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.The Conversation

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.

Avatar photo
Dr José Caballero leads the IMD World Competitiveness Center’s research team in the development and implementation of new models of assessing competitiveness. His research explores the intersection of international politics and economics.
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

101 Comments
oldest
newest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Jonathan Charles Agar
Jonathan Charles Agar
1 year ago

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

Mark
Mark
1 year ago

And what, watch the Global Economy tank overnight on a scale that dwarfs even the 08 Crash or the Covid impact…?

Frank62
Frank62
1 year ago
Reply to  Mark

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.

Jonathan
Jonathan
1 year ago
Reply to  Frank62

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… Read more »

expat
expat
1 year ago
Reply to  Jonathan

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… Read more »

Jonathan
Jonathan
1 year ago
Reply to  expat

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… Read more »

Expat
Expat
1 year ago
Reply to  Jonathan

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… Read more »

Jonathan
Jonathan
1 year ago
Reply to  Expat

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,😂😂😂😂

grizzler64
grizzler64
1 year ago
Reply to  expat

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… Read more »

Last edited 1 year ago by grizzler64
Expat
Expat
1 year ago
Reply to  grizzler64

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… Read more »

Jim
Jim
1 year ago
Reply to  Frank62

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… Read more »

Jonathan Charles Agar
Jonathan Charles Agar
1 year ago
Reply to  Mark

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

ABCRodney
ABCRodney
1 year ago

I do wonder if India realises that most of it Navy is dependant on Ukrainian built Gas Turbines and spare parts ?

Jonathan Charles Agar
Jonathan Charles Agar
1 year ago
Reply to  Mark

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.

James
James
1 year ago

They still are, just Russia sells it to India and now India sells it to to the EU.

grizzler64
grizzler64
1 year ago
Reply to  James

Ah is that how they get round that…India winning ‘friends’ on both sides of the divide…clever those guys ain’t they 🙂

grizzler64
grizzler64
1 year ago
Reply to  Mark

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.

Mark B
Mark B
1 year ago

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.

grizzler64
grizzler64
1 year ago
Reply to  Mark B

Apart from itself maybe?…

dan
dan
1 year ago

Biden removed most of the sanctions against China.

Monkey spanker
Monkey spanker
1 year ago

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

Frank62
Frank62
1 year ago
Reply to  Monkey spanker

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… Read more »

Quentin D63
Quentin D63
1 year ago
Reply to  Frank62

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.

Frank62
Frank62
1 year ago
Reply to  Quentin D63

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.

Jonathan
Jonathan
1 year ago
Reply to  Frank62

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… Read more »

Jonathan
Jonathan
1 year ago
Reply to  Monkey spanker

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… Read more »

expat
expat
1 year ago
Reply to  Jonathan

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… Read more »

FormerUSAF
FormerUSAF
1 year ago
Reply to  Monkey spanker

PRC believes it to be a zero sum proposition. If they win, West loses, or the converse.

Frank62
Frank62
1 year ago

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… Read more »

Quentin D63
Quentin D63
1 year ago
Reply to  Frank62

I think if China pushes to far there will be retaliation. Grasping bullies will need to learn. Hope the West is (getting) ready.

Jonathan
Jonathan
1 year ago
Reply to  Quentin D63

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… Read more »

Marked
Marked
1 year ago

And still the west keeps on pumping billions upon billions into this vile nation. We have created this problem through our own greed.

Mr Bell
Mr Bell
1 year ago
Reply to  Marked

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.

Jonathan
Jonathan
1 year ago
Reply to  Mr Bell

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… Read more »

farouk
farouk
1 year ago

“”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.””   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… Read more »

Jonathan
Jonathan
1 year ago
Reply to  farouk

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…

lonpfrb
lonpfrb
1 year ago
Reply to  Jonathan

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… Read more »

Jonathan
Jonathan
1 year ago
Reply to  lonpfrb

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.

Jonathan
Jonathan
1 year ago

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… Read more »

dp
dp
1 year ago
Reply to  Jonathan

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… Read more »

Jonathan
Jonathan
1 year ago
Reply to  dp

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… Read more »

Netking
Netking
1 year ago
Reply to  Jonathan

“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… Read more »

Jonathan
Jonathan
1 year ago
Reply to  Netking

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)… Read more »

Netking
Netking
1 year ago
Reply to  Jonathan

“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… Read more »

Jonathan
Jonathan
1 year ago
Reply to  Netking

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… Read more »

Jonathan
Jonathan
1 year ago
Reply to  Netking

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… Read more »

Last edited 1 year ago by Jonathan
grizzler
grizzler
1 year ago
Reply to  Jonathan

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. )

Jonathan
Jonathan
1 year ago
Reply to  grizzler

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

Last edited 1 year ago by Jonathan
grizzler
grizzler
1 year ago
Reply to  Jonathan

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 …

Puffing Billy
Puffing Billy
1 year ago

Watch out. Before Xi Jinping kicks the bucket he will want to have the honour of re-unification with Taiwan.

FormerUSAF
FormerUSAF
1 year ago

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. 🤔😳🤞🙏😱

dp
dp
1 year ago
Reply to  FormerUSAF

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… Read more »

Jonathan
Jonathan
1 year ago
Reply to  FormerUSAF

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… Read more »

FormerUSAF
FormerUSAF
1 year ago
Reply to  Jonathan

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.

Jonathan
Jonathan
1 year ago
Reply to  FormerUSAF

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… Read more »

lonpfrb
lonpfrb
1 year ago
Reply to  FormerUSAF

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..

FormerUSAF
FormerUSAF
1 year ago
Reply to  lonpfrb

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. 🤔🤞

dp
dp
1 year ago
Reply to  FormerUSAF

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…

FormerUSAF
FormerUSAF
1 year ago
Reply to  dp

Yes, really rather the definition of existential climate change. 🤔😳😱

Zach
Zach
1 year ago

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.

John Stott
John Stott
1 year ago
Reply to  Zach

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.

grizzler
grizzler
1 year ago
Reply to  John Stott

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…

John Stott
John Stott
1 year ago
Reply to  grizzler

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 😏

simon alexander
simon alexander
1 year ago

the article reports there is some doubt in population the desire for independence, would the West restrict imports from China after an invasion?

Jonathan
Jonathan
1 year ago

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… Read more »

simon alexander
simon alexander
1 year ago
Reply to  Jonathan

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.

Jonathan
Jonathan
1 year ago

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…..

SteveP
SteveP
1 year ago

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.

Jonathan
Jonathan
1 year ago
Reply to  SteveP

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… Read more »

Last edited 1 year ago by Jonathan
Farouk
Farouk
1 year ago
Reply to  Jonathan

Jonathan wrote: “”So, in reality all its navy are second hand cold War relics apart from a handful of small light frigates””   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… Read more »

Jonathan
Jonathan
1 year ago
Reply to  Farouk

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.

Farouk
Farouk
1 year ago
Reply to  Jonathan

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… Read more »

Jonathan
Jonathan
1 year ago
Reply to  Farouk

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.

grizzler
grizzler
1 year ago
Reply to  Farouk

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.

TypewriterMonkey
TypewriterMonkey
1 year ago

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.”

Farouk
Farouk
1 year ago

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. 

Jonathan
Jonathan
1 year ago
Reply to  Farouk

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.

peter wait
peter wait
1 year ago

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 !

John Hartley
John Hartley
1 year ago
Reply to  peter wait

The killing of Falun Gong members for organ harvesting. Another CCP act of genocide. Yet Philip Hammond thinks the CCP is lovely.

grizzler
grizzler
1 year ago
Reply to  John Hartley

cut from the same silk as Cameron & Osbourne…

grizzler
grizzler
1 year ago
Reply to  peter wait

or any country that has a stronger economy & manufacturing or service base than our own…

peter wait
peter wait
1 year ago

If China gets Taiwan high tech chip production they have major leverage ! Perhaps America should upscale production of chips now ?

RobW
RobW
1 year ago
Reply to  peter wait

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… Read more »

Sonik
Sonik
1 year ago

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… Read more »

Last edited 1 year ago by Sonik
Jonathan
Jonathan
1 year ago
Reply to  Sonik

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… Read more »

Sonik
Sonik
1 year ago
Reply to  Jonathan

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… Read more »

Last edited 1 year ago by Sonik
Jonathan
Jonathan
1 year ago
Reply to  Sonik

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… Read more »

Sonik
Sonik
1 year ago
Reply to  Jonathan

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.

Jonathan
Jonathan
1 year ago
Reply to  Sonik

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… Read more »

Jonathan
Jonathan
1 year ago
Reply to  Sonik

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.

Edward Davies
Edward Davies
1 year ago

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.

John Hartley
John Hartley
1 year ago

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.

Frank62
Frank62
1 year ago

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.

Jonathan
Jonathan
1 year ago
Reply to  Frank62

Indeed

grizzler
grizzler
1 year ago
Reply to  Frank62

consumers were consulted – we all want cheap stuff…and dont really care how we get it….

Frank62
Frank62
1 year ago
Reply to  grizzler

That’s just a myth.

grizzler
grizzler
1 year ago
Reply to  Frank62

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?

Frank62
Frank62
1 year ago
Reply to  grizzler

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… Read more »

Angus
Angus
1 year ago
Reply to  Frank62

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.

Angus
Angus
1 year ago

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… Read more »

dan
dan
1 year ago

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.