PLA Strategy in a Taiwan Contingency

Well to be honest, I think the US has handed China a strategic gift in the form of the US actions in regard to Ukraine.

I think it is time for China to capitalise on its Sovereignty over the Island and return the US's own tactics to them by loudly shouting that the US is planning an Invasion of China (placement of military force on the Chinese Sovereign territory of the Island of Taiwan) and start making all manner of dire threats and warnings, combined with major force movements etc.

This would be a matter of changing the narrative from one of Re-integration to one of defending the Motherland.

This talk of a total war of attrition between China and the US is all well and good as an academic exercise, but nuclear weapons have foreclosed on the possibility of such a war. For the US to wage such a war, it's aims at minimum would be the destruction of the CPC, if not the destruction of China itself. There's no way such a war wouldn't escalate to nuclear use.

ZeEa5KPul said:

This talk of a total war of attrition between China and the US is all well and good as an academic exercise, but nuclear weapons have foreclosed on the possibility of such a war. For the US to wage such a war, it's aims at minimum would be the destruction of the CPC, if not the destruction of China itself. There's no way such a war wouldn't escalate to nuclear use.

Click to expand...

Well, there are some in the USA who still argue that they can conduct and win a conventional war against China, and that it won't go to MAD.

But that position will be untenable, given DOD estimates that China will expand its nuclear arsenal to 700 nuclear weapons by 2027 and 1000 by 2030.

Bltizo said:

The original point was about how US intervention during a Taiwan invasion would require the PLA to significantly shift gears to allow them to achieve a degree of regional air and sea control for the airlift and sealift of a Taiwan invasion to continue and to succeed.

Click to expand...

i have been thinking about this after our discussion few days back, i wonder how does this a2ad concept play into this general war scenario.

To my understanding, a2ad means "exploiting strategic benefit of being on the defensive and sitting on a continent, find a way to fend off sea/island based US power projection into first island chain, when China's own power is still far inferior to that of US, so that taiwan can be recovered"

Bltizo said:

However -- and let me be categorically clear -- in event of third party intervention, an invasion cannot successfully happen in a circumstance where the PLA does not have the ability to at least contest air and sea control in the general western pacific region, therefore the first priority will be contesting said air and sea control first.
Put the horse in front of the cart. Don't do it the other way around.

Please consider my words carefully "contesting air and sea control" after the US has carried out an intervention, means a general PLA air, naval and missile operation against US forces in the western pacific to deny their ability to assert air and sea control in the region to the greatest practical extent possible.

Click to expand...

In terms of contesting air/sea control, i do think PLA as of now has substaintial capability to do that WITHIN the first island chain, which means i cannot see how can US aircraft conduct direct attack over tw island or in the strait, or US sink PLA ships in the strait with relative ease. and i think PLA has the capability to maintain that status for at least a few weeks or even months.

Beyond first island chain, PLA capability deteriorate pretty quickly.

The result is US strike against mainland/tw will be limited to standoff weapon from outside the first island chain mainly, the intensity of which is far less than being able to conduct direct attack.

my calculation is on average each day US may deliver ～1000 missiles from bombers and ～200 missiles from naval ships.

For PLA's counter offensive to disrupt US action, i think that is where H6 and PLARF come in place, and their capacity, according to my calculation, is also about 1000+ missiles towards targets in island chains.

so this is the picture we would see:
1, both sides conduct massive standoff strike with similar scale
2, the air/sea control around tw island remain contested

with above as overall situation , is it possible for PLA to some how concentrate its ASW/AAW/ASuW capability to create a relatively safe passage for its amphibious forces to cross the strait, and resupply it as needed? i think this is the orginal question. and i dont think it is impossible.

Bltizo said:

But the idea that the US will cease hostilities against China if China is able to successfully invade Taiwan and force terms of surrender on Taiwan, is very unlikely to me.

Click to expand...

this part is becoming a bit political in nature so everyone could have different view.

but to me, the problem at hand for PRC/PLA leadership is: how can we prevent tw from breaking away even with US intervention.

i think they probably will not initiate that military action unless there is clear/unmistakable political gesture on the tw side to declare independence. So it is not really a choice but more of a if...then decision, so to speak.

At the beginning of everything, lets say if Chinese leaders share your view that they will lose a war of attrition eventually, then what is the only chance to avoid the dire consequence of government total collapes when that day come? is to somehow managed to recovered the island during the process.

i guess above logic is why i didnt agree with you on China suspend invasion in case of US intervention, it is politically not viable at all, which means they will be looking for a different military solution

as to US, if they can prevent China from taking tw, of course that is the best outcome for them. But if not, the prolonged action is to what end? re-liberate tw? unthinkable to me. to punish China? maybe, but to what extend, i mean China is a nuclear power, you cannot expect a total surrender like ww2. and if it goes too far, there is always risk of escalation.

Bltizo said:

The alternative of not prioritizing air and sea control in the western pacific after third party intervention, would be to have China to continue and carry out an invasion of Taiwan under circumstances where the US is capable of openly conducting air and naval operations between the first and second island chains, where they will not only be able to conduct strikes against PLAN ships operating around Taiwan (including amphibious assault ships), but also against PLA aircraft operating over Taiwan and against PLA bases on China's coastal provinces in general -- not to mention to conduct strikes against PLA positions in Taiwan itself.

Sure, the PLA will do its best to combat US forces in those areas, but that is exactly the kind of war of attrition the PLA will definitively lose, because the sortie and force generating forces of the US in the region (air bases, carriers, logistics centers) will remain operational.

Click to expand...

like i described above, not really a choice

Bltizo said:

This is why I typically don't participate deeply in Taiwan contingency threads, because it usually becomes a thread about a generalized westpac high intensity conflict involving the US.

Click to expand...

i thank you for leading this civil discussion given how extremely sensitive it is

AndrewS said:

But that position will be untenable, given DOD estimates that China will expand its nuclear arsenal to 700 nuclear weapons by 2027 and 1000 by 2030.

Click to expand...

One should note that these estimates are revised from the "at least double in a decade" of the previous year. People focused on the "double" part when I think the "at least" part is far more significant. DoD estimates aren't very reliable at the current moment because the situation is still fluid and I expect them to be revised upward in the near future.

ZeEa5KPul said:

One should note that these estimates are revised from the "at least double in a decade" of the previous year. People focused on the "double" part when I think the "at least" part is far more significant. DoD estimates aren't very reliable at the current moment because the situation is still fluid and I expect them to be revised upward in the near future.

Click to expand...

Yup, as soon as the 2021 CMPR came out I made a bet that the estimate will be revised upward again in next year's. I think something plausible for them to say might be 1000 by 2027 and 1500 by 2030.

caohailiang said:

this part is becoming a bit political in nature so everyone could have different view.

but to me, the problem at hand for PRC/PLA leadership is: how can we prevent tw from breaking away even with US intervention.

Click to expand...

Taiwan is deterred from independence because the Chinese military can still achieve something like air superiority quite easily because Taiwan is too close to China and too far from anyone else.

Taiwan's civilian infrastructure could be dismantled as follows.

AndrewS said:

Yes, I agree that the PLA would delay a Taiwan campaign if the US got involved.

From the civilian perspective, the electricity and fuel networks on Taiwan will be attacked. There are only 100-odd major targets like Power stations, Fuel Depots and Refineries. The transportation network could also be crippled with another 300-odd bridges on major rivers/canals in Taiwan, which would result in roughly 15 isolated regions comprising 1-2 million people each. I would see this happening within the first week, even with US intervention.

If these targets are hit, no matter what happens afterwards, it is only a matter of days/weeks before a societal collapse in Taiwan, reminiscent of the last days of Imperial Japan. Taiwan only produces one-third of its food requirements during peacetime and China can still prevent outside aircraft and ships from reaching Taiwan for example. I don't see any way for Taiwan to avoid this scenario except with a political settlement with China.

So if there is US intervention, then the PLA can afford to delay a Taiwan invasion by a few weeks.
In that time, we would see increasingly desperate attempts by the US forces to reach Taiwan which is only 200km from the Chinese coast.

Click to expand...

Some further thoughts on this.

The DPP government in Taiwan could mitigate the scenario above by requiring every family to stockpile 1 month of food, water purification tablets and other supplies.

But given the political hurricane that such a request would create, I don't see this happening.

---

It also occurs to me that some of the Japanese Ryukyu Islands are really close to Taiwan, and could experience something similar.
This might even extend to Okinawa, which is a small island and has a significant civilian population of 1.3 Million

AndrewS said:

Taiwan is deterred from independence because the Chinese military can still achieve something like air superiority quite easily because Taiwan is too close to China and too far from anyone else.

Taiwan's civilian infrastructure could be dismantled as follows.




Some further thoughts on this.

The DPP government in Taiwan could mitigate the scenario above by requiring every family to stockpile 1 month of food, water purification tablets and other supplies.

But given the political hurricane that such a request would create, I don't see this happening.

Click to expand...

This still won't help. Let's say they all require a barrel of fuel at home, a private generator, 1 month dry food, 2 month water purification tablets.

Where are they going to go other than stay at home when bridges, oil refineries, communication relays, days centers and grid power gets hit and they only have 2 days worth of generation? Because that's how inefficient private gas or diesel generators are vs. plant scale generation.

They won't be able to go anywhere, do anything, communicate or do anything beyond merely surviving on Cheetos and Mountain Dew. I understand that their otakus will be highly trained in Mountain Dew + Cheeto survival in basements. But it's only enough for survival, not resistance.

AndrewS said:

Well, there are some in the USA who still argue that they can conduct and win a conventional war against China, and that it won't go to MAD.

But that position will be untenable, given DOD estimates that China will expand its nuclear arsenal to 700 nuclear weapons by 2027 and 1000 by 2030.

Click to expand...

I am confident China has already had that number of nukes (~1,000), there is no limiting factor for China to get to the number (money, technology, material, need). If you were in charge of China, would you be comfortable to only have 300 nukes while facing very aggressive USA and allies. I am pretty sure that Chinese leaders are much much wiser and smarter than me to realise that

1,000 is a minimum, China may have a target to get to 2,000-2,500 .. remember China has to also consider EU, Japan, India, Aus, etc

FairAndUnbiased said:

This still won't help. Let's say they all require a barrel of fuel at home, a private generator, 1 month dry food, 2 month water purification tablets.

Where are they going to go other than stay at home when bridges, oil refineries, communication relays, days centers and grid power gets hit and they only have 2 days worth of generation? Because that's how inefficient private gas or diesel generators are vs. plant scale generation.

They won't be able to go anywhere, do anything, communicate or do anything beyond merely surviving on Cheetos and Mountain Dew. I understand that their otakus will be highly trained in Mountain Dew + Cheeto survival in basements. But it's only enough for survival, not resistance.

Click to expand...

Man screw the energy problem. Where the hell are you going to get water? If the utilities get knocked out then the water pumps to the buildings = dead. The populace is going to concentrate around rivers, lakes, streams, etc.

Otherwise, the further away from water sources then the more energy and time required to transport it. 1 trip to the river and 1 trip back. How long can people are several litres for 1 person everyday before exhaustion sets in.

Stockpiling food is useless without stockpiling water. Average US bathtub carries 42 gallons of water, which is enough for 3 people for 1 month of drinking water. Another tub for cooking water. (Average household = 2.92). There is also issues with evaporation (slow due to humidity) and an unsealed bathtub (water leakage).