Then China conducts a limited pre-emptive strike on Taiwan's developing nuclear programme, and dares Taiwan or the US to respond?
If both Pyongyang and Beijing possess nuclear weapons — the latter equipped with a far more sizeable, deliverable and capable stockpile than the former — then there's little, if any reason for Washington to be open to nuclearization for Seoul, but not for Taipei, at least in
principal.
At this juncture, the US is reasonably cognizant that it will struggle to compete against China militarily — even if it somehow fully forsakes its security commitments in Europe and the Middle East — given where American economic output, in particular industrial capacity, stands vis-a-vis China.
Knowing that they can't contain the rise of Pax Sinica by themselves, the current US administration is aggressively seeking to
strongarm allies, vassals or whatever you want to call countries like Japan, Australia, and so on and so forth into preoccupying and containing, and should the day come, waging war upon China:
Likewise, the US has and intends to further employ the regime in Taipei for identical purposes. Depending on your perspective, the island of Taiwan in general and its armed forces in particular either represent Uncle Sam's default "tip of the spear," or the first wave of (would be) "cannon fodder" against the Chinese.
It's why DC wants Taipei to increase defense spending to 10% of GDP:
If Washington is willing to demand something this outrageous from the island's taxpayers, adding nuclear weapons to Taipei's arsenal and the broader geopolitical equation makes complete sense, so long as it can be "done right."
That's perhaps where we diverge most. I concur that it won't be easy whatsoever for the regime in Taipei to acquire an even somewhat credible nuclear capability without Beijing finding out "prematurely."
However, that does not mean they won't try if egged on by certain forces situated on the Beltway. That in itself — as in even a handful of deliverable devices — will open up a can of worms that even our Cantonese friends won't mistake for a delicacy.
Unless the US intervenes, Taiwan is lost.
Remember that Taiwan does make 90% of the world's most advanced semiconductors, which are mostly designed and sold by American companies. So either Taiwan's semiconductor capacity is destroyed or falls in the hands of Mainland China.
The US does not care if "Taiwan is lost," and have been preparing for such a scenario — including how it'll impact access to semiconductors —
. There's a reason why Trump has been
TSMC to
.
Let's look towards Ukraine for a second.
Not looking to get sidetracked, nor am I here to
categorically deny Kyiv's agency. However, regardless of the intentions of the actors in play, the ongoing Russo-Ukrainian War is
effectively and principally an attempt to preoccupy and weaken a resurgent Russia.
From Washington's perspective, Taipei can and will most likely be employed for identical purposes in order to contain "the pacing threat."
I can't speak for Kyiv, but it shouldn't surprise any of us that a not insignificant number of Ukrainians — including their
— now regret Kiev's decision to denuclearize in the 1990s. This has not gone unnoticed in Taipei or Washington.
Note that the US and Israel have just done this to Iran's nuclear programme.
We can also expect the end of Pax Americana in the rest of the Western Pacific (aka. South Korea, Japan, Philippines, etc)
The dominant thinking in Washington is that any sort of overt and kinetic aggression on the part of the PLA against targets situated on the island of Taiwan will push Seoul, Tokyo and Manila toward Washington.
Rationally speaking, trying to use Taiwan to bleed China, with the USA remaining neutral, is not going to work
There are individual actors within the current administration who are reasonably rational. Though more broadly speaking, I would
strongly caution against making positive assumptions about the collective rationality of the administration.
Moreover, it isn't just a lack of rationality, but an inability to manage tradeoffs, never mind reasonably foresee second and third order effects.
You can't count on their rationality!
The sitting administration's track record speaks for itself. Just look at how Trump's tariff policies have harmed both the American economy, and alienated Washington's traditional allies, vassals or whatever your preferred framing for them happens to be.
It just means the end of Pax Americana
There are significant risks of escalation, if not Armageddon in play here — in fact those risks are exactly what I'm deeply concerned about — but besides a "
Hail Mary," what else is there for Pax Americana
to try to stop a rising Pax Sinica from supplanting it?
