Into a new era of warfare
China tests a non-nuclear hydrogen bomb
I was planning to write on the likely (possible) turning point in the stock markets but then got a confirmation of a first-ever non-nuclear hydrogen bomb test by China over Easter. Just in December, I had noted in my (then unpublished) update to my paper on first strike with tactical nuclear weapons that:
Nuclear deterrence is a policy presented not just to your opponent, but also to your public. It's meant to shield your (nuclear) nation from devastation. Strikes with tactical nuclear weapons can be concealed with suppression of information and propaganda. Moreover, research suggests that that so called Fourth generation fusion nuclear weapons, FGNW, leaving only a very concentrated (likely localized) radiation footprint can soon enter the arsenal of modern nuclear powers and the modern tactical (low-yield) nuclear weapons are already magnitudes cleaner than the old bombs. Essentially, all that is required for the nuclear deterrence to hold is plausible deniability.
While a hydrogen bomb is not an actual FGNW, at least that’s how I’ve understood it (I am not a nuclear physicist), this is a major step towards the world entering an era of battlefield usage of extremely destructive weapons. As reported by The Defense Post:
A team of Chinese researchers claims to have successfully detonated a two-kilogram (4.4-pound) non-nuclear hydrogen bomb, unleashing a powerful chemical chain reaction.
Conducted during a recent controlled field test, the device produced a white-hot fireball exceeding 1,000 degrees Celsius (1,832 degrees Fahrenheit) — hot enough to melt aluminum alloys
It also sustained the explosion for over two seconds, which is 15 times longer than a standard TNT blast.
The Economic Times reports:
The test, conducted under controlled conditions, showed that the device could generate peak overpressure of 428.43 kilopascals at two meters, around 40% of TNT’s blast force, but with far more significant heat damage. The bomb's unique feature is its ability to create a self-feeding combustion loop, which means it can continue producing intense heat after initial detonation, devastating large areas.
The weapon’s potential military applications are wide-ranging: from denying the enemy access to strategic routes by incinerating roads to precisely targeting critical infrastructure such as power stations or communication hubs.
The paper also claims that China would be able to produce 150 tonnes of magnesium hydride annually. If so, China has just taken a major advantage in modern warfare.
We noted in our Special Report in November that:
We envisage three reasons of why a (confirmed) usage of a (tactical) nuclear weapon would permanently change the world:
The threshold of using nuclear weapons against civilian populace would become permanently lowered.
It would ignite a rearmament race across the globe.
The level of accepted aggressivity and violence (gore) would increase.
We are about to enter a new, much more dangerous world. I will analyze the test of China and its implications further when more information becomes available. I'll write about the market turning points tomorrow (other earth-moving events lacking).
Tuomas
Errata: hyride → hydride corrected on 4/22/2025.
Disclaimer:
The information contained herein is current as of the date of this entry. The information presented here is considered reliable, but its accuracy is not guaranteed. Changes may occur in the circumstances after the date of this entry, and the information contained in this post may not hold true in the future.
No information contained in this entry should be construed as investment advice nor advice on the safety of banks. Readers should always consult their own personal financial or investment advisor before making any investment decision or decision on banks they hold their money in. Readers using this post do so solely at their own risk. GnS Economics, any of its partners and employees, nor Tuomas Malinen cannot be held responsible for errors or omissions in the data presented.
Readers must make an independent assessment of the risks involved and of the legal, tax, business, financial, or other consequences of their actions. GnS Economics nor Tuomas Malinen or any other authors cannot be held i) responsible for any decision taken, act or omission; or ii) liable for damages caused by such measures.