PLA Strategy in a Taiwan Contingency

tch1972 said:

Kishore who is more academic and writer.

Click to expand...

Kishore has been a diplomat for 20 years serving as your country's (am assuming you're a Singaporean based on your comment) permanent representative to the U.N. and a one time President of the U.N. security council. I don't understand how you can sort of trivializes the man's long excellent diplomatic service on your country's behalf.

This is shorten version of the debate between pro and contra US intervention in Taiwan contingency

To the Mods :

Can we move the discussion on Singapore, Philippines and and Thailand in the last few pages to either the SCS Strategic thread of SE Asian Economics thread, or other more appropriate ones ?

There were some good discussion and I like to join in. But we should not derail this thread.

I like Kishore but

Bellum_Romanum said:

Kishore has been a diplomat for 20 years serving as your country's (am assuming you're a Singaporean based on your comment) permanent representative to the U.N. and a one time President of the U.N. security council. I don't understand how you can sort of trivializes the man's long excellent diplomatic service on your country's behalf.

Click to expand...

I personally like Kishore and agree with his view at large. But he had left foreign ministry long ago and had lately focus on writing books on international geopolitics. That a fact and how do yiu construe this as trivialising his contribution?

tch1972 said:

I like Kishore but

I personally like Kishore and agree with his view at large. But he had left foreign ministry long ago and had lately focus on writing books on international geopolitics. That a fact and how do yiu construe this as trivialising his contribution?

Click to expand...

The Mahbubani books have a far greater impact.

Plus Kausikan's view of Trump as an aberration is just plain wrong. If that is the view inside the Foreign Ministry, well, the opinion polls in the USA show Trump is the leading contender for the next Presidential election.

The election of Trump and his views are not an aberration.

I also recall a speech by the Singaporean Prime Minister a few month's ago to Parliament, where he lamented how bald faced lies are now prevalent in US politics, both Foreign and Domestic, whether Republican or Democratic.

Anyway, back to topic.

PLAN draw lesson from Falkland naval war and recent sinking of Moskva. Another good op/ed from Lyle Goldstein


From aircraft carriers to nuclear submarines to naval helicopters to amphibious doctrine, the PLA Navy has comprehensively mined the Falklands War for insights into what 21st-century naval warfare might look like. But nowhere have they gone to school more intensively than on fielding a vast array of lethal anti-ship cruise missiles, such as the and , which may well be superior to the Western equivalents.


Unquestionably, Taiwan’s defenders will be inspired by the example of Ukrainian asymmetric warfare at sea. However, American strategists will do well to approach this volatile scenario with all due caution, keeping the Sheffield example well in mind.

After all, as Chinese strategists have long pointed out, if the Argentines simply had a large store of Exocet missiles instead of the they did possess, the results of the Falklands War would most likely have been very different.

good op/ed by David Goldstein in AT He quote Oriana Skylar Mastro op/ed in New York times basically said US has no chance of winning in Taiwan contingency. So those would be analyst that say China will be battered by US missile doesn't know what they are talking

As Air Force strategist and Stanford professor Oriana Skylar Mastro warned in a May 27 op-ed: “China’s missile force is … thought to be capable of targeting ships at sea to neutralize the main US tool of power projection, aircraft carriers.

“The United States has the most advanced fighter jets in the world, but access to just two US airbases within unrefueled combat radius of the Taiwan Strait, both in Japan, compared with China’s 39 airbases within 500 miles of Taipei.

“If China’s leaders decide they need to recover Taiwan and are convinced that the United States would respond, they may see no other option but a pre-emptive strike on US forces in the region. Chinese missiles could take out key American bases in Japan, and US aircraft carriers could face Chinese ‘carrier killer’ missiles.”

Hendrik_2000 said:

This is shorten version of the debate between pro and contra US intervention in Taiwan contingency

Click to expand...

The funniest thing about this debate is that the one guy who actually follows all the Chinese military developments is saying the US would lose, while the other side is just looking at the political cost of not defending Taiwan.

They completely fail to consider the political cost of trying and failing to defend Taiwan. That would inarguably be a far greater shock to American hegemony than not defending Taiwan at all.

solarz said:

The funniest thing about this debate is that the one guy who actually follows all the Chinese military developments is saying the US would lose, while the other side is just looking at the political cost of not defending Taiwan.

They completely fail to consider the political cost of trying and failing to defend Taiwan. That would inarguably be a far greater shock to American hegemony than not defending Taiwan at all.

Click to expand...

Actually, to me the funniest thing is that this is a bunch of white people debating over an island full of non-white people.
Also the other side is basically saying do it for "American Interests", which from this video seems like *white* interests.

Therefore fight a war for colonialism/white supremacy. Good times...

I highly doubt a taiwan scenario will ever happen. Why?

1. China still committed to peaceful reunification and its not like there is a deadline for it.
2. A war would end taiwans place as an advanced economy. It's clear the Taiwanese authorities are aware of it too when one looks at their quadrenial 2021 defense review. Plus no way Taiwanese independence wins democratically ,why? Because it means the Taiwanese real estate market quickly goes to 0% and the CPC tries really hard to hammer that into the heads of the Taiwanese
3. US can't win much from a war. Best case they keep their hegemony. Why risk it