PLA Strategy in a Taiwan Contingency

zhangjim · Jun 11, 2022

Michaelsinodef said:
I wouldn't say japanese intervention would be a given, it's a % and it will vary due to many different factors such as the strength of the PLA and US willigness to actually fight the PLA.

Publicity is magic.The lesson from Ukraine is that irresponsible propaganda has cost the lives of many Western mercenaries who thought war was "easy and fun like video game".
Japan has the same dangerous tendency,they propagate day in and day out how technologically advanced Japan is and that Made in China will only explode.Even their current best-selling manga is promoting how easily and easily Japan could defeat a Chinese aircraft carrier without even the help of the United States!
Even if it is daily news,Japanese netizens are showing extreme contempt for China.All the media are creating the illusion that "if only the U.S. would help us, then we could easily defeat China".
Unfortunately, Japanese politicians have consciously used this to advocate the expansion of the military while completely disregarding the national strength and even advocating the argument of acquiring nuclear weapons.
Judging from historical experience, Japan will also seize the opportunity to make dangerous gambles whenever it has a slight advantage.

Michaelsinodef said:
For this, I personally don't think Xi and the leadership is that afraid of military actions, but the decision of taking military action against Taiwan is really complex and at the core it has become a China - US issue and confrontation.

The people are tired of the day-to-day, useless diplomatic protests,the radicals claim that they don't care about any official so-called "hardline" views except for the landing of the army.
They think it's a waste of resources in a "pariah" that doesn't even have official international status,and it happens to be tricked by American scaremongering.
The extremely limited support of the Americans for Taiwan has shown their actual attitude.There is a fundamental difference between caution and timidity.

solarz · Jun 11, 2022

zhangjim said:
On the diplomatic front, previous political commitments are failing.The Taiwan Strait issue seems to have become a topic in which any country can intervene.The Czechs and Lithuanians set an extremely bad precedent,U.S politicians are escalating the situation with great frequency,their foreign ministry has repeatedly revised the wording,as for the Japanese and Koreans, they have also shown a position of forceful interventiont.

None of that matters. Only two things matter when it comes to Taiwan:

1. Will Taiwan cross the red line?

2. Will US militarily intervene?

The PLA is making preparations with the assumption that both of the above will be true.

It is 100% clear that the US does not want war with China, just as it does not want war with Russia. It wants to be able to play it's little games so that it can use proxies to bleed its rivals.

As we are seeing in Ukraine, the US is doubling down on this strategy. When the US tells Taiwan to learn from Ukraine, it is effectively telling them it will not intervene militarily.

FairAndUnbiased · Jun 11, 2022

zhangjim said:
The people are tired of the day-to-day, useless diplomatic protests,the radicals claim that they don't care about any official so-called "hardline" views except for the landing of the army.
They think it's a waste of resources in a "pariah" that doesn't even have official international status,and it happens to be tricked by American scaremongering.
The extremely limited support of the Americans for Taiwan has shown their actual attitude.There is a fundamental difference between caution and timidity.

it's difficult to land troops in Taiwan in a massive war between US and China, but it is very easy to stop supply ships from landing in Taiwan.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

even with fertilizer imports and

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

. In the absence of imports, Taiwan's population will decline to its natural carrying capacity - 7 million people living in medieval conditions.

The medieval conditions will occur first as neutralization of oil refineries, oil storage, ports, LNG terminals, power stations, distribution substations, bridges, railways, food storage depots and other military-infrastructure targets will render Taiwan incapable of either accepting or utilizing their existing energy reserves or distributing existing food.

As it is legal to use chemicals for plant management per US legal precedent during Vietnam War, their agricultural yields can be further reduced by using drone dispensed herbicides to manage their crop production down to a more sustainable level.

This is all 100% legal, ethical and moral based on US's own precedent and prior behavior.

And it would be unreasonable for China to resupply Taiwan during a war, and if other countries don't want to resupply Taiwan due to insurance issues, who can blame them?

Coalescence · Jun 11, 2022

solarz said:
As we are seeing in Ukraine, the US is doubling down on this strategy. When the US tells Taiwan to learn from Ukraine, it is effectively telling them it will not intervene militarily.

This is what I'm thinking as well, their intentions are pretty clear. Their goal is to "contain" China by slowing down, halting or even reversing its development through economic and diplomatic strategies. What I think will likely happen is they won't intervene military, but use the same sanctions and actions as they did with Russia.

They are trying to insulate their economy from China in order to prevent their economy from being affected by those actions, and gather "allies" around the region through organizations and treaties to control them like EU to maximize the economic blockade against China, creating a bloc in effect.

Other than militarily preparing for a scenario where US intervenes, China should focus on diplomacy and economy. They need to ensure they won't suffer greatly from the results of those sanctions and assets being stolen by insulating their own economy as well and reduce dependencies on imports from more hostile countries, and make agreements or improve relations with countries that after an armed reunification scenario they will still maintain normal ties with China. I think the CPC knows this, and is preparing for it.

FairAndUnbiased · Jun 11, 2022

Coalescence said:
This is what I'm thinking as well, their intentions are pretty clear. Their goal is to "contain" China by slowing down, halting or even reversing its development through economic and diplomatic strategies. What I think will likely happen is they won't intervene military, but use the same sanctions and actions as they did with Russia.

They are trying to insulate their economy from China in order to prevent their economy from being affected by those actions, and gather "allies" around the region through organizations and treaties to control them like EU to maximize the economic blockade against China, creating a bloc in effect.

Other than militarily preparing for a scenario where US intervenes, China should focus on diplomacy and economy. They need to ensure they won't suffer greatly from the results of those sanctions and assets being stolen by insolating their own economy as well and reduce dependencies on imports from more hostile countries, and make agreements or improve relations with countries that after an armed reunification scenario they will still maintain normal ties with China. I think the CPC knows this, and is preparing for it.

This is why I believe supporting Russia while not completely breaking ties with Ukraine was a good move. Zelensky recognizes China's value which is why Ukraine has never condemned China while ironically the typical gang blames China for not supporting Ukraine enough. 皇帝不急太监急。Meanwhile Putin also understands, and he also knows that Russia is tied to China.

The only way Ukraine rebuilds with any semblence of normality or independence, with whatever they have remaining, is with China's help. China is the only one capable of giving them cost effective capital goods required for rebuilding, and most of all, China is the only one that will buy their non-agricultural products. Otherwise, they'll just be a EU satellite state and remain in poverty like Moldova. Meanwhile Russia, I don't need to say how their economy has shifted towards China.

The reality is that neutrality and noninterference, while they come at a cost, also are a great benefit. Sure, allies can help, but they can also be a burden. This is how China can satisfy Russia and Ukraine simultaneously, Saudi and Iran simultaneously, North and South Korea simultaneously. China doesn't get drawn into meaningless conflicts which saves a ton of political capital, not to mention doesn't incur military or economic costs. The only problems China has are with countries that actively antagonize China.

yungho · Jun 11, 2022

zhangjim said:
My view is the exact opposite: the potential for conflict is growing.
On the diplomatic front, previous political commitments are failing.The Taiwan Strait issue seems to have become a topic in which any country can intervene.The Czechs and Lithuanians set an extremely bad precedent,U.S politicians are escalating the situation with great frequency,their foreign ministry has repeatedly revised the wording,as for the Japanese and Koreans, they have also shown a position of forceful interventiont.
View attachment 90536
Taiwan's independents have never had such a privileged environment as they do today.

In recent years, they have been the most active echoers of a series of U.S. accusations against China.Considering that Japanese show too much undeserved attachment to this former colony,the Japanese military intervention was completely predictable.
This would be a great encouragement to the pro-Japanese faction within Taiwan.

China's diplomatic costs will only increase further over time.
Worryingly, many people have begun to question whether the top brass has the determination to complete national reunification or not.
One of the most vicious claims is that the transfer of benefits to Taiwan has created an interest group that does not want to unify the nation, and that the top brass does not dare to confront the United States, and that all the seemingly tough actions are just a show to appease the people.
The most fanatical part of the population outright claimed that if unification by force could not be achieved, then Xi would be nothing more than a power-hungry tyrant!

Although it is not possible to publicize this in the media, these statements are still spread through various political metaphors,if the top leaders still care about their historical ratings, I think action is inevitable.

solarz said:
None of that matters. Only two things matter when it comes to Taiwan:

1. Will Taiwan cross the red line?

2. Will US militarily intervene?

The PLA is making preparations with the assumption that both of the above will be true.

It is 100% clear that the US does not want war with China, just as it does not want war with Russia. It wants to be able to play it's little games so that it can use proxies to bleed its rivals.

As we are seeing in Ukraine, the US is doubling down on this strategy. When the US tells Taiwan to learn from Ukraine, it is effectively telling them it will not intervene militarily.

Completely agree. Confidence in the communists are deteriorating, partially due to outside demoralization and increasingly restrictive government policy. The red line is not important anymore. The US will continue to deteriorate the Taiwan Relations Act, until crossing the 'red line' is just a formality. The US will obviously intervene, that's not even a question anymore. It's obvious the US wants a 'military operation' as well, because they think they will win.. and I think they will.

I don't have confidence China will come out on top in a conflict. I don't think it needs to either. Getting baited into a conflict by a more power adversary with better allies, equipment, numbers, and experience is a mistake. Taiwan is not going anywhere. Let's say Taiwan crosses the red line tomorrow. What do you gain by jumping into the conflict now vs 10 years from now? While I don't think the power balance is major, the 'house' is not stable. I don't have confidence in the communist system and believe political reform is needed before talking about conflict.

I think Japan intervention is guaranteed. Japan today is constructed by the US and relies on the US, to an extent, for legitimacy. Any Chinese military action in the east will be viewed as an existential crisis for the Japanese. Japan leaders have long desired to revise Article 9, despite resistance from the populace. Korea is more questionable.

Michaelsinodef · Jun 11, 2022

yungho said:
Completely agree. Confidence in the communists are deteriorating, partially due to outside demoralization and increasingly restrictive government policy. The red line is not important anymore. The US will continue to deteriorate the Taiwan Relations Act, until crossing the 'red line' is just a formality. The US will obviously intervene, that's not even a question anymore. It's obvious the US wants a 'military operation' as well, because they think they will win.. and I think they will.

I don't have confidence China will come out on top in a conflict. I don't think it needs to either. Getting baited into a conflict by a more power adversary with better allies, equipment, numbers, and experience is a mistake. Taiwan is not going anywhere. Let's say Taiwan crosses the red line tomorrow. What do you gain by jumping into the conflict now vs 10 years from now? While I don't think the power balance is major, the 'house' is not stable. I don't have confidence in the communist system and believe political reform is needed before talking about conflict.

I think Japan intervention is guaranteed. Japan today is constructed by the US and relies on the US, to an extent, for legitimacy. Any Chinese military action in the east will be viewed as an existential crisis for the Japanese. Japan leaders have long desired to revise Article 9, despite resistance from the populace. Korea is more questionable.

Lol no, confidence in the PLA is rising not falling.

What's more, you should probably spend some time to look into the US military as well as like ROC, JSDF and ROKAF (hint, things aren't looking that good inside).

Still, the expectation is that they will be competent if a conflict should happen (and likewise the PLA as well), at which point we can start looking at equipment, in which we can see that relatively (and also not relatively) the power of the PLA has grown immensely.

Bellum_Romanum · Jun 11, 2022

yungho said:
Completely agree. Confidence in the communists are deteriorating, partially due to outside demoralization and increasingly restrictive government policy. The red line is not important anymore. The US will continue to deteriorate the Taiwan Relations Act, until crossing the 'red line' is just a formality. The US will obviously intervene, that's not even a question anymore. It's obvious the US wants a 'military operation' as well, because they think they will win.. and I think they will.

I don't have confidence China will come out on top in a conflict. I don't think it needs to either. Getting baited into a conflict by a more power adversary with better allies, equipment, numbers, and experience is a mistake. Taiwan is not going anywhere. Let's say Taiwan crosses the red line tomorrow. What do you gain by jumping into the conflict now vs 10 years from now? While I don't think the power balance is major, the 'house' is not stable. I don't have confidence in the communist system and believe political reform is needed before talking about conflict.

I think Japan intervention is guaranteed. Japan today is constructed by the US and relies on the US, to an extent, for legitimacy. Any Chinese military action in the east will be viewed as an existential crisis for the Japanese. Japan leaders have long desired to revise Article 9, despite resistance from the populace. Korea is more questionable.

yungho said:
I don't have confidence in the communist system and believe political reform is needed.

What political reform do you like to see or happen? Are you advocating for political liberalization a.k.a. Democracy and election American style? If so, please argue the merits of this proposal and how exactly it would benefit your version of China to your own preference. I expect originality and not just some copy and paste nonsense that only ever exists in theory and not in actual practice.

FairAndUnbiased · Jun 11, 2022

yungho said:
Completely agree. Confidence in the communists are deteriorating, partially due to outside demoralization and increasingly restrictive government policy. The red line is not important anymore. The US will continue to deteriorate the Taiwan Relations Act, until crossing the 'red line' is just a formality. The US will obviously intervene, that's not even a question anymore. It's obvious the US wants a 'military operation' as well, because they think they will win.. and I think they will.

I don't have confidence China will come out on top in a conflict. I don't think it needs to either. Getting baited into a conflict by a more power adversary with better allies, equipment, numbers, and experience is a mistake. Taiwan is not going anywhere. Let's say Taiwan crosses the red line tomorrow. What do you gain by jumping into the conflict now vs 10 years from now? While I don't think the power balance is major, the 'house' is not stable. I don't have confidence in the communist system and believe political reform is needed before talking about conflict.

I think Japan intervention is guaranteed. Japan today is constructed by the US and relies on the US, to an extent, for legitimacy. Any Chinese military action in the east will be viewed as an existential crisis for the Japanese. Japan leaders have long desired to revise Article 9, despite resistance from the populace. Korea is more questionable.

China doesn't need to come out on top but China does need to fight. As long as it's not an existential loss, which it won't be because of increasing strategic deterrence and US invading China is impossible, dealing a crippling blow to them is almost guaranteed.

US doesn't need to just win, it has to win overwhelmingly and easily with near zero losses. Otherwise Taiwan gets over half their population starved to death and the rest reduced to medieval conditions when ASM and mines keep blowing up freighters and SRBM keep destroying their ports. There's no way to prevent ASM and SRBM TELs from hitting soft targets in Taiwan even if entire PLAN gets sunk. China would also rebuild a navy faster than the US.

If Taiwan gets destroyed by starvation and USN is crippled the message to the rest of the world is, fuck with China and your country will become a shit hole and btw, the hegemony is crippled, it's now a free for all.

Bellum_Romanum · Jun 11, 2022

yungho said:
Completely agree. Confidence in the communists are deteriorating, partially due to outside demoralization and increasingly restrictive government policy. The red line is not important anymore. The US will continue to deteriorate the Taiwan Relations Act, until crossing the 'red line' is just a formality. The US will obviously intervene, that's not even a question anymore. It's obvious the US wants a 'military operation' as well, because they think they will win.. and I think they will.

I don't have confidence China will come out on top in a conflict. I don't think it needs to either. Getting baited into a conflict by a more power adversary with better allies, equipment, numbers, and experience is a mistake. Taiwan is not going anywhere. Let's say Taiwan crosses the red line tomorrow. What do you gain by jumping into the conflict now vs 10 years from now? While I don't think the power balance is major, the 'house' is not stable. I don't have confidence in the communist system and believe political reform is needed before talking about conflict.

I think Japan intervention is guaranteed. Japan today is constructed by the US and relies on the US, to an extent, for legitimacy. Any Chinese military action in the east will be viewed as an existential crisis for the Japanese. Japan leaders have long desired to revise Article 9, despite resistance from the populace. Korea is more questionable.

yungho said:
Confidence in the communists are deteriorating, partially due to outside demoralization

Please cite any studies or surveys that support your pretty dramatic and assertive opinion as if we have to take them as facts.

Your comment while welcome and must be entertained for a serious debate actually is pretty irritating because you simply said something or throw something that's heavy on western perception yearning for approval.

PLA Strategy in a Taiwan Contingency

zhangjim

Junior Member

solarz

Brigadier

FairAndUnbiased

Brigadier

Coalescence

Senior Member

FairAndUnbiased

Brigadier

yungho

Junior Member

Michaelsinodef

Senior Member

Bellum_Romanum

Brigadier

FairAndUnbiased

Brigadier

Bellum_Romanum

Brigadier