Minitrue: Promote Land-Based Anti-Missile Test

The following censorship instruction, issued to the media by government authorities, has been leaked and distributed online. The name of the issuing body has been omitted to protect the source.

Please take note to republish: “China Conducts Successful Domestic Land-Based Anti-Missile Test.” (July 26, 2014)

请注意转载：中国在境内成功进行1次陆基反导技术试验。

China’s Ministry of National Defense announced the success of a land-based missile interception test on Wednesday, and Xinhua reported that “such test[s] could build shield for China’s air defense by intercepting incoming warheads such as ballistic missiles.” Meanwhile, the AP reports that Washington is urging Beijing against destabilizing actions after successfully testing the military technology, which the U.S. State Department says is designed to destroy satellites. BBC rounds up Chinese media coverage of the test, which is carrying messages that counter U.S. claims:

Describing the test as a “success”, a commentary in the Beijing News notes “China has already mastered anti-missile technology and is in a world-leading position”.

It observes that the US and India are also developing anti-missile systems, while Japan is “actively participating in the research of missile defence systems”.

The China Daily quotes experts as saying that China has “made a major breakthrough” in the technology.

However, Teng Jianqun, a senior research fellow from the China Institute of International Studies, warns that China’s anti-missile system is still far from being perfect.

[…] “Our aim is to show the US that we possess such technology… China is against the militarisation of space, and does not really want to carry out actual deployment, but if the US is deploying a massive anti-missile system, China will need to be equipped too,” he tells the Peninsula Morning Post. [Source]

Since directives are sometimes communicated orally to journalists and editors, who then leak them online, the wording published here may not be exact. The date given may indicate when the directive was leaked, rather than when it was issued. CDT does its utmost to verify dates and wording, but also takes precautions to protect the source.