conflict becomes meaningless given the extensive destruction caused by nuclear weapons.

The report offers several recommendations for U.S. policymakers:

• Educate Decision-Makers: The report emphasizes the need for U.S. leaders to understand the complexities of theatre nuclear use and current U.S. responses. It suggests forming a high-level study group to explore these issues and develop strategies.
• Pursue Dialogue with China: Despite the challenges, the report advocates for ongoing dialogue and confidence-building measures with China to manage nuclear escalation risks.
• Strengthen Alliances: The report highlights the importance of U.S. alliances in the Indo-Pacific and recommends detailed planning with key allies like Japan and Australia to prepare for potential nuclear coercion.
• Improve Capabilities: The U.S. should integrate nuclear considerations into its planning and exercises and develop new capabilities to effectively respond to nuclear coercion.
• Expand Theatre Nuclear Capabilities: The report suggests that the U.S. may need to develop new theatre nuclear weapons, such as nuclear-tipped anti-ship missiles, to enhance its ability to manage nuclear escalation.

To sum up, the recent tabletop exercises highlight a sobering reality: the risk of a Sino-American nuclear conflict is not just a theoretical scenario but a tangible concern that demands serious attention. As both nations navigate a complex and evolving geopolitical landscape, the potential for escalation, especially over Taiwan, poses significant challenges. The study underscores the importance of preparing for various contingencies, strengthening alliances, and pursuing open dialogue to mitigate these risks. With the stakes as high as they are, it's crucial for U.S. policymakers to integrate these findings into strategic planning to ensure that the world can avoid the catastrophic consequences of nuclear warfare.