Fourth Taiwan Strait Crisis

SunlitZelkova said:

I wouldn't bet on the variety of "Democratic *insert other adjective*" parties. They are just as pro-US and pro-Taiwan separatism.

Best case scenario Japan's economy is devastated by a limited war over Taiwan and/or Diaoyu + climate change + population decline and people come to their senses, drop their largely irrational fears and completely elect the JCP (yes, unlike the "CCP", Japan's communist party actually is officially called "Japanese Communist Party") to power which then transforms Japan into a socialist state.

In a worst case scenario (for both China and Japan) I wouldn't put it beyond the LDP to try to transform Japan into a South American style junta-led military regime amidst a crisis, of course with US support. I'm skeptical whether the public and JSDF would actually go along with it- the concept of democracy is very entrenched in society despite historical denialism and anti-China sentiment in the media- but it is a possibility that shouldn't be ruled out as far as whatever China needs to plan for goes.

The junta scenario may seem outlandish but Aso Taro, who continues to hold a high ranking position, has literally said that the LDP should copy the Nazis in how they restored the German military and rearmed. The chaos that a conflict over Taiwan would cause would be the perfect situation to take advantage of.

Click to expand...

I don't recommend expecting too much from JCP.
There are many reasons. Let me list them briefly：
1、At present, the Japanese are convinced that they are on the "right side". Francis Fukuyama's attitude of regarding the western system as a religion has a lot to do with his Japanese ancestry.Even when we read those entertainment novels, we can often see that Japanese writers sometimes flaunt their country's "democracy".When communism is severely slandered, it is difficult to change people's minds under the omnipresent propaganda.Unfortunately, they always feel that they live in an ideal Utopia and feel that there is nothing to change.
2、The political enthusiasm of the people is not as high as expected, and the apathy of the Japanese is beyond imagination. In the last century, there were too many factional contradictions within the JCP, and the radical youth groups were easily driven by self moving emotions, which made the opportunity to gain influence wasted by a series of mistakes
3、The United States has very tight control. Some people satirize that the current situation in Japan is nothing more than the shogunate regime ruled by the United States.Since the United States has military base in the capital of Japan, it can allow the United States to take over the leadership of Japan by force at the first time.
4、JCP and the CPC already have great political differences，the two sides may not have the intention to cooperate.In order to cater to the voters, this party, which has been seriously marginalized in Japan, has become consistent with the LDP in many aspects.Now, the JCP is also criticizing China's "expansionism".

FairAndUnbiased said:

yep, Japanese have only themselves to blame for allowing fascists to come to and stay in power since 1930's. Once this mistake has been corrected via denazification of the regime, I am sure the Japanese people will make the correct historical choices.

Click to expand...

Don't expect anything from the Japanese.In consideration of their consistent attitude of admiring the strong，I'm afraid they won't change their minds until they are hit hard.

Temstar said:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Et tu, Brute?
Checkout the asspained comments under this news

Click to expand...

Now, that is truly a beautiful sight

SunlitZelkova said:

drop their largely irrational fears and completely elect the JCP (yes, unlike the "CCP", Japan's communist party actually is officially called "Japanese Communist Party") to power which then transforms Japan into a socialist state.

Click to expand...

The JCP is just controlled opposition and has been completely gutted out by the intelligence services, pretty much like CPUSA.

And as such, they have antichina positions

GZDRefugee said:

The problem is the only country listed that has a mutual defense treaty with China is the DPRK. Their only incentive to support China is that if China loses, they will be next on the chopping block. If Vietnam, another "communist" country, isn't willing to back China even though the US is sure to destroy them next, the odds of Russia, Iran directly fighting the US is quite slim imo.

Additionally, just like how China today is not the China in 2016, the US today is not like WW2 US. They spent all this time warmongering and building up the infrastructure to support further warmongering. Anywhere outside near-China, the Americans enjoy overwhelming logistical advantages. Those 800 bases worldwide are not just for show.

Click to expand...

The only country with a mutual defense pact with Poland in ww2 was UK.

Once war starts, any nation that feels threatened by USA will join. And they will feel threatened, because if US exercises those 800 bases you're talking about, they'll be doing act of war against tons of third party neutral countries. Unless US will just stand by and let the global south send supplies as usual to the East, then in that case most of the south will be neutral.

I don't see the validness in comparing Russia and Iran who are in de facto in proxy wars against USA already compared to Vietnam who got their north completely trashed by PLA just a generation ago and therefore have a very good reason to not be a close ally with China.

America most defintely does not enjoy overwhelming logistical superiority in Asia, the battlefield that matters. By the time China makes it to east Pacific, it'll be a very different PLA.

GZDRefugee said:

Just a thought experiment. Suppose China is now the largest and cheapest source of high tech chips. All that good stuff that goes into your fancy jet fighters and other toys. Fighting a war with China would mean all your gear running out of parts and inability to produce more. You know, general economic malaise. Would you concede the first island chain to maintain your supply lines?

Click to expand...

It's even more than that.

Lets assume the worst case scenario, US successfully lands 200 000 (as many soldiers as in the Iraq war) on Taiwan. PLA has slightly less troops defending the west coast of Taiwan while the east coast is completely lost. The war develops into an Ukraine like situation, with both sides sitting still and shooting artillery at eachother. PLA tries to plan an offensive but just like the mythical Kherson offensive, it's never arriving due to lacking logistics and fierce fighting.

USA relies on TSMC for almost all of its semiconductors. TSMC has some plants on the mainland that will be put under govt control, and some on the island which may be occupied by USA. However, China can and will simply scorched earth all these plants with artillery and rockets.

If both China and US lose TSMC, China still has a myriad other semiconductor companies and free access to the raw materials to boot. US on the other hand has nothing, unless they can convince SK to help, but China holds the NK card like a sword hanging over SK's head. During wartime, Chinese embargo will forbid all nations from selling semiconductors to US, including SK, if SK defies it, NK may attack, and even if NK alone can't roll SK by itself, you can say bye bye to any Samsung semiconductors once NK artillery is raining over Seoul.

This is the reason why US needs a war to be short and sharp, only by seizing Taiwan suddenly and then declaring a fait accompli, like the Crimea incident, can US actually win. However, the fact China can surge way more forces there in a short time doesn't speak highly of their chances to do something like that.

Instead, US is trying an alternative path at the same time to build up their industry through for example the chips act. Ideally, US likely wants to delay war until theyve achieved semiconductor independence. Which is why, torpedoing the so-called CHIPS 4 should be China's top agenda to prevent US aggression.

Biscuits said:

It's even more than that.

Lets assume the worst case scenario, US successfully lands 200 000 (as many soldiers as in the Iraq war) on Taiwan. PLA has slightly less troops defending the west coast of Taiwan while the east coast is completely lost. The war develops into an Ukraine like situation, with both sides sitting still and shooting artillery at eachother. PLA tries to plan an offensive but just like the mythical Kherson offensive, it's never arriving due to lacking logistics and fierce fighting.

USA relies on TSMC for almost all of its semiconductors. TSMC has some plants on the mainland that will be put under govt control, and some on the island which may be occupied by USA. However, China can and will simply scorched earth all these plants with artillery and rockets.

If both China and US lose TSMC, China still has a myriad other semiconductor companies and free access to the raw materials to boot. US on the other hand has nothing, unless they can convince SK to help, but China holds the NK card like a sword hanging over SK's head. During wartime, Chinese embargo will forbid all nations from selling semiconductors to US, including SK, if SK defies it, NK may attack, and even if NK alone can't roll SK by itself, you can say bye bye to any Samsung semiconductors once NK artillery is raining over Seoul.

This is the reason why US needs a war to be short and sharp, only by seizing Taiwan suddenly and then declaring a fait accompli, like the Crimea incident, can US actually win. However, the fact China can surge way more forces there in a short time doesn't speak highly of their chances to do something like that.

Instead, US is trying an alternative path at the same time to build up their industry through for example the chips act. Ideally, US likely wants to delay war until theyve achieved semiconductor independence. Which is why, torpedoing the so-called CHIPS 4 should be China's top agenda to prevent US aggression.

Click to expand...

Ukraine situation will never happen in Taiwan. The entire island is under overwhelming artillery coverage from mainland China without logistic issues. The reinforcement route and supply route is easily cut off by SSK in shallow water where American carrier and nuclear sub cannot operate well. It is practically an encirclement if US land in Taiwan. If they dare send 200k soldier they can expect 200k POW instead. We should be assuming worst case scenario not bast case scenario where USA surrenders 200k army in opening stage.

The way I see it is US will drag out the conflict by containing global trade with China by stopping/attacking any trade. Meanwhile sabotage any land trade China has in BRI with terrorist attacks and bombing. Most of US land army will be deployed across the globe to cut off Chinese trading routes not in a direct battle near China.

Biscuits said:

Lets assume the worst case scenario, US successfully lands 200 000 (as many soldiers as in the Iraq war) on Taiwan.

Click to expand...

We should only assume a realistic worst case scenario.

The US landing 200 000 troops in Taiwan has the about the same chance of happening as China making an amphibious landing in California

Overbom said:

We should only assume a realistic worst case scenario.

The US landing 200 000 troops in Taiwan has the about the same chance of happening as China making an amphibious landing in California

Click to expand...

The only scenario where that is even remotely possible is China loses the war. There won’t even be a North Korea like split because It is an all or nothing scenario. Taiwan imports also all their energy and a significant amount of food supplies.

How is the US going to keep their supply convoys safe from PLAAF or PLARF to supply 200k troops and millions of refugees from the Western side going east for the duration of the war. Only way for that to be possible is that the PLA gets completely crushed.

FriedButter said:

The only scenario where that is even remotely possible is China loses the war. There won’t even be a North Korea like split because It is an all or nothing scenario. Taiwan imports also all their energy and a significant amount of food supplies.

How is the US going to keep their supply convoys safe from PLAAF or PLARF to supply 200k troops and millions of refugees from the Western side going east for the duration of the war. Only way for that to be possible is that the PLA gets completely crushed.

Click to expand...

My point isn't if its realistic that US can full scale invade Taiwan or not (no, unless most of the PLA goes in a vacation), my point is that even if they can manage to do it, they will still suffer from semiconductor blockade because China will not abandon the factories on Taiwan for US to use at will, they would destroy them so completely that US can't even pick up stuff from the ruins to reverse engineer.

Therefore US is seeking to make the CHIPS4 alliance which if a success will embolden them to attack. This is, as I see it at least, a very dangerous initiative that threatens China's position, that Chinese industrial and tech predominance can deter global scale conflicts and ensure peace. So China would need to proactively prevent this "alliance" from becoming effective at all costs.

Regarding the Taiwan policy act, The aim of this bill is to integrate the Taiwanese military into the US military, The US already has officially few dozens of soldiers in Taiwan, unofficially probably higher and the number will probably increase as the weapons' shipment increase to integrate the ROC military with the US, so that eventually they can send to Taiwan (and help Taiwan develop) more advanced and longer range radars & missiles to help in the encirclement of China.

Their aim would not be to wage an actual war on China, but it is to militarize the Taiwan island and turn it into one massive military base to help de-fang China by having this military advantage of missiles and radars in Chinese territory, This would force China to be less bold in it's foreign policy.

The big idea of some people on the forums regarding Taiwan is that China shouldn't make use of the current weak senile leadership of the US plus the massive economic weakness that the US/EU are suffering from, and instead wait till the west recovers and have (probably) a stronger leadership (I mean you can't get weaker than Biden) and wait till the US does all the bills and military things they want to do regarding Taiwan and then wait more and more till China becomes so much larger than the west.. basically wait till China becomes god and then invade Taiwan. This way of thinking is not strategy, it is cowardice. "hey I know the enemy is now unbelievably week but still I should wait few more decades before I make a move, just to be safe".

If I were to describe this way of thinking with an analogy.. imagine if there is a guy who is scared of cockroaches, he just found a huge one in his room and it's flying all over his room, but then this roach lands on a glue trap and it sticks to it but it's still moving a little bit, there is an object right besides him that he can use to smash the roach but then the guy says "oh what if I miss the roach and it flies into my face, I should go to the other room to grab a much bigger object, just to be safe" then the guy goes out, brings the bigger object and comes back only to find that the roach escaped the trap and now the guy has to spend the entire day moving furniture looking for the roach to kill it. He unnecessarily made it harder for himself by being hesitant.

China already said they will speed up reunification, they will not wait till they are a 40$-50$ trillion economy, hopefully that means the Chinese leadership doesn't share this same mindset of "hey, let's wait for our enemies to recover and then wait several more decades".