The RAND Corporation, a leading think tank, has issued a stark warning about the risks of nuclear escalation in a potential U.S.-China conflict over Taiwan. In its newly released report, “Denial Without Disaster—Keeping a U.S.-China Conflict over Taiwan Under the Nuclear Threshold,” RAND highlights strategies for the U.S. to defend Taiwan while avoiding the devastating consequences of a nuclear war. The report’s findings are particularly urgent as tensions in the Indo-Pacific rise and China continues to expand its nuclear arsenal.
As RAND explains, the U.S. military’s reliance on long-range strike capabilities—like the B-21 Raider stealth bomber, hypersonic missiles, and conventional surface-to-surface missiles—will play a pivotal role in any defense of Taiwan. However, the report warns that how these weapons are deployed could determine whether a conflict remains conventional or escalates to a nuclear exchange. According to the authors, “Employing long-range strike assets judiciously, hardening them against nuclear attack, and protecting them from conventional attack should reduce escalation risks.”
Why This Matters Now
RAND’s report reflects a shift in the strategic balance between the U.S. and China. Until the 2020s, China’s nuclear capabilities were limited, which kept the risk of escalation low. However, RAND notes that “everything changed” with China’s dramatic nuclear buildup over the past decade. The People’s Liberation Army (PLA) has developed advanced systems, including the DF-41 road-mobile intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM), nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarines (SSBNs), and a nuclear-capable fractional orbital bombardment system (FOBS).
This buildup enhances China’s ability to conduct a secure second-strike—retaliating even after suffering a nuclear attack—making it critical for the U.S. to approach a conflict with China under the assumption that Beijing has this capability. As the report states, “Recent qualitative and quantitative advances in China’s nuclear capabilities mean that the United States must treat Beijing as if it already has a secure second-strike capability—especially by 2030.”
RAND’s Recommendations for Managing Escalation
To mitigate the risks of a nuclear conflict, the RAND Corporation offers detailed recommendations aimed at balancing operational effectiveness with escalation management. Below are the key strategies, explained with insights from the report:
1. Develop a Robust Denial Capability
Rather than relying heavily on strikes against the Chinese mainland, RAND emphasizes the importance of “denial strategies.” These strategies focus on preventing China from achieving its military objectives—such as a successful invasion of Taiwan—without provoking nuclear retaliation. By prioritizing defensive measures, the U.S. can effectively counter Chinese aggression while minimizing the likelihood of escalation.
2. Strategic Target Selection
The report highlights the critical importance of selecting targets carefully to avoid unnecessarily provoking China. Striking certain high-value assets on the Chinese mainland, such as nuclear command centers or missile bases, could be perceived as crossing a “red line.” The authors stress that “the single most influential factor under U.S. military control for managing escalation is target selection.” Military planners must evaluate each potential target through the lens of escalation management to reduce the risk of a catastrophic response.
3. Establish an Escalation Management Center of Excellence
To institutionalize these principles, RAND recommends creating an Escalation Management Center of Excellence within the Air Force Global Strike Command. This center would train personnel at all levels to understand and navigate the risks of nuclear escalation during both peacetime and conflict. It would also help the military integrate escalation management into training exercises, war planning, and weapons acquisition.
4. Harden Long-Range Strike Assets
Long-range strike platforms like the B-21 Raider and hypersonic missiles are essential to U.S. strategy, but they must be protected from both conventional and nuclear attacks. Hardening these assets makes them less vulnerable and less tempting as targets for a preemptive Chinese strike. RAND warns that these assets should not “become an inviting target for a limited Chinese nuclear strike.”
5. Communicate Intentions Clearly
RAND urges the U.S. to proactively manage Chinese perceptions of its military actions and intentions. Clear communication—both during peacetime and conflict—can help prevent misunderstandings that could lead to escalation. The authors suggest preparing communication strategies in advance to address potential Chinese nuclear signaling or provocations.
6. Avoid Escalatory Training Practices
Certain military exercises, such as those simulating leadership decapitation or counterforce strikes, could be perceived as direct threats to China’s nuclear deterrent. RAND advises against such practices, noting that they could increase Beijing’s willingness to consider nuclear first use. Instead, training should focus on scenarios that emphasize defense and de-escalation.
7. Adapt War Plans for Escalation Management
In a conflict with China, the U.S. may need to accept trade-offs between operational efficiency and the risk of escalation. RAND suggests developing flexible war plans that allow for slower tempos, suboptimal target selection, and operating farther from conflict zones. While these compromises may reduce immediate military effectiveness, they serve the greater purpose of preventing nuclear escalation.
The Broader Context
The report’s findings come at a critical time. Chinese President Xi Jinping has reportedly ordered the PLA to be ready to invade Taiwan by 2027, a timeline that coincides with Beijing’s ongoing nuclear buildup. Meanwhile, the Biden administration is seeking ways to strengthen deterrence without further expanding the U.S. nuclear arsenal. RAND’s recommendations align with this goal by focusing on how conventional forces, particularly long-range strike capabilities, can support nuclear deterrence.
The Pentagon’s recently submitted Nuclear Employment Strategy to Congress underscores the complexity of simultaneously deterring China, Russia, and North Korea. As RAND notes, “There will likely be a trade-off between military operational utility, force survivability, and escalation management.” Balancing these priorities will be key to maintaining stability in the Indo-Pacific.
Striking a Balance
Mark Gunzinger, a former bomber pilot and defense analyst, adds perspective to the debate. While some argue that strikes on mainland China are too escalatory, Gunzinger counters that such strikes may be necessary to deny the PLA an “operational sanctuary.” He warns, “If we don’t factor mainland strikes into our war plans … we would be ceding mainland China as an operational sanctuary to the PLA.” However, he also acknowledges that any strike carries risks and must be weighed carefully.
ACZ Editor’s Comment: The bottom line is that we are in an arms race once again, this time with China. While these are intelligent suggestions some of them border on ‘appeasement’ which we know never works. The report seems to subscribe to the “china is crazy and unstable” theory, and that fear is a weakness we cannot afford. China does not want nuclear war anymore than we do.