Why 3 year that particular number, not 5 or 10?
Almost certainly a whole catalogue of reasons, but the most obvious being:
- Based on genuine assessment of how long it might take Japan to achieve nuclear breakout
- Trump will still be in power, which makes the broader strategic calculus a lot easier as he is a known quantity. In 5 years, there will be a new President which adds massive uncertainty on how they might behave and respond.
- PLA internal wish list of what additional next gen platforms and munitions stocks they might ideally want for such a mission and when those assets can be procured in the required quantities.
- Economic and industrial consideration on the length of time needed to secure alternative domestic supplies of whatever core products China still buys from Japan, America and Europe to minimise economic pain and industrial production disruption from the inevitable trade disruption such a war will cause and likely resultant Western sanctions. A stretch objective might be to provide viable alternatives to Japanese supplies on a global scale to offer to neutral 3rd parties to minimise global complaints from economic damage spillovers.
- Length of time needed to liquidate and evacuate Chinese state assets in jurisdictions under western control to minimise economic losses from western looting under the Russian model.
- Length of time the diplomatic corps thinks is required to establish a credible degree of international acceptance if not outright support for Chinese actions.
- Chinese strategic estimates on when America might try to initiate kinetic confrontation as a last gasp effort to overturn the inevitable future projections of continued full spectrum leapfrogging by China to the point where Chinese hard power becomes overwhelming.
- Chinese nuclear armament expansion targets for when China can achieve nuclear parity with the U.S. in terms of deployed nuclear warhead numbers.
- Chinese ABM defence key milestone completion dates.
The list could go on and on.
