An Analysis of Size and Structure of the Army of Reunified Korea

vesicles said:

I think invading China by Korea would be an impossible scenario. Even the US and the UN would not dare invading China when it was in complete catastrophe during the Korean War. At the time, China just finished its civil war, which followed fighting 2 WWII's, which then followed another civil war, which followed a series conflicts with foreign powers (Sino-Japanese wars and Opium war), which followed a series of civil war (against Tai Ping Tian Guo). China could not be in any weaker condition after almost 100 years of continuing nationwide wars. Yet, when contemplated with the thought of invading or attacking mainland China, the US and UN decided against it and even fired its top commander because of it. In the 60's and 70's, the Soviets and China were in danger of an all out war. Even with China going through all sorts of political and social nightmares, like the Great Leap in the 50's, the huge famine in the 60's and the Cultural Revolution in the 60's and 70's (an estimated 60 million people died in this period), the Soviets would not dare an open war with China. So I don't think anyone would even contemplate the thought of attacking the mainland China in their wildest dreams.

Click to expand...

I agree with everything you said. However, in the late 19th Century, the Qing Dynasty was every foreigner's bitch. There was a common saying back then: the Peasants feared the Magistrates, the Magistrates feared the Foreigners, and the Foreigners feared the Peasants.

The British sailed up and down the coast of China with impunity during the Opium War, forcing the Qing to secede Hong Kong. The Eight Nations Alliance sacked the Forbidden Palace itself, carting away priceless artifacts. The Japanese thought they could conquer the entirety of China in 3 months. While that was revealed to be an empty boast and were defeated in the end, they did cause horrific damage to China. MacArthur himself was certain that China would never dare to stand against US troops in the Korean War. He said that if China entered the fray, there would be the "greatest slaughter".

So clearly, China did not always command respect from its adversaries. I believe this attitude changed with the Korean War.

solarz said:

I agree with everything you said. However, in the late 19th Century, the Qing Dynasty was every foreigner's bitch. There was a common saying back then: the Peasants feared the Magistrates, the Magistrates feared the Foreigners, and the Foreigners feared the Peasants.

The British sailed up and down the coast of China with impunity during the Opium War, forcing the Qing to secede Hong Kong. The Eight Nations Alliance sacked the Forbidden Palace itself, carting away priceless artifacts. The Japanese thought they could conquer the entirety of China in 3 months. While that was revealed to be an empty boast and were defeated in the end, they did cause horrific damage to China. MacArthur himself was certain that China would never dare to stand against US troops in the Korean War. He said that if China entered the fray, there would be the "greatest slaughter".

So clearly, China did not always command respect from its adversaries. I believe this attitude changed with the Korean War.

Click to expand...

Yes. I believe it has everything to do with the attitude of the leadership. Ever since Daoguang of the Qing dynasty, Chinese leaders, including emperors, presidents and warlords, had been weak to the foreigners. I always feel ashamed when talking about that era in Chinese history. I mean what country would give money to and apologize to someone whom they defeated on the battlefield?? The Chinese emperor, Daoguang did that! China defeated the British, the East Indian company to be exact, in the 1st Opium War decisively. What happened next? The Chinese govn't apologized to the EIC, fired the commanding general who led the Chinese to victory and dismantled the coastal defense completely so that the EIC could march into China unimpeded. WHY?? I mean you won the war! Why in the world would you apologize to someone you just beat?? This kind of mentality kept on for almost a century until the CCP took over. All those foreign powers believed that they could take over China in months because few Chinese leaders dared to stand up to them. It's not that the Chinese didn't know how to fight and it's not that Chinese could not fight. It's that the leaders did not want/dare to fight. In my opinion, Zhang Zuolin was the only warlord who stood up the foreigners. He formed many aliances with Germany and even Japan, but was firm on the belief that no one should step onto Chinese soil. So when he was in the Manchuria, Japanese could not even move an inch toward China because he did not allow them to. The Japanese had to assassinate him. Once he was gone and his son took over, the Japanese knew that his son was weak. And as they expected, he's weak. He pulled his troops out of Manchuria (300,000 and completely armed with German technology) without firing a single shot when the Japanese attacked.

This situation did not change until the CCP came to power. The CCP has done many many many bad things. The one good thing they did was to stand up to the foreign power. And as a result, no one has dared to touch China ever since.

solarz said:

China doesn't really need Taiwan in the extremely unlikely event of a war against a unified Korea. Remember that Korea is accessible by land to China, and well within Chinese missile range. China is magnitudes more powerful than even a unified Korea.

Click to expand...

I think that we agree though that if the impossible happens then China must be facing one or both: internal Chinese discord, reunified Korea + allies (at least the US if not additional allies).

I'm trying to abide by good contingency planning rules by assuming the worst! ;P However for our purposes I won't contemplate anyone going nuclear because we all know that can only lead to The End, or back to how impossible this scenario is.

It is critical for China to have control of Taiwan, or to have an allied or neutral Taiwan, which will help prevent China's opponents from attacking the Chinese coastal core from all directions and with impunity.

A conflict between China and Korea doesn't have to be limited to the Korean peninsula, the Koreans do have an air force and a navy. If additional countries are involved then it's even more likely that multiple fronts will be opened against China.

Remember the gunboat diplomacy that opened Qing China up? It's alive and well and now comes with fighters, bombers, drones, subs, and cruise missiles.

We haven't touched on cyber and psych warfare yet but those are going to be waged as well by all sides.

China will have a tough time winning in this situation though its opponents will certainly come through bruised and battered as well. Which is why this whole thing wouldn't even happen in the first place.

PanAsian said:

A conflict between China and Korea doesn't have to be limited to the Korean peninsula, the Koreans do have an air force and a navy. If additional countries are involved then it's even more likely that multiple fronts will be opened against China.

Click to expand...

Well, you have to remember that China's strength is its army. If Korea in involved, China will be able to use its army effectively. I don't think there is a military in the world that can say it can crush China's army easily.

About attacks from the seas. A huge difference between most of the naval operations we've seen in the last couple decades and possible scenario with China would be the length of engagement. Normally when a technologically and numerically superior navy attacks a small and poor country, everything goes much quicker. Naval operations are expensive and difficult to maintain. It must be finished quickly. However, the same cannot be said of any naval attacks on China. Everything will be dragged on and on for months if not years. An inherent issue that comes with this would be supply. How can you sustain such long period of naval engagement without a decent and safe base. This is difficult in the case of an attack on China since every place that can possibly be used as a base by an attacker will be in the range of Chinese missiles and bombs. If anyone dares to host China's attacker, it will automatically be considered an enemy of China and will be attacked by China. It will be extremely difficult to maintain an operational base for an attack when you have to constantly watch for Chinese missiles and bombers.

Plus, nowadays, anyone that has the capability to mount a meaningful attack on China is located far far away from China. That means any potential operation against China will be extremely costly, both in terms of finance and time. Once the first wave is over, it takes a lot of money and time to maintain the same level of intensity of attacks. It took the entire US to save up enough resources, such as metal, to fight Germany in WWII. It would take so much more to fight a nation the size of China. It would take time to ship things from home to the front line. These transport ships will be extremely vulnerable to China attacks assuming China's attackers cannot establish an effective blockade on China in its initial attack. This is actually highly likely since China will not sit there and wait for its attackers to finish their build-up. Most of the enemies that West has faced so far have no means to fight back. The best that these nations could do is to defend, which means sitting and waiting until their attackers finish their initial build-up. This would not be the case with China. China would not hesitate to attack enemy bases once war is declared and wayyy before the attackers can finish the initial build-up. then China will not be blocked for anything. Then Chinese navy will patrol the area like everyone else. then all the transport ships from the attackers will be attacked by the PLAN and PLAAF. Without effective supply, it would be difficult to mount any meaningful attacks on China.

So without a foothold and without supply, any attack from the seas will be meaningless.

PanAsian said:

Remember the gunboat diplomacy that opened Qing China up? It's alive and well and now comes with fighters, bombers, drones, subs, and cruise missiles.

Click to expand...

Like we have talked about in previous posts, the gunboat diplomacy worked because China HAD weak leadership. Since we are talking about military strategies, we assume that both sides are willing to fight to the end. Then gunboat diplomacy should not work since it bases on an assumption that China would surrender when threatened by a possible attack. Although it's possible that this will happen again, this is not the kind of scenario we are discussing here. Again, we discuss military strategies, which assume both sides are willing to fight to the end.

And China now also has fighters, bombers, drones, subs and cruise missiles. One big equalizer would be nukes. Although we are not discussing nukes in this forum, nations with nukes are treated differently both diplomatically and militarily even in a conventional war.

The fact of matter is China has not shied away from any conflict coming its way since the CCP took over. So the day when the gunboat diplomacy would work on China has long gone.

PanAsian said:

We haven't touched on cyber and psych warfare yet but those are going to be waged as well by all sides.

Click to expand...

Again, China also has cyber and psych warfare. If news media is any indication, China is pretty darn good with them.

PanAsian said:

China will have a tough time winning in this situation though its opponents will certainly come through bruised and battered as well. Which is why this whole thing wouldn't even happen in the first place.

Click to expand...

I agree with this assessment. Anyone who decides to attack China would have thought it over and over and have covered everything that can be covered. So defeating such an attack would not be easy. However, in any potential attack, China will enjoy a huge home court advantage because of its geographical location. I have to say that the Chinese ancestors have done such an excellent job conquering everything and anything they could see. China is now surrounded by nothing but mountains and oceans, and oh yeah, Siberia, all insurmountable barriers. So attacking China will be extremely difficult since there is no meaningful foothold for any attackers.

Those few islands that many of our fellow posters are thinking are meaningless since it does not have the size to be the kind of the base that would be huge enough to house all the equipment needed in an attack on China. Secondly, they are all within the range of Chinese missiles and bombers.

---------- Post added at 07:43 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:26 PM ----------

---------- Post added at 07:51 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:43 PM ----------

This is also why I don't think China is thinking about fighting the US when talking about "unification" with Taiwan. Yes, the American Pacific Fleet is powerful. However, what happens after they fire all the missiles within a day or two? How long would it take to supply the fleet again. Any Chinese attack on Taiwan will be a surprise attack. the Pacific Fleet certainly does not have enough stored supply to sustain the kind of intensive fighting with China for any long period of time. Yes, a few other fleets can come over quickly, but the same question still holds. How do they sustain the intensity of the fight? China initiates its attacks from home. Everything comes much faster. All China has to do is to hold out the 1st wave, or use drones (the massive J-6 and J-7 fleets) to make the attacking fleets waste their missiles and ammo. Then China can use its resources to cut off supply lines and effectively isolate their attackers.

Which is why I think China is simply using the Taiwan issue as an excuse to develop its military.

vesicles said:

I think invading China by Korea would be an impossible scenario. Even the US and the UN would not dare invading China when it was in complete catastrophe during the Korean War. At the time, China just finished its civil war, which followed fighting 2 WWII's, which then followed another civil war, which followed a series conflicts with foreign powers (Sino-Japanese wars and Opium war), which followed a series of civil war (against Tai Ping Tian Guo). China could not be in any weaker condition after almost 100 years of continuing nationwide wars. Yet, when contemplated with the thought of invading or attacking mainland China, the US and UN decided against it and even fired its top commander because of it. In the 60's and 70's, the Soviets and China were in danger of an all out war. Even with China going through all sorts of political and social nightmares, like the Great Leap in the 50's, the huge famine in the 60's and the Cultural Revolution in the 60's and 70's (an estimated 60 million people died in this period), the Soviets would not dare an open war with China. So I don't think anyone would even contemplate the thought of attacking the mainland China in their wildest dreams.

Click to expand...

.... then explain why General MacArthur proposed to use National ROC forces to invade Mainland China via Korean peninsula...

Only reason why nobody wanted to fight China is because China was allied with USSR, and USSR would have invaded Europe in retailiation...

Phead128 said:

.... then explain why General MacArthur proposed to use National ROC forces to invade Mainland China via Korean peninsula...

Only reason why nobody wanted to fight China is because China was allied with USSR, and USSR would have invaded Europe in retailiation...

Click to expand...

Maybe because MacArthur was losing the war, and wanted ROC troops as cannon fodder?

Really, think about it. Why would ROC forces go all the way to Korea to stage an invasion?

Phead128 said:

.... then explain why General MacArthur proposed to use National ROC forces to invade Mainland China via Korean peninsula...

Only reason why nobody wanted to fight China is because China was allied with USSR, and USSR would have invaded Europe in retailiation...

Click to expand...

The USSR was not that Friendly with China. China like Yugoslavia, Vietnam and Cuba was a home grown communist state. China was never a avid follower of the Comintern. As the Korean war was shown and eventually the Vietnam war, the Cuban missile crisis and the Chinese invasion of Vietnam will show; the USSR will not commit troops to defend her allies.

MacArthur was no dumb arse; he knows the USSR will not go to war with the USA over China; actually he might have hoped for it. The USSR only detonated her first A-bomb in 1949, the advantage the USA held over the USSR in MAD is at it's greatest.

There is a certain animosity between Russia and China; Russia wrestled away Outer Mongolia from China. Invade Manchuria in 1929, Xinjiang in 1937 and again in 1969. Stalin never got along with Mao; to an avid diplomat, the soviet intervening on China is a slim chance.

solarz said:

Maybe because MacArthur was losing the war, and wanted ROC troops as cannon fodder?

Really, think about it. Why would ROC forces go all the way to Korea to stage an invasion?

Click to expand...

...because other than ROC's Northern Expedition from Guangdong base, and Ming Dynasty's repulsion of Yuan forces from Southern China, most, if not all the major (and successful) invasions of China has been from the North? Mongols, Manchus, Japanese, etc... have all invaded China from the North, so that's why MacArthur suggested ROC Nationalist troops to be sent into Manchuria via Korean peninsula because it's far better than an amphibious land invasion, and the flat steep plains of China's Northeast is conducive for rapid movement, compared to the hilly Southern terrain that also requires amphibious assault.

Korea is a geostrategic buffer zone where past powers have threatened China's Northeastern land border flank, so denying enemy access to the Yalu river has historically been very important.

Phead128 said:

...because other than ROC's Northern Expedition from Guangdong base, and Ming Dynasty's repulsion of Yuan forces from Southern China, most, if not all the major (and successful) invasions of China has been from the North? Mongols, Manchus, Japanese, etc... have all invaded China from the North, so that's why MacArthur suggested ROC Nationalist troops to be sent into Manchuria via Korean peninsula because it's far better than an amphibious land invasion, and the flat steep plains of China's Northeast is conducive for rapid movement, compared to the hilly Southern terrain that also requires amphibious assault.

Korea is a geostrategic buffer zone where past powers have threatened China's Northeastern land border flank, so denying enemy access to the Yalu river has historically been very important.

Click to expand...

And you think it has nothing to do with the fact that MacArthur's army was in full retreat at that time in that very location?

But ROC can see it like daylight that the US is retreating. Maybe it would have been more useful for McArthur to use ROC troops to start the opening front on NK right at the start. Chiang might not be able to resist the temptation of a direct push to Beijing from NK. Too bad he was feeling like superman at the time. Also I think it has been the intention of Truman to keep war limited to the K-peninsula from the start, the ROC action in NK would not make sense, except as cannon fodders.