Part 2 of 2 Parts (Please read Part 1 first)
     China carried out a total of forty-five test detonation of nuclear devices before they signed the CTBT. It only has three yield options. These include a several kiloton warhead for solid fueled ICBMs and SLBMS, a two megaton warhead for liquid fueled missiles which have an intermediate range, and a five megaton warhead for liquid fueled ICBMs. All of these Chinese nuclear warheads are considered to be strategic weapons. They have no nuclear warheads that are considered to be “tactical.”
    China has publicly stated that they do not need to have any tactical nuclear warheads because they do not intend to ever start or fight a nuclear war with the U.S. They do not believe that the U.S. would ever start a nuclear war with China as long as China has a credible retaliatory nuclear capability which is satisfied by their current arsenal. Unlike the U.S. and Russia, the Chinese do not keep any of their nuclear weapons on alert, ready to fire on demand.
     Chinese nuclear experts are concerned that the U.S. might come to believe that it could destroy China with a massive first attack and missile defenses good enough to absorb whatever China did manage to launch in retaliation.
    The recent modest Chinese efforts to modernized and upgrade their nuclear arsenal have been undertaken to persuade any U.S. president that it would not be worth the risk to attack China. The Chinese are working to convince U.S. planners that enough of Chinese missiles would be able to get through U.S. defenses to deal serious damage.
    The best way for Congress and the U.S. public to satisfy their justified concerns about the Chinese nuclear capability upgrade would be to make use of two international mechanisms to constrain China. Those two constraints would be the aforementioned CTBT and something called the Fissile Material Cut-off Treaty (FMCT). The CTBT would prevent the Chinese from conducting test detonations of nuclear devices required to develop more advanced warhead design. Getting the Chinese to agree to the FMCT would limit the Chinese nuclear arsenal to its current level.
    China has expressed their willingness to enter into international arms control agreements with the United Nations. Chinese negotiators in multilateral nuclear conversations have affirmed that China is willing to ratify the CTBT when the U.S. does. China has also said that it is willing to enter into negotiations on the ratification of the FMCT. The fact that China is willing to consider these serious constraints on its nuclear weapons arsenal is significant when discussing issues regarding the current size of the Chinese nuclear arsenal and its current modernization program.
     It is obvious that China is not interested in trying to match the nuclear arsenal of the U.S. and China. The huge size of China and its large population makes it a difficult target for nuclear annihilation. Any attempt to destroy China on the part of the U.S. would also be suicidal for the U.S. The fact that China has a small nuclear arsenal and does not participate in the belligerent and provocative public threat of nuclear war that is common with the Russian government and President Putin suggests that China is not really an existential threat to the U.S.
Chinese nuclear forces emblem:

Ambient office  = 86 nanosieverts per hour

Ambient outside = 105 nanosieverts per hour

Soil exposed to rain water = 102 nanosieverts per hour

Blueberry from Central Market = 81 nanosieverts per hour

Tap water = 77 nanosieverts per hour

Filtered water = 70 nanosieverts per hour

Ambient office  = 81 nanosieverts per hour

Ambient outside = 137 nanosieverts per hour

Soil exposed to rain water = 136 nanosieverts per hour

Tomato from Central Market = 78 nanosieverts per hour

Tap water = 90 nanosieverts per hour

Filtered water = 72 nanosieverts per hour

Ambient office  = 100 nanosieverts per hour

Ambient outside = 88 nanosieverts per hour

Soil exposed to rain water = 89 nanosieverts per hour

English cucumber from Central Market = 42 nanosieverts per hour

Tap water = 123 nanosieverts per hour

Filtered water = 112 nanosieverts per hour

Dover sole – Caught in USA = 115 nanosieverts per hour

Part 1 of 2 Parts
       There are three major nuclear powers on Earth. The U.S. and Russia both have thousands of nuclear warheads. It has been estimated that the detonation of one hundred nuclear warheads could destroy human civilization and threaten the existence of the human race. This means that between the U.S. and Russia, they could destroy humanity more than a hundred times over. This does seem a bit excessive.
    The third nuclear power, China, is thought to only have a small number of nuclear warheads and says that it will not use them unless attacked. While China does not make public the extent of its nuclear arsenal, nevertheless, there is enough public information about China’s weapons to make a well-informed guess about the number of nuclear warheads it possesses.
     It is documented that China had produced a small amount of weapons-grade plutonium when it joined an agreement to limit such production a few decades ago. China has also detonated a few test nuclear devices. These two facts limit the possible future quantity and quality of China’s nuclear arsenal.
    It is accepted that China does have a few hundred nuclear warheads. It also has enough weapons-grade plutonium to make a few hundred more. The U.S. has three thousand eight hundred nuclear warheads counting both operational and reserve. It has enough weapons-grade plutonium to make roughly five thousand more warheads.
    China could use its ground based intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBM) to deliver up to one hundred of their warheads to targets in the U.S. It also will soon have sixty more warheads that it can use to hit the U.S. with submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBM). The U.S. has four hundred nuclear warheads on its ground-based ICBMs and about nine hundred on SLBMs. The U.S. also has about a thousand nuclear gravity bombs and about five hundred nuclear armed cruise missiles that can be delivered by airplanes. China does not have any nuclear warheads that can be delivered by aircraft.
     Checking these numbers, it becomes obvious that the current rate of increase in Chinese nuclear warheads will never allow China to even come close to equaling the total number of U.S. warheads. Even it the U.S. does not add any new nuclear warheads to its nuclear arsenal for decades, it will be easy to maintain nuclear superiority over China.
     In addition to the obvious quantitative advantage that the U.S. has over China in nuclear warheads, the U.S. also has a significance superiority in the quality of nuclear weapons. The U.S. detonated over a thousand nuclear test devices before it signed the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) in 1996. These test detonations allowed the U.S. to test many different warhead designs and perfect the maximum yield of a giving quantity of plutonium. The U.S. now has seven different types of nuclear warheads including two type which can be adjusted for different yields. U.S. nuclear warheads have thirteen different yields between a third of a megaton and one and two tenths megatons.
Please read Part 2