The likelihood of China using military force to “reunify” Taiwan is growing.
Some believe the Chinese government could use military action to distract its population from troubles at home after China’s economic growth fell to its second lowest level for decades in 2022.
There are numerous signals from Beijing about its intentions towards Taiwan, which the People’s Republic of China claims jurisdiction over. During the 2022 Communist party congress, President Xi indicated that Taiwan is at the core of China’s “rejuvenation” and that peaceful reunification is preferable but that China does not “renounce the use of force”.
This article is the opinion of the author and not necessarily that of the UK Defence Journal. If you would like to submit your own article on this topic or any other, please see our submission guidelines.
Simultaneously, tensions in the Taiwan Strait have been exacerbated by a series of events. The August 2022 visit of former US House of Representatives speaker Nancy Pelosi to Taiwan led to Chinese military exercises in the strait, and the cancellation of “military dialogues” and cooperation channels with the US.
In late December 2022, China conducted additional military strike drills near Taiwan, and several Chinese aircraft were detected into Taiwan’s air defence zone. In early January 2023, a US warship transited through the strait prompting a reaction from the Chinese embassy in the US accusing the latter of flexing its military muscle and undermining peace and stability in the region.
Such heightened geopolitical tensions can put socio-economic and political pressures on Taiwan and the situation could have wider consequences for the self-governing island.
What to look out for
If China is to opt for the use of force in Taiwan, it is likely that it will increase production of munition, ballistic and cruise missiles and other military hardware.
In addition, China would move to protect relevant industries from disruptions and sanctions. These could include measures such as freezing foreign financial assets within China, the “rapid liquidation and repatriation of Chinese assets held abroad” and the suspension of key exports such as critical minerals.
Observers point out that when Ma Ying-jeou served as Taiwan’s president between 2008 and 2015 his policies handed Beijing more power. He was conciliatory and promoted economic integration.
This increased economic dependence on China allowing the super power to exert financial or commercial pressure at will. Taiwan’s economic prosperity has gradually become more dependent on China because of greater trade between the two. By 2021, trade with China amounted to 21.6% of Taiwan’s total trade, making China its largest trade partner.
Studies indicate that in the last decade or so Taiwan has slowly recovered from the stagnation that resulted from the 2008 global financial crisis but has not reached the pre-crisis growth level and dynamism of its economy. The current context with its potential for military conflict could disrupt trade flows affecting employment levels, wages and productivity, bringing back a degree of economic stagnation.
Independence v unification
Taiwanese politics are largely intertwined with independence. The idea of being pro-independence is often employed by politicians as a diversionary strategy from other issues.
As the popularity of Taiwan’s president — and approval — declines, the rhetoric about independence from China increases. The current state of affairs in the region will loom large in Taiwan’s politics, especially in the 2024 presidential elections. During the national election periods, “candidates are compelled” to take a position about the independence-unification issue.
The possibility of conflict may lead to political polarisation among supporters of independence and pro-Beijing groups. This could occur along the lines of political parties with the pro-unification nationalist Kuomintang (KMT) which appeals to older voters. This is important because the older population seem to be more likely to support unification.
Taiwanese identity issues
Some commentators argue that identifying as Taiwanese (rather than Chinese) does not necessarily translate into support for independence. They point out that support only increased from 23.1% in 2008 to 23.8% in 2014 with an 80% to 90% of Taiwan’s population preferring the status quo.
This is despite a strong increase in people identifying as Taiwanese from 20% of the total population in 1992, to 39% in 2000 and to 55% in 2010. Nevertheless, national identity and relations between China and Taiwan have in the past led to “bitter divisions”.
Older voters are descendants of Chinese nationalist soldiers but were born or grew up in Taiwan during its brutal decades of martial law so they may be more sceptical about Taiwanese politicians’ commitment to democratic values. By some accounts in 2022, support for unification with China was up to 12%, possibly because voters believed that China’s economic strength and global power would benefit Taiwan.
Some politicians exploit the divide between the pro-China and Taiwan independence lobbies to advance their own interests, and in doing so ramp up public distrust in democratic processes and governance. This intensifies intolerance and increases the likelihood of violence by fuelling the public’s anger and their division about specific issues.
The younger population is more inclined to adopt pro-independence views which in the past led to “hostile” political attitudes toward China. The vast divide and emotions involved can even manifest in parents being against their children marrying people from “across the divide”.
There may be other subtler effects of the current Beijing/Taipei tension, for example, those that can arise from responses to military pressure. In late December 2022, Taiwan announced that it was extending its compulsory military service from four months to one year — which previously had been reduced from more than two years — because of the increasing pressures from Beijing. Arguably, military conscription can have unintended consequences.
Studies (for example, in Sweden and Argentina) found that conscription has a negative social effect by significantly increasing the likelihood and the number of post-service crimes among people from disadvantaged backgrounds.
Conscription can also delay the entry into the workforce of some young people, thereby reducing their labour market opportunities. Such an effect, in the long term, can have significant implications for the wellbeing of the economy, for example, by lowering the development of skills necessary to sustain productivity.
All of these elements are providing extra pressure on the Taiwanese economy, which, in turn, gives China more power.
Jose Caballero, Senior Economist, IMD World Competitiveness Center, International Institute for Management Development (IMD)
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Maybe its Times for Sanctions on any Country that Supports Russia, see how Quick China loses its interest in Taiwan, and that all its oversea assets are taken and its markets are blocked
And what, watch the Global Economy tank overnight on a scale that dwarfs even the 08 Crash or the Covid impact…?
It may be either that or WW3. I can’t see any easy options left. Burying our heads in the sand just allows Russia & China to get even more ahead, unrestrained. It’s our weak folly that has empowered them. Either we stop them or become extinct.
Unfortunately feeding the economic growth of a mercantile and opposing geopolitical power was always going to end badly, but if you are a true follower of Neoliberalism then the only the market matters not the fate of individual nationstates..even if that means allowing the rise of a mercantile power that will by its nature destroy neoliberalism….unfortunately neoliberalism has never really been truly tested against Mercantilism until now ( as all the neoliberal states were actually mercantilists until the rise of neoliberalism, so the UK, US major EU economies were all essentially mercantile in nature and got their wealth and power from that…moved more and more to a neoliberal model to grow wealth further…which allowed them to out compete communism…but it’s never been tested against a really full fat mercantile power until now….and the west is really struggling to come up with a game plan that both satisfies the neoliberal free market approach but protects from an opponent using a very good mercantile strategy.
The other element of mercantilism that we have not yet fully seen from china is the the use of hard power to collect more wealth. The ROC is ultimate prize for a mercantile state, it will essentially give china complete control of semiconductor production and has a level of deniability to use around the world..Both ROC and the Chinese communist party both claim to be the true government of China..so China would not be invading a sovereign state..just one of its provinces…even the ROC agree that’s the case.
Both the west and China are all mercantile, we all trade. One lets the market decide what standard of goods and at what price, the other likes to rig it via state aid, currency manipulation, dubious government to government loans. Without the free market which drives new products, technology, productivity, quality and price China would have nowhere to trade because without it many of the innovative devices that are built in their factories would still not exist. What needs to happen is countries and trading blocks like the EU need to use the mechanisms within bodies like WTO to confront China. Any suggestion we clamp down on our own free market to curtail China, essentially removing the cornerstone of freedom aka ‘choice’ is a very very very bad idea. Markets where that occurs its obvious we’ll all end up far worse off. Some, using China as an example are saying, look you can have a regulated state and still be innovative. But that’s not what’s happening, as China is selling into largely free markets globally so its own regulated market is not that relevant. If those global markets become regulated then China has no reason to innovate and neither do companies in those in the new regulated markets.
I do find it ironic that it was the political left in the US that actually favoured China joining the WTO which catapulted China into its global position today. The neoliberals in the US were mostly against China joining the WTO.
Hi expat Mercantile is a very specific geopolitical tool of nations it does not mean general trade and has nothing to do with free market ideas….mercantilism is when a nation’s government manages trade ( import and export) as well as manages markets and controls raw materials and sometimes labour….with the express aim of taking wealth from other nations, reducing their wealth and power and increasing its own…it was the overriding way trade was done in the west up until the 19th century ( in reality it dominated into the early 20c)…it’s premise is that there is a finite amount of wealth and a nation should collect as much as it can ( zero sum game) The free market idea is that you can create more wealth and so it’s a positive sum game..but only if you have free trade..the problem is the free market was never designed to compete with a mercantile nation….what happens is the free market starts to generate wealth that is then acquired by the mercantile state.
Ive always associated to with the movement of wealth to a particular class of people typically the wealthy merchants. In the UK this lead to them investing locally to bring goods to market. Jeff Bezos could be a modern day example although some may think otherwise 😀. It’s easy to forget China is communist, however they are more National Socialist than Marxs dream of boarderless Socialism. Generally the merchants of the 19th and 20th century respected things like intellectual property or to be more accurate the nations they resided in respected international IP laws and inforced them, China doesn’t. I’m not sure I’d say China is mimicking what happened historically in the west as they show little respect for international norms of the time.
I’m not sure what you would call Jeff Bezos really…not after he payed to have a rocket shaped like a….well you get the message,😂😂😂😂
I agree with a lot of that ..but not about the ‘free market’ …The UKs implementation of the free market philosophy has meant hostile take overs of UK companies are far easier than those even in the EU (it was one of the reasons Coleman’s were going to ‘relocate to Holland) if you look at Arm Tech. they were bought out post Brexit…and it was hailed by the Tory’s as an indication the UK was ‘still open for business’…Even more recently the Chinese were buying UK Chip manufacturer until the UK government begrudgingly blocked it.(I think?)
Absolute madness.. .and something we could and should ensure is addressed..as soon as possible.
A lot of the problem is not government policy to prevent takeovers. UK companies get snapped up because they are under valued, new owners see value but thats ultimately in relocating or duplicating parts of the business elsewhere or if they are held privately the UK owner doesn’t want them anymore ie they don’t want to run a UK company. We need to ask why is that. And its a problem that’s getting worse with ARM choosing the US to relist on the stock exchange and AstraZenica choosing Ireland to open a new factory. Just yesterday a UK based energy company said its not going to invest in the UK and axe jobs here. Its not Brexit and I say that as a remainer. Rather the hostile business environment that’s been created and fueled by the media.
Interestingly Singapore has now doubled down on F35B. That’s a squadron of allied jets that can now operate from Queen Elizabeth class should we deploy a CSG in the east. The “west” is far more powerful than even we often realise. China and Russia are dying, this is the last death kicks of crazy 20th century social-economic experiments.
Neither country has ever been or will ever be to challenge the west and its Anglo core of nations. We have controlled the sea since the 14th century and will continue to do so probably indefinitely. You can’t win a global war without control of the sea. Indeed every global war their has even been was lost and won at sea.
https://youtu.be/JyzgmYKSaDQ
Bare in Mind that the Ukraine sold its tech to Russia and China, Developed China faster and made it Stronger. India/China/Africa want to Support Russia. Fine then Deport all those people from the Sanction countries. Guess your Worried about your Business flogging cheap Chinese tat
I do wonder if India realises that most of it Navy is dependant on Ukrainian built Gas Turbines and spare parts ?
And also the Fact that NATO European Partners IE Brussels brought its fuel oil From Russia, the enemy that its formed to defend against. and at no point that there would be a Problem with that.
They still are, just Russia sells it to India and now India sells it to to the EU.
Ah is that how they get round that…India winning ‘friends’ on both sides of the divide…clever those guys ain’t they 🙂
Says it all…we have all been complicit in ensuring our dependency on Chinese Manufacturing …and allowing them to embed themselves in infrastructure from power to water to education…and there are STILL MPs both sides of the chamber that would have us believe Cameroon’s red carpet (road?) approach to China is still the way the UK should go…Funny if it wasn’t so scary …We need to.move away from this dangerous dependency.
Individual companies across the world are already beginning to view China as a risk & and looking for safer options wherever possible. China’s leaders are looking at biting the hand that feeds it, believing that the world cannot survice without it. Russia thought the same yet we are adapting. All China needs to do is return to being a peaceful unagressive nation and everyone will be happy.. There is no threat to China.
Apart from itself maybe?…
Biden removed most of the sanctions against China.
I really hope the author is wrong. Taiwan is massively more difficult to protect or help from China attacking it.
They really are on their own. The USA and surrounding Asian nations are the only countries that could try and respond quickly enough and would they? Is the USA going to declare war on China over Taiwan? I’m doubtful.
Why mainland China can’t just be happy with the current situation and work together is beyond me. If they invade we all lose.
Sad times if a war actually happens
Being an Island with a well armed military & knowing just how the PRC treats those who disagree with its views means, most Taiwanese will fight tooth & nail to survive & protect their homeland. The PRC will not stop there even if it somehow managed to take Taiwan. Thankfully practically all her neighbours in east Asia have been very aware of the threat & a major arms race has been taking place ther over the last 20 years or so. The PRC has amazing strength militarily, but her neighbours likely to oppose her combined match that strength combined with the USA. We must become stronger & more resolute to deter their plans to take nations & territories by force. Appeasement hasn’t worked & only fuels their boldness.
To much China, China, China. It’s not their people doing this, but the CCP and PLAN. If their leadership and military over reach, over step, they might get a rude shock as to what comes back their way. The freer world is watching all their words and actions. Taiwan will not be a push over nor will anyone else for that matter especially when we, they, truly value what we’re defending and fighting for.
Hi Quentin, I do indeed mean the Chinese CCP regime rather than the Chinese people who’ve been so badly oppressed & misled by the CCP. In hope we too stand by Taiwan whenever the PLAN attacks.
Hi Fanke this may not actually be the case. Taiwan is a mess and does not necessarily have the social cohesion to resist. The ability of an nation to resist and win a conflict is a funny thing…the French third republic was a classic example..on paper the third republic should have smashed the army of the third reich even without the help of the BEF…it did not because it as a nation had no will to fight ( read The Collapse of the Third Republic: An Inquiry Into the Fall of France in 1940, its great.it explains why the second largest empire in the world and most powerful military fell after 1 battle).
Taiwan’s army is actually not that great, it’s still using M60 and M48 tanks, its army is around 120,000-130,000 strong. It’s only really just developed the idea of total mobilisation and is not near say Finland in this regard.it’s navy is old..it’s only four destroyers are Kidd class, second hand US destroyers that are 40 years old…it’s 22 frigates are again a mostly second had..Knox class ( 50-60 years old) and Perry class…with a few la Fay’s. It’s got a good number of fighters but these are again a mix older types mostly 30+ years old. From F5s to mirage 2000 and f16s.
Taiwans main defence is infact its semiconductor industry….it’s sort of gambling on being to important for either the US or china to allow to total fall into the others control.
But will to fight wis…I’m not sure if Taiwan will have any…it cannot even agree if it’s a proper nation…with nationalists ( who what an independent Taiwanese nation) to those who want a reunification with China as Taiwan’s leading china and finally a group that would just like reunification and don’t care if it’s the ROC or Chinese communist party that run china….you have to remember this is an island that was taken over as a last bastion by the losing side in a civil war…not a sovereign nation..it’s was a military dictatorship until 30 years ago…and the people who actually lived on Taiwan did not really ask for any of it.
But fundamental the west is probably going to have to go to war with china if China invades….because it cannot allow the 50% of the semi conductor industry and almost 100% of the most advanced semi conductor production to fall into the hands of china as it would give china an almost unassailable geopolitical edge. For a mercantile state to control almost 100% of a fundamentally critical production would doom the west to many decades of china having the edge.
There is a big problem here it’s not so much will the US and West declare war on china over Taiwan ? is could they afford not to ? Unfortunately the west should never have let itself become so exposed over the Semiconductor manufacturing. If China were to control Taiwan it would control around 75% of world semiconductor manufacturing including just about 100% of the 5nm chip production. This would essentially be just about the final play in the Chinese mercantile strategy.
If china invades Taiwan the west will face two basically shite choices:
1) enter a war, in which the tyranny of distance is potentially overwhelming against a nation that has been preparing for this very fight for decades and has mass and will to accept catastrophic casualties…remember the Chinese truly believe Taiwan is part of China and they will be fighting to defend their nation not attacking another. It a war that the west may not be able to win or accept the level of loss needed to win..even if it wins it’s likely to be a pyrrhic victory in which we loss access to a hung majority of the worlds manufacturing capacity. It’s very likely the rest of the world may just turn around and tell the west to stick its war…after all the ROC is china and china is the ROC….so they may just let the west and china kick each other to death.
2) let china take Taiwan….what then could the west do…place sanctions on the county that builds most of its stuff and has 75% of the worlds semiconductor manufacturing including all the really cutting edge. From the point of view of geopolitical conflict and the use of mercantilism china has probably won at that point and the west may have to accept a future of Chinese hegemony.
what can the UN do..china has a security council veto and in international law china and Taiwan are one county…infact if the west did intervene it could easy be played by china that the west has invaded China ( because they actually would have).
Rule one..never ever allow all all your key manufacturing of a vital resource to be build in the middle of an unresolved civil war..especially when one side is the larger more powerful side and is your geographical opponent…because there is a fair chance your losing access to that manufacturing one way or another.
The chip production issue is a very interesting one. The obvious answer is to up capacity in the west, but that denies Taiwan key revenue and therefore play into China’s hands commercially and as revenue drops Taiwan’s ability to fund a military drops.
I’ve heard those number before but I researched further and it may be lower at 54% of global production. Certainly the technology to design the chip and the manufacturing equipment for ICs is still in the West and mainly in the US. So the solution is in our hands. The logic way forward is to develop all new production outside of Taiwan and China, the chip market continues to grow so this doesn’t remove revenue from Taiwan and decreases over all influence in the market longer term.
The reality is the west wouldn’t suffer most, we have the purchasing power to buy up at premium prices, like we’ve done with oil and gas in the past year, we may not be able to get the latest gadget for year so as other devices and applications would need to be prioritized. Developing world would suffer more as price of technology has a big impact. Some countries will benefit where they look to fill the gap.
The worse thing we can do is let the China think their strategy will win out. . Biden said before the war started there would be no military consequence for Russia, this provided absolute clarity for Putin. What the west didn’t do with Ukraine was be ambiguous to change the calculation. Fortunately the US is being more ambiguous on Taiwan. In the UK however our next government has made it clear that Europe and the North Atlantic, not the far east is the priority, we appear to have learnt nothing!!!
PRC believes it to be a zero sum proposition. If they win, West loses, or the converse.
The PRC is dangerously close to open warfare against anyone who dissents from its narrow self interests, the USA & West in particular. After Tibet, Hong Kong, gazzumping & bullying every other far closer nation with claims in the SCS, Putin’s invasions & annexing areas of Ukraine after promising he was never going to invade, plus decades of stealing Western intellectual & industrial secrets & property, hacking our IT widely & regularly, we really must disabuse ourselves of the notion they’re after peace. The only peace either they or Putin want is unrestricted tyranny over everyone where anybody who disagrees is dispensable, usually terminally.
Goodness know we in the west have many faults, but we need to stand up & bite the bullet sooner rather than later. Appeasement has gone on long enough & we either face up to it or die. No agreement will be honoured, rather dispenced with as soon as it suits either Russia or China.
I think if China pushes to far there will be retaliation. Grasping bullies will need to learn. Hope the West is (getting) ready.
Unfortunately Quentin it’s actually a lose lose game for the west..we have slept walked into a potential disaster.
1) if we let China finally end its civil war china gets control of most of the worlds semiconductor production and all most 100% of the most advanced semiconductor production..added to china already being the wests manufacturing and biggest supplier of amost everything ( the west buys 3350 billion dollars of stuff from china every year). This would effectively be pretty much the end game for chinas mercantile strategy…effectively it would be close to the time it could simply sanction any western nation into submission.
2) if we intervene there is a reasonable chance we could loose..china is a supper power, not as powerful as the US or the close to the west combined..but we would be fighting a war literally on the coast of a superpower with almost all the wests strength being ocean away..you cannot escape the tyranny of distance, a war over Taiwan easy to loss and the west would loss big..if it happened this would probably be an air and and navel campaign not seen since WW2 with all the death that attached to that. It would be a blood bath in which any forces sent in may never come home again. Worse is that fact china and the Chinese people utterly and absolutely see Taiwan as china..Taiwan sees Taiwan as China as well..so they will be seeing the west as invaders and we know what that means to a nations will to fight. Even if we win we loss…the loss of life, the shattering of the majority of the worlds semiconductor production and no more 3350 billion dollar a year of goods coming from china..your talking the worst economic catastrophe ever to hit the west. even more that WW2.
F
And still the west keeps on pumping billions upon billions into this vile nation. We have created this problem through our own greed.
Agree. The West has been complicit in China’s rise to power by greedily moving all production there for a deregulated work environment and cheap labour costs.
Result. China develop the wealth and “know how” with some of the most advanced technology in computing and telecoms.
Utter folly.
Hate to admit it but Trump was right. It all needs to be shut down and brought back in-house.
Cannot disagree, china has been waging a mercantile strategy against the west..unfortunately we could not even admit it as it would in some way bring to question the superiority of the neoliberal view of the free market..we have somehow forgotten that the way the west became the wealthiest and most powerful hegemony ever seen was via Mercantilism…the British empire, the Rise of the U.S, France etc it was not powered by free market capitalism but mercantilism…specifically mercantile capitalism or merchant capitalism.
The problem is the major powers all slowly transitioned from mercantilism to a more free market approach at about the same time…so the neoliberal free market approach was never directly tested against a mercantile capitalist state…until now and it is having a real problem with it. Simply put if you have a free-market system compete with a communist system we know the communist system gets out competed by the wealth generating free market system…the problem we are now seeing is that yes the free market system creates great amounts of wealth..but mercantilism was designed to create a winner in a zero sum game by hovering up all available wealth…so it’s designed to draw in wealth from a system with a finite wealth…when it has a free market system that creates unlimited wealth for it to suckle on the mercantile state is a big problem..the only way for the free market system to manage the Mercantile state is to: 1) go back to a mercantile system ( less great), 2) have a managed free market ( where we sort of are with tariffs and where trump was trying to go large or 3) it cuts out the parts that are really free trade economy’s competing fairly ( china, Russia, possibly India TBH) and create a more limited free trade area.
Reading the above, I feel that the authors behind the studies in Argentina and Sweden fail to acknowledge that both countries are peaceful countries with very little threat from abroad even taking into account that Sweden restarted conscription in 2017 (4000 a year and not for all Swedish citizens are stated in the linked in report)
Countries that face an actual outside threat:
Israel
Ukraine
Taiwan
Armenia
Cyprus
South Korea
will see its citizens join for patriotic reasons, yes most will moan, but it is deemed a rite of passage, and it will be the same politized activists who will make a huge song and dance about their human rights regards serving, the UK had them during WW2 and they were found employment in other areas.
Let’s not forget that the forces are but a snapshot of society and that those with a criminal bent will serve alongside those who are paragons of human virtue and their criminal acts are often used by the ethical latte drinkers in which to promote their cause (usually disbandment of the military)
The simple fact remains Moscow’s invasion of the Ukraine, and the increase of overt pressure from the Chinese military will harden public opinion against the Chinese in Taiwan, especially in light with how Beijing treats its Islamic Uyghurs population (QR codes outside each home which allow the police to know who lives there, having to download spyware onto their mobile phones to allow the Chinese to see who (and what) you are communicating with and finally the millions of Uyghurs forced to undergo re-education , where they are forced to toe the party line.
Say what you want about the Taiwanese , but I doubt many (including the very small nbr in the pro-China camp) want to be ruled by Beijing.
Yes I looked at that and thought from an evidence point of view it’s a bit…iffy. Finland has universal conscription and has as many or more guns per head than the US but has almost no gun crime…
Finland has epic social cohesion including the strong memory of the Winter War and subsequent loss of territory following WW2 to the gangster Joseph Stalin. Nobody should underestimate the determination of Finn’s to remain a free democratic nation. National Service binds Finns together and that shared experience goes some way to explain why they have Defence spending in excess of the NATO 2% GDP expectation.
Having a huge land boarder with Pootin-stan and long memories would do that.
London has Nelson’s column and Apsley House, Helsinki has a statue of the Field Marshal Manneheim on the main road by the Parliament.
Hyvää Suomi!
But Finland actually has a very high violent crime rates….but they tend not to go beyond fighting and brawling. Even though they all own guns they tend not to use them.
Geopolitically this is one of the Wests most obvious Achilles heal. The simple reality is that the Taiwan issue whatever way you wish to spin it is an unresolved civil war. Both governments acknowledge this, both governments claim to be the government of China and both governments seek reunification….it was not ever going to end well, at some point either the Chinese communist party or the government of the Republic of China were going to finish their business.
The problem for the west is that the Chinese communist party has used a mercantile strategy to collect the level of wealth it needs to have the power to removed the ROC. It got this from the west…and has made the west dependent on its manufacturing..at the same time the ROC had close to the same idea…it developed manufacturing strength in a key resource to develop its own power , whatever ROC is now ( and it is a modern democracy) at the time it developed it semi conductor industrial capacity it was a totalitarian mercantile state….just like mainland china…( interestingly only 23% of the population of the ROC think democracy is more important than economic growth and wealth..).
This means that the west either lets china finish the final piece to it 40 year long mercantile play and risk Chinese hegemony or try and protect a very small island with an out of date and vastly outnumbered military, (that has a very confused identity that may well collapse its will to fight) against what is now a superpower on that superpowers back door and literally oceans away from the wests key powers.( essential a war that will shatter our military and economies even if we win).
Basically the west slept walked into a loss loss game and china knows it, where as china is playing a win loss game ( it gets Taiwan without a war and wins or it gets a war with the west and both it and the west loss…but I think China is actually more willing to loss than that west… china would possibly take half a million casualties..could the west contemplate even the loss of a few 10,000 thousands).
If Taiwan fails to collapse into civil conflict, can the PRC successfully sustain a “hot war” invasion against US Navy submarine forces?
Studies seem to suggest the US would take serious losses if things went “all out” but that China’s navy would be wrecked. It seems uncertain if China to support an extended campaign through air invasion and smaller vessels alone.
Moreover, there are some indications that China would highly vulnerable to economic losses — if there’s a very hot war at sea, China is not getting foreign imports of resources that its economy is also dependent upon, because merchant vessels are not going to proceeding through a war zone. That’s the counterpoint of the war being close to China.
The reality a U.S. China war is a lose lose. In that both china and west will loss. The economic interdependence of both Taiwan and china to western economies means that the loss in war of Taiwanese semiconductor conductor and Chinese industry would be all in one go on the back of a major war would likely crash western economies. It would very much likely be akin to US/western hegemony as the impact of WW2 was on the British empire and British hegemony.
As for the impact of the U.S. submarine force….yes it would be massively impactful. But the Taiwan strait is about 350km long, so to be impactful the US submarine fleet would need to be in the strait and that would be a death sentence to the crews of those boats as the average depth is only 60m and is all under 150m…so any submarine is going to be restricted in operations, will probably be visible to the surface search aircraft a lot of the time and will be operating in a noisy strait environment….
The unfortunate truth is the tyranny of distance will mean that it’s likely china would have the ability to push overwhelmingly numbers into the area and use its area denial capabilities.
This means the US is probably only ever going to win a pyrrhic victory. So it means the only win for the west is if China does not invade.
“so any submarine is going to be restricted in operations”
Including Chinese subs and you can’t take Taiwan using subs alone. You need ships, lot of ships and exposing those ships to USN and USAF anti ship weapons will be absolute carnage for any invasion fleet trying to cross those waters. If you look at unclassified US weapons procurement goals, up to 5000 lrasm, accelerated development of a range of anti ship sensors and weapons, it’s obvious the tactic they plan to use against a Chinese invading force. Subs will play a significant role but it won’t be the main weapon the US plans to use when dealing with the PLAN
Yes but what do you think China has been doing with it’s area denial..it’s essentially going to be the western navies bringing themselves within close proximity to a near superpower that has been focusing on area denial in those very seas. Your talking over 1000 forth generation fighters..yes they may not be up to western standards but china has the money to actually make sure it’s fleet is operational and it’s pilots trained ( not like Russia). It’s got around 43 large modern surface combatants ( 7000-13000 tons,30+ modern 4000-5000 ton surface combatant 57 modern small ASuW combatants ( 1500tons) its got 80 odd amphibious vessels. The Chinese navy and airforce are not the rotting remnants of -40 50 years ago that is Russia it’s a military that may not be up to the best in the west..but all modern and built very specifically to turn the South China Sea into a blood bath…yes there is a good chance the USN would win….but in all likelihood the US would not be getting that much of its navy back either.
“Yes but what do you think China has been doing with it’s area denial”
Great as an abstract concept but as the case with the Russian military, let’s see how them perform in real life. I wouldn’t go as far as to dismiss the PLA but they are plagued by many of the same problems that affect the Russian military. Top heavy bureaucratic leadership, rampant corruption and lack of combat experience and know how in particular for the PLA.
“but all modern and built very specifically to turn the South China Sea into a blood bath”
Blood bath for who is the key. IMO what seems to be taking shape is the PLA is banking on an area denial strategy but this has a great chance of turning into a modern day Maginot line. Allow the PLAN to flood their vessels into the confines of the SCS, thinking they have area denial when in reality they have placed themselves in a large kill box.
It would be a very big mistake to in anyway conflate the shambles that is the Russian military with china. China spends around a 100+ billion dollars a year more that Russia on defence spending. Its equipment is new not rotting Soviet stuff. When you start to consider equivalence between what a western dollar buys and what a Chinese dollar buys…you can see China has not been scrimping…Russia is and has been for 40 decades a decaying power. China is a rising superpower….the Han chinese are exeptionalists..which means their armed forces are believes and it’s all a professional volunteer force…not a 50% conscripted force like Russia.
navel warfare cannot be compared to the maginol line they will be fighting in an entire sea..it’s just the PLAN will be fighting under its land air umbrella and close to its supply lines….you cannot understate what this means to the level of power project and ability to sustain operations…the tyranny of distance is very very significant and the pacific is very wide. There is essentially no likely outcome other than a bloodbath on both sides and the decimation of both navy’s.
As for a kill box remember just the strait is 55,000km2 that’s not a kill box it’s a sea. To access the strait the US navy would need to effectively move either into the South China Sea and approach from the south or the East China Sea and approach from the north…both of those seas will be contested by Chinese aviation and submarine forces and surface forces….effectively to engage with any Chinese amphibious forces the USN needs to force either or both of these seas then force the access points to the strait while at all time being under the Chinese air umbrella. It would be an utter nightmare.
beyond that the Brooks institute said it best:
“Neither Beijing nor Washington would accept defeat in a limited engagement. Instead, the conflict probably would expand horizontally to other regions and vertically, perhaps even to include nuclear weapons threats — or their actual use. It literally could become the worst catastrophe in the history of warfare.”
another analysis pointed:
defeat for the U.S. and its allies would be possible if not likely. In recent years U.S. wargames have generally shown Beijing as the victor. The best case, after a fashion, appears to be an indecisive and thus lengthy war. Concluded one analysis: “The overarching takeaway from participants in the war game: If China invades Taiwan, the Indo‐Pacific region will plunge into a broad, drawn‐out war that could include direct attacks on the U.S., including Hawaii and potentially the continental United States.”
the American Enterprise institute is I think one of the closest and sobering:
“If conflict does break out, U.S. officials should not be sanguine about how it would end. Tamping or reversing Chinese aggression in the Western Pacific could require a massive use of force. An authoritarian CCP, always mindful of its precarious domestic legitimacy, would not want to concede defeat even if it failed to achieve its initial objectives. And historically, modern wars between great powers have more typically gone long than stayed short. All of this implies that a U.S.-China war could be incredibly dangerous, offering few plausible off‐ramps and severe pressures for escalation.”
The consequences of such a conflict would spread globally, with much greater impact than the Russo‐Ukraine war. Imagine Taiwanese industry devastated from combat or conquest. Allied sanctions against Beijing and its trading partners. Nations big and small pushed to choose sides. Both the U.S. and China interrupting if not sweeping the other nations’ trade from the seas.
Its estimates that with present construction and growth of forces by 2027 china will have the forces to take Taiwan with assurance of success and the thought is that they will use force.
Pretty much every group of head sheds that have published on this basically say the same think.
1) A Sino US war will start with a navel and air Campaign around the strait of Taiwan. This it is agreed will be a total blood bath…even the US military war gaming is 50/50 phone a friend on the outcome.
2) The side that losses that campaign will not give up. Neither the US or china will be able accept defeat…it’s essentially the loss of hegemony that both nations require as a core part of their being.
3) This will lead to an ongoing war across the pacific in which both china and the US will end up in Unrestricted warfare with attacks on both core nations.
4) Both china and the U.S. will pretty much insist that all nations pick a side in regards to sanctions and trade..with the Taiwanese semi conductor industry smashed and world trade ground to a halt the war would go on with no off ramp. You then have two nuclear powers with neither side able to admit defeat…with a war that will drag on with only complete defeat of one side or a nuclear end game.
5) Even if one side wins it will be through exhaustion and we would have simply entered a 21c version of an early 20c disease….one devastating war after another….
This is pretty much every think tank looking at geopolitics and international security is worries about.
Also it’s pretty much a given that when china thinks it’s got a better than fair chance of success with losses it’s willing to take it will invade ( and it’s acknowledged that China will accept a significant losses as its about national pride as much as the geopolitical end game of having control of Taiwan ).
Well as my ol’ grannie used to say …They should have thought about all of that before then!…
(the ‘they’ in this case being The West obv. )
It all unfortunately goes back to western hubris from the fall of the Soviet Union…basically the end of history brigade decided that every nation would see the wealth creation opportunities of free trade and would through free trade all Become liberal democracies….unfortunately as with all such ideas it was b ollox
I still remember the Red Carpet treatment Cameron and Osbourn gace the Chinese …dragging The Queen into it with their Royal Ball….pair of chancers …
Watch out. Before Xi Jinping kicks the bucket he will want to have the honour of re-unification with Taiwan.
Virtually regardless of the path trodden and mistakes made to arrive at the current state of affairs, the critical issue is addressing the immediate future. The latest round of wargaming aumulations has the US winning a conflict w/ the ChiComs, after incurring greater losses than any engagement since WW II. (Note these simulations were all conducted by US based analysis organizations, therefore, there may be an inherent bias.) Very uncertain whether President Biden has the fortitude to deal w/ this as an octogenarian. 🤔😳🤞🙏😱
The Ukraine War kind of took both Ukraine and Russia by surprise. The Russians hadn’t properly trained or prepared their soldiers for it; Ukraine didn’t think Russia would go this far and weren’t quite ready for it.
In contrast, the US military and China and Taiwan have all been preparing for a Taiwan war for many years. It is almost certain that little will go as planned, but the mere fact that everyone involved *has* planned for it may have an impact. Biden is not going to be gobsmacked by the unthinkable, but rather faced with a situation where the US military can likely hand him ready-to-go plans with a wide range of options based on the specific scenario from gradual Chinese escalation (seizing outlying islands, blockade, etc.) to sudden all-out attack.
Things will certainly not go as planned for either side – people had lots of plans in WWII as well and still suffered surprises and reverses – but I think their existence means it’s more likely that any US president would respond militarily.
It’s not just the huge loss of life…win or loss the west will loss access to most of the worlds semiconductor production ( assuming china would burn Taiwans industrial capacity to the ground in any significant war) as will as 3350 billion dollars of imports..our manufacturing will not be able to make anything ( you need semiconductors for everything as well as all the other parts of the supply chain manufactured in china). Effectively you war talking a global recession that would make the Great Recession look like a blip…added to that a western military that will have gutted a lot of its capabilities…you just may see the end of US/western Hegemony..as the Second World War saw the end of the British empire…
personally I think there are some key problems the wargames do not look at:and that is:
1)the wests will to fight a peer war with a nuclear power…a key element of winning a major war…china sees Taiwan as its own ( even Taiwan sees itself as part of China)..therefore the Chinese military and public will not be fighting a geopolitical war far way they will be fighting the invaders…and we know how that story goes. I fear that a western- Chinese war over Taiwan for the west would be a mixture of the second world wars impact on the british empire and the Vietnam wars impact on the U.S. economic shattering and collapsed will to fight..Also we have the nuclear element..china can hold the US mainland at risk.
2) Taiwan as a nations will to fight for itself…it’s politically a mess and is not a place with a definite understanding of nationhood and intrenched democracy (only 23% of the population thing democracy is more important than economic wellbeing).
3) the tyranny of distance..even if the west was willing to fight….I’m not sure it would be willing to deploy and sustain the level of forces needed knowing there is a very good chance it would not get them back again.china could exhaust the west simply by deploying..forcing the west to deploy and exhaust its naval power…sitting in your own county has a far less cost that deploying across the pacific or from Europe.
4) economic collapse…as discussed above..this war would effectively collapse the world economy…with the west losing access to most semiconductor manufacturing….no cars made no computers made….no Apple phones to sell….
The West has backed itself into what is a present a no win set or outcomes…give china complete economic dominance and the ability to dominate the west through an end game mercantile strategy…of fight a war that even if it wins it losses.
Our only real way forward is rapid decoupling from the Chinese economy.. we can the take action without sticking a knife in the hearts of our economies.
“The world has been conducting a wrong policy of appeasement in the past few decades, which has nurtured and helped China grow into what it is today,”
“The world watched as China became one of the biggest threats to modern civilization, and I blame this largely on the Western democracies, especially the United States,”
Wuer Kaixi, Chinese rights campaigner and general secretary of Taiwan’s Parliamentary Human Rights Commission
While I don’t disagree significantly w/ your analysis on a standalone point-by-point basis, privately believe the most probable course of any conflict w/ PRC will result in a climb of the escalatory ladder to an all-out nuclear exchange between US and PRC. Almost inevitable, once hostilities commence. Currently, relative weapon stockpiles favor the US (5000+ v. ~300). By 2035, balance shifts. Actually, same scenario will probably occur, if war commences w/Russia.
I think the potential for a nuclear exchange is more likely a potential escalation with Russia. I think Putin has genuinely lost control and him and his leadership are potentially close to a third reich burn it all position. I think the PRC are more considered in their approach ( it’s why they have not invaded Taiwan as yet) they are playing for Chinese hegemony and I don’t think they would let that genie out of the bottle for anything less that suffering a nuclear strike themselves. They have actually have the clearest rules on nuclear engagement that all the other powers including the west… strictly a no first response under any condition. Russia seems to have completely lost any real rules on nuclear engagement and are now on an if we feel it’s necessary type trigger.
With both TSMC and Intel building new chip fabrication plants in continental USA thanks to tax-payer subsidies the picture on sovereign chip supply will improve. Import tariffs to be expected to protect US investment..
The true cost of sovereign capability is worth paying..
Yes, believe the ultimate effect of the passage of the CHIPS Act will be greater resilience of supply for both US and the West in general, w/in a decade. The interim period could prove to be a sporting proposition. 🤔🤞
If any kind of significant nuclear war occurs, except for some elites in bunkers and survivalists with multi-year food stocks, we’re all dead from nuclear winter…
Yes, really rather the definition of existential climate change. 🤔😳😱
It’s a good job we had Globalists export our means of production to Communist China over the last 30 years. Isn’t it. Definitely not a stupid move at all. Nope. Not at all. 4D chess at it’s finest.
True. Those same people now shout “net zero” whilst China is opening yet more coal fired power stations. I put the blame squarely on bankers, corporations and lobbied politicians. No scruples, and they care not one jot about their populations wellbeing. The Orange Man was right.
Yep I often wonder who is ultimately fundung the net zero climate warriors we see in The West…who buy’s ‘ower Greta her laptops and phones…
Bud, I reckon the same people who create “markets” based on fear and lies. I mean “carbon credits”? It was well known that The Soros Foundation funded social unrest in the States. Like Gates bought our media to blow the climate trumpet on a health ticket. Instil fear, doubt, and guilt in a population via controlled media-bought politico shills you have a recipe for mass-market lithium sales. All dug by third-world kids and poor folk of course. As for Gollum? Scandinavia’s youngest millionaire. Easy to join dots 😏
the article reports there is some doubt in population the desire for independence, would the West restrict imports from China after an invasion?
Hi Simon the political situation in Taiwan has always been tricky and you have to be carful to put it in a box. At present it’s fair to say the democratic and independence movement are moving into ascendency. But you have to remember what the ROC is and we’re it’s come from:
The government of the republic of China retreated to Taiwan and held it as a military dictatorship until the early 1990s. It’s still the aim of the ROC to unify China under one government ( its own) just in the same way as the mainland Chinese government. There has never even been an armistice let alone a peace treaty…the civil war never ended….If the ROC had ever gained military superiority their is no question that for most of its existence it would have invaded mainland China…it’s only as it moved away from being a military dictatorship that it moved away from reunification by any means to reunification through peaceful means when the Chinese communists party falls…..It’s a geopolitical mess to be honest and their is no guarantee the rest of the world would support the wests intervention as legally it’s all one county…
Would the west bat an eyelid without the silicone shield question…nope…it’s spent most of the last 30 years appeasing china…and would not in anyway help out..after all Russia is a far weaker opponent than china and is right next to a big percentage of the wests military might and we did not interview when it invaded a sovereign democracy with no legal ambiguity ….Taiwan is 80 miles from an opposition superpower and an ocean away from any significant western strength as well as legally not being an independent nation..The west will only act because if mainland china gets Taiwan it effectively owns 75% of the worlds semiconductor manufacturing and can hold the west at risk and crash our economy…..we were stupid to get in that situation and may just have to manage the consequences.
As for the question of the west restricting imports…if china took Taiwan the west would be faced with a nation that could send our economies into free fall….so it will be very interesting to see what happens…if in the next few years if china invades Taiwan the west is faced with a lose lose set of options…our only real way out is to decouple from china and Taiwan before it decided to invade…to do this we need to make them believe we will go to war and burn the world economy to the ground ( a west-chinese war would send the world economy into free fall for a decade or more) while moving a huge amount of key manufacturing to the west….at which point the west would be secure and could protect Taiwan by the threat of sanctions and not military action.
J thankyou for your insight. Would mainland China pursue a scorched earth policy like Russia and subjugation like other provinces of China ?I pity the outlook for Taiwan. The strongest factor would be western sanctions with China and safeguarding semi conductors for the West if it came to the worst. It appears Russia and China cannot allow bordering countries / regions to flourish and an invasion provides a distraction from the thug leader’s failings.
I think China possibly would go all out to destroy Taiwans infrastructure if it came down to a major war with the west and it was losing. The only thing that would mitigate that is the population is 97% Han Chinese and the mainland Chinese’s government is essentially Han exceptionalist in nature. But that may go the other way as the mainland Chinese government would essentially see them as traitors….historically some of the very worst behaviours of governments is against what they perceive as traitors…..
Taiwan seems to me to be buying the wrong type of kit. Destroyers, frigates and fighters are not going to survive the early barrage of Chinese missiles. Mobile SAM launchers to deny Chinese jets air superiority over Taiwanese airspace seem more sensible to me. And ground mobile SSM’s and sea mines that can deny Chinese access to the coast make more sense than warships.
Taiwans big issue around defence is that the west has not really been willing to sell it arms as it did not want to damage relations with china. So in reality all it’s navy are second hand cold Cold War relics apart from a handful of small light frigates ( it only has four 40 year old destroyers and most of its 22 frigates are 40-60 years old). Is airforce is flying F5s, Mirage 2000s and older f16s. As for its armoured force it’s using M60 and M48 which is 70 years old.
The west as been appeasing china and feeding the beast for a very long time. A guy call Wuer Kaixi said it best
“The world has been conducting a wrong policy of appeasement in the past few decades, which has nurtured and helped China grow into what it is today. The world watched as China became one of the biggest threats to modern civilization, and I blame this largely on the Western democracies, especially the United States,”
Jonathan wrote:
I personally wouldn’t see that as a sign of weakness, simply due to the vast overmatch in everything that China has over Taiwan, meaning that anything larger than a frigate would be taken out very early on. I feel that China has more to fear from the 12 Tuo Chiang stealth Corvettes, Taiwan ordered in 2012 (6 in service) which saw another order last year for 10 more. The basic model is fitted 16 ASMs, the latest model comes with 28 ASMs. As it’s a stealth design, 1 ship could completely ruin a Chinese invasion fleet
Taiwan currently upgraded its F16 fleet to the F16V iteration and purchased 66 new build Block 70 on top of that.
“”As for its armoured force it’s using M60 and M48 which is 70 years old.””
Correct, but it ordered 108 M1A2T tanks in 2018 which started been delivered from last year. Regards the older M60 and M48 tanks, whilst they may be outdated on the modern battle field it is presumed that China would use light tanks in any initial invasion using tanks such as the Type 15 tank and Type 05 amphibious fighting vehicle, so the 105mm gun used by both tanks would be more than enough to take them on, also they (as well as the Chinese tanks) are better suited to the terrain in Taiwan, than much heavier tanks.
Whislt Taiwan has always adopted a defensive stance regards the PRC, on the basis, that they know they won’t win, but they will make it far too costly for China to try. of late they have ratcheted it up another notch by building new cruise missiles (Hsiung Feng IIE) in 2008 which can strike deep into China.(ordered between 500 to 1000) We are seeing something similar in Japan which has just ordered 500 Tomahawk missiles
But unfortunately Farouk a lot of the age of their equipment is actually more about western appeasement. Taiwan has always struggled to get the US to provide modern equipment. Taiwan wanted a modern MTB a long time ago but the US would not sell them. It’s only in recent years we have seen a hardening of US foreign policy around supporting Taiwan.
J,
Allow me to appologise, In going off on a rant regards the Tiwanese equipment holdings, i failed to acknowledge your point. yes you are indeed correct regards how the West treats Taiwan (for example Taiwan is not recognised at the UN) saying that until DT, it was the Dems who sold most stuff to Taiwan.
On that note, I feel that the West has finally woken up to the threat that the cabal of:
Russia
China
N korea
Iran
Venezula
presents to the free world. No wait I said the west, I should have stated the West minus the Uk with its pro Chinese Government
I hope the west has woken up because in truth it’s been digging itself into a big hole. You simple cannot be doing free trade with enemy states especially mercantile states as you’re just feeding the beast. We understood that once and essentially defeated the USSR by isolating it……but for some reason completely forgot that with china and have basically funded the creation of an enemy super power…bonkers behaviour to be honest.
Has ever been so since Cameron & Osbourn’s red carpet treatment .
Still going on today with both sides of the house “in bed with the red” they have to get their money from soimwhere dontcha know..esp. now Russia’s oligarchs have been sanctioned.
Meanwhile… “According to official UK bilateral aid statistics, the UK spent £68.4 million on aid to China in 2019, up from £44.7 million in 2015.”
Stuff like this really gets my goat. The political elites who excuse such largess , explain aid to the likes of China that the money is needed to help their old age people, that we are teaching them about climate change. The same people who will berate us when it comes to China regards it was an advanced culture whilst the British were living in mud huts, or that China is a world leader when it comes to green technology.
the aid budget should be either for nations which have sod all to ensure things like safe water, vaccinations and food security..disaster relief it should not be sent to a superpower especially not an enemy superpower.
Aid should not go to any country with a space program or one that supports slavery of any form They should have the moral fibre to put their people first !
The killing of Falun Gong members for organ harvesting. Another CCP act of genocide. Yet Philip Hammond thinks the CCP is lovely.
cut from the same silk as Cameron & Osbourne…
or any country that has a stronger economy & manufacturing or service base than our own…
If China gets Taiwan high tech chip production they have major leverage ! Perhaps America should upscale production of chips now ?
The EU have announced plans to become independent from China in semiconductor manufacturing. The aim is for a 20% global market share by 2030.
US companies are generally moving away from China, with more and more opting for India, Vietnam, and Mexico. UK and EU companies are following suit, much of the hi tech industry has or is in the process of setting up elsewhere.
Last year it cost $14k to bring a container full of goods to the UK from China. It is now one tenth of that price. There are other factors at play, such as the economic outlook and things getting back to normal following Covid restrictions, but a big part of it is reducing demand in Chinese manufacturing.
We may be 5+ years away from their economy feeling the effects. Their growth (if you believe their figures) is now around 5% pa, down from double digits. There is though a trend moving away from China’s manufacturing dominance.
Can’t see it myself.
Recent history shows that China is above all rational in most affairs, albeit we may not agree with their reasoning there is always a carefully considered logic behind their decisions.
One thing we can therefore be sure of is that the CCP will have studied in great detail and considered every possible outcome of any action they take, and the consequences for themselves. As others have described far more eloquently, there can be no winners from military action on Taiwan.
So IMO China will not be likely to pursue such a scorched earth policy unless they are already severely on the back foot. That’s not to say such circumstances could never arise; but I think we will get fair warning if they do. Ironically, continuing economic disengagement by the West, could be the very thing that makes it possible.
Western leaders have certainly been asleep at the wheel, or more pertinently, focused on other unnecessary distractions for too long.
The general consensus is china will invade ( although it’s not really an invasion as Taiwan is china and china is Taiwan), but not until it’s happy it can take Taiwan with acceptable losses ( which in chinas case would mean a lot more than the west considers acceptable). Most estimates are using a working assumption that china ( at its present rate of build-up) will have that edge in 2027. It’s not at present so much a question of if china will invade but when.
You have to remember there a two drivers to this both based around Chinese national identity and Han exeptionalism.
The Chinese believe completely that Taiwan is part of China…this fixed belief will not go way. It’s also remember the belief still of the majority of Taiwanese. It’s more an argument of who’s in charge of china. So this issue I’d taiwan is a question of national identity and remembering we are talking about a extreme nationalist totalitarian state here with a population that believes not in democracy but the superiority of china ( specifically Han China). Even the population of Taiwan are not what you would call believers in western liberal democracy…they like it but it’s not their key driver ( so only 23% of the Taiwanese population think democracy is more important than economic wealth). This is a civil war in with neither side has even ever sort even a formal suspending of hostilities let alone a piece ( one side simply retreated to a place the other could not get to).
The final bit is Taiwan is the final piece in china’s mercantile strategy to become the world’s hegemonic power ( be in no doubt that is the end game…not co-operation in a free trade world..but hegemony using any and all methods).If china takes Taiwan with its industries intact then it’s essentially won…it will come to dominate.
So china is looking at three things and always assessing:
1) are the population of Taiwan slipping to far in their beliefs around independence and democracy ( at present its assessment will be the population are more interested in prosperity than democracy and still feel chinease..so easy to integrate after a take over). If China sees this slipping away it will speed up its timetable.
2) does it have the navel and air power to both force a crossing of the straits and deny or destroy any U.S. intervention….at present this is balanced so every one is sort of 50/50 on the outcome. If China decides it can force a crossing with acceptable losses it will ( remember we are talking a far right set of believers here..both the population and leaders will accept a lot of losses…people should be thinking third Reich levels here).
3) will the US intervene and it’s will to fight to the death…the US has always kept strategic ambiguity her as it knows once a Sino US war starts its going to be to the death as neither side will be able to accept losing at the campaign level…..what happens to Taiwan will become less relevant as neither side will have an off ramp and it will become a death struggle between the two major powers ( essentially international trade will stop and all nations will need to pick a side even if it’s just a which side they will be embargoing) The US is likely to be asking the rest of the western powers to support militarily what they can and the pacific will become an ongoing war.
Basically a Sino US war of Taiwan will be catastrophic for everyone..but at present we are on a road to it. The only way to prevent that is:
1) stop chinas military build up before it feels able to force a landing…that needs an economic strategy by the west that stops the Chinese mercantile strategy in its tracks ( although it’s possible it’s to late for that). Or:
2) US/western forces built up to the level China will know it cannot win and ensuring china knows the US and West will be willing to enter a state of total war over Taiwan.
Both of these are still going to have an impact on the west ( and china) but…Anything less than one or both of these two states will lead to a catastrophic outcome for the west, China and the world at large.
I think you miss my point.
From a military/nationalist perspective an invasion seems logical and therefore inevitable. My point is that the CCP does not think like this. They look carefully at the bigger picture, including the secondary strategic consequences. The ‘war on terror’ shows how the west failed to learn this lesson during the cold war, while the Chinese stood back and took notes. Remember too that China is not a democracy; the CCP therefore have no need to pursue a populist agenda unless their regime is facing an existential threat, either at home or abroad.
Never judge the intentions of your adversary by your own standards.
but I think that’s the point they very much do look at it from a nationalist point of view, the Chinese communist party is not a communist party it’s a Han exceptionalist party. Their every action is to create a Chinese hegemony. The CCP is all about a populist agenda it’s very much how they keep power..it’s the story of Chinese’s destiny and the population expect Taiwan to be reunified its part of their identity..the fact it will be an end play on the Chinese mercantile strategy and probably ensure Chinese hegemony and the end of western hegemony is just a cherry..there are very few voices in either China, Taiwan or the west who think this is going anywhere but south..you have to remember to the Chinese Taiwan part of their their nation it’s not separate it’s just being being held by a bunch of traitors for the last 70 years once they can take it back and remove that last vestige of the Chinese republic they will.
I understand the Han exceptionalism, but the simple fact is that invasion of Taiwan would be highly risky, so of course they will continue to make noise about it but actual military action threatens many of their own interests and they know it. Hence it won’t happen unless they are desperate, which they are not, for the time being at least.
I agree I don’t think it will happen yet. I think the assessment of an action in 2023 is probably hyperbole..unless they decide the US is too distracted to be involved..but I think JB made it clear the present US view. A lot of the more rational assessments are for around 2027 as this is when it’s likely that China will be able to achieve the military mass needed.
The reality is chinas building programme is essentially a war programme. With the US navy itself saying that the Indo/pacific balance of navel power will be in favour of china on or around 2025.
in some years they have commissioned into service 10 new large combatants. With 10 major combatants fitting out or on trials for next year. They will have a 80ton carrier in service for the end of the year and are on track to have have 50+ modern attack submarines by 2025. The US navel strength in the same timeframe will be getting slightly smaller. With the US actually ending up with an older fleet that China.
China are seriously not in anyway playing nice and have an avowed aim of both Taiwanese reunification under any means and an avowed aim of chinas hegemony. The invasion of Taiwan will not happen when the are desperate it will happen when they think they can win with what are acceptable losses to the Chinese communist party ( which is a party that is happily ethnicity cleansing and will consider large scale loss of life acceptable).
As for rational I think we can safely say the concentration camps are not in anyway rational and very much play to the Han exceptionalist view.
Interesting title considering the author doesn’t really outline why he thinks Beijing is looking to unify with Taiwan this year; instead outlining recent tensions which are arguably a continuation of the way relations have been for years and identifying the signals that may indicate China is preparing for an attack without commentating on whether we are seeing this now.
I have been saying, that the ex Kuwait F/A-18CD Hornets, should be supplied to Taiwan as an F-5 replacement. It is like having another US carrier off Taiwan.
We manufactured most of the stuff here in the west before short sighted greedy rich folk thought it would be a great idea to close down whole industries here & get the PRC to make the stuff on the cheap in far eastern sweat shops. Consumers weren’t consulted.
If things go bad with the PRC we can rebuild that manufacturing base here. It may be far wiser to do so than allowing totalitarian brutal dictatorships to gain so much power over global trade.
Indeed
consumers were consulted – we all want cheap stuff…and dont really care how we get it….
That’s just a myth.
What is? That we all want cheap stuff , or that we don’t care how we get it…I fail to see where the myth is for either?
Hi Grizzler, I think the myth is that Joe public had an insatiable demand for cheaper goods which drove us to the self harm of moving much of our manufacturing mostly to the far east, mostly to China. That seems a cover for the reality that those who actually made those decisions & drove the folly was already rich amoral people who only cared about getting richer irregardless of the strategic folly, the devestation to our own workforce & communities, or the exploitaion of sweat shop/even forced/slave labour in the far east(mostly China).
We all love a bargin but not that many would choose to do such harm in the process. As consumers we have pretty small power when it is the big money that decides what level of toxicity they’ll put up with to make themselves even richer. They chose how polluting, how excessively packaged, what poverty wages, what cruel practices their work force has to endure etc, not us. No problem with rich people, just those of them that abandon all morality to get rich & remain so. Sadly those folk have had too much sway far too long.
The upshot of which is the PLAN has been largely funded indirectly by the west to challange freedom, democracy & the rule of law, meanwhile we’ve cut our forces so low that Putin & Xi feel quite confident about ripping up treaties, attacking & enslaving other nations. Just as well Putins lot have made such a fist of it, but millions die or suffer in the process.
Hard to rebuild such when the knowledge has gone and the youth do not want to work hard for their dosh and where would the money come from? Those that have it will not invest in the UK anymore. So much is owned by foreigners and they pull the purse strings.
Yes all down to one word ‘GREED’ and that includes the Western consumers wanting everything cheap. China will sell at a loss as long as it gets Dollars and Euro’s in exchange.
It’s a bun fight we cannot win anymore.
The greed of the West has allowed China and Russia grow to such a level we are now running scared of them. We have only ourselves to blame in the end. Some made lots of money in the West at the cost of loosing many industries that once we were the lead in. UK being a prime example of its own greed.
If China does go in with Force will the Free World really rally to Taiwan’s aid? I do not think it would be very popular at home for sure and Government’s can not sell our youth coming home in body bags for a far off state.
The Chicoms are smart. They know their best chance in winning is with old Biden in the White House. Biden removed most of the sanctions put on China when he took office. They know Biden is a friend unlike Trump that did everything he could to contain the Chicoms.