PLA Strategy in a Taiwan Contingency

i.e. said:

Then US got a bigger problem on its hands,


if it is still occupying the territory of another country, I would say pretty illegally....
because pretty much all international bodies and countries, including United States, recognizes Taiwan as part of China, even back when US recognized ROC as the official government of china.

and the PRC in 50s up to late 70s were pretty much right in pointing out that US is occupying Taiwan and should be thrown out as an invader.


better settle this before People's Liberation Army really knocks on the door.

Click to expand...

Nothing about it was illegal. The Japanese surrendered to the allies and did sign the peace treaty giving up the islan, by treaty, to US occupational control. At the time, the ROC was not on the island and the US had them act on their behalf.

After the ROC lost the war on the mainland the issue was in question and the US left it that way.

Nothing illegal there...just not settled legally on paper, though the ROC is governing as though it were...but doing so acting on behlaf of the US on paper who is okay with it...which means it would all also be legal.

Sort of like the Korean conflict, after all of these years is still not "officially" over. Just an armistices/cease fire but no formal treaty.

So it apparently is with Taiwan. The US it seems, is just letting it go until the two sides come together, and in the mean time, the ROC governs with US approval the whole time.

The US has indicated that there is one government of China...but on paper, legally according to the treaties...that does not yet include the island. Realize, this is all legaleze stuff...has nothing to do with the reality of the situation on the ground. It is clear that the US wants both sides to work this out peacefully.

No need to threaten military action over that...to do so would be a worse action by the PRC, and give up all the good will they are developing by waiting as it is.

I believe it can, and hope and pray it will, work out peacefully. It's just an interesting bit of research on the actual treaties and the history that have legally been involved with the island since the 1895 treaty.

Jeff Head said:

The US has indicated that there is one government of China...but on paper, legally according to the treaties...that does not yet include the island.

Click to expand...

"There is one government of China, and Taiwan is part of China". I believe the second part is the language from the joint communiques that under pins the diplomatic relationship between US and CHina (between pretty much everyone in the world and CHina for that fact),
This clearly de-linears where US officially consider the sovereignty of Taiwan belongs.
now there is a bit of diplomatic dancing as far as who that "CHina" is. but still, taiwan is part of china.

now as far as international law goes, clearly US has nullified those part you have mentioned that put Taiwan's legal status in doubt, by effectively announcing that "taiwan is part of china" multiple times on multiple occasions.

Jeff,
How can you claim that Taiwan was free for sixty years ( being most of that time a dictatorship under Chiang and his son, btw ) and at the same time claim that the government of Taiwan is acting under the authority of the US?

delft said:

Jeff,
How can you claim that Taiwan was free for sixty years ( being most of that time a dictatorship under Chiang and his son, btw ) and at the same time claim that the government of Taiwan is acting under the authority of the US?

Click to expand...

Two reason. 1st, I have done more research and dicovered the part about the "occupying military authority" which is a part of all the official treaties and orders.

Official communiques are important...but they need to be backed up by signed, diplomatic treaties before they are official.

Also, I indicated that the people of Taiwan feel that they are free and have been free for that time. Did not say anything about the official/legalexe status in those posts. I believe I indicated that (ie. that the people on the island felt they were a nation for all that time). And they do. Irrespective of whatever those old treaties and Orders from Macauthur say. I also indicated that all of that was legaleze and did not relate to the reality on the ground of day to day governance of Taiwan.

Delft, I was simply raising what I though (and still do think) is an interesting point about the legal history of the island. That's all.

Clearly, those documents are interesting, but in the end, they will not be the deciding factor on what happens with Taiwan.

Jeff Head said:

Official communiques are important...but they need to be backed up by signed, diplomatic treaties before they are official.

Click to expand...

The treaty establishing diplomatic relations between US and China I believe reference to the joint communiques explicitly as the basis of this diplomatic relations.

the end.

i.e. said:

The treaty establishing diplomatic relations between US and China I believe reference to the joint communiques explicitly as the basis of this diplomatic relations.

the end.

Click to expand...

If that is the case...and it was signed diplomatially under those pretenses, you would be right and it would have already been resolved. Can you point to a link or specirfic documentation with that wording?

I can find these other documents, treaties, official orders, etc...but have not seen that one. I'll look as well.

Jeff Head said:

If that is the case...and it was signed diplomatially under those pretenses, you would be right and it would have already been resolved. Can you point to a link or specirfic documentation with that wording?

I can find these other documents, treaties, official orders, etc...but have not seen that one. I'll look as well.

Click to expand...

I did a google on
"Joint Communique on the Establishment of Diplomatic Relations between the People's Republic of China and the United States of America"

This is the primary instrument that established the relationship between two countries.

and here is what i found:

Here is one example.



note this is from the US consulate website in Hongkong & Macau


"Joint Communique of the United States of America and the People's Republic of China
January 1, 1979

(The communique was released on December 15, 1978, in Washington and Beijing.)

The United States of America and the People's Republic of China have agreed to recognize each other and to establish diplomatic relations as of January 1, 1979.
The United States of America recognizes the Government of the People's Republic of China as the sole legal Government of China. Within this context, the people of the United States will maintain cultural, commercial, and other unofficial relations with the people of Taiwan.
The United States of America and the People's Republic of China reaffirm the principles agreed on by the two sides in the Shanghai Communique and emphasize once again that: Both wish to reduce the danger of international military conflict.
Neither should seek hegemony in the Asia-Pacific region or in any other region of the world and each is opposed to efforts by any other country or group of countries to establish such hegemony.
Neither is prepared to negotiate on behalf of any third party or to enter into agreements or understandings with the other directed at other states.
The Government of the United States of America acknowledges the Chinese position that there is but one China and Taiwan is part of China. Both believe that normalization of Sino-American relations is not only in the interest of the Chinese and American peoples but also contributes to the cause of peace in Asia and the world.
The United States of America and the People's Republic of China will exchange Ambassadors and establish Embassies on March 1,
"

Both side signed the document in 1979.


And this is the Shanghai Communique that was referenced in the previous document that outlined the details of US position on taiwan:



"The U.S. side declared: The United States acknowledges that all Chinese on either side of the Taiwan Strait maintain there is but one China and that Taiwan is a part of China. The United States Government does not challenge that position. It reaffirms its interest in a peaceful settlement of the Taiwan question by the Chinese themselves. With this prospect in mind, it affirms the ultimate objective of the withdrawal of all U.S. forces and military installations from Taiwan. In the meantime, it will progressively reduce its forces and military installations on Taiwan as the tension in the area diminishes.
"

i.e. said:

"It reaffirms its interest in a peaceful settlement of the Taiwan question by the Chinese themselves. With this prospect in mind, it affirms the ultimate objective of the withdrawal of all U.S. forces and military installations from Taiwan. In the meantime, it will progressively reduce its forces and military installations on Taiwan as the tension in the area diminishes."

Click to expand...

Excellent. I will add that to the end of my analysis. The final part would be...which has not occurred...for the US to sign a treaty with te PRC where they officially end the "principle military occupancy" and cede the soverignty over to the PRC.

To indicate a joint understanding is one thing, particularly when it uses language like "ultimate objective" which legally indicates that the objective has not been met or fulfilled yet...and to officially end the occupation and cede soverignty as a result of an official treaty is another.

I do not believe that will happen until both sides agree and everything will get officially and legally taken care of at that point.

Mr T said:

Anything is possible. But Taiwan won't willingly become a SAR because that means China having massive political influence. What's the point in going from a democracy to having a leader who is effectively appointed by Beijing and where half the legislators are appointed by special-interest groups?!

And disarming under China's protection? Where's the advantage in that? It would just give China the ability to roll in to Taiwan at any time with no resistance and take over.

The sad thing is that China wants Taiwan to unify with it, but it has no realistic game-plan for how unification would work.

Click to expand...

Good points, but Look at it from a PLA or any military stand point of view. Look at a map of Taiwan and see how vast ocean of real estate there is between it and Hawaii? Logically either "containment" of China or a security of China (depending on the person) rest upon the Taiwan island, unfortunately for the people living there, it could be a contentious situation.

Equation said:

Good points, but Look at it from a PLA or any military stand point of view. Look at a map of Taiwan and see how vast ocean of real estate there is between it and Hawaii? Logically either "containment" of China or a security of China (depending on the person) rest upon the Taiwan island, unfortunately for the people living there, it could be a contentious situation.

Click to expand...

The PLA also has to think about a post-unification landscape. Is it really worth having bases on Taiwan if the population is hostile? That would require significant resources required to suppress the population, especially as there are no Chinese peasants/migrants there to give a loyal base of support. It wouldn't even be possible to have the levels of freedom that exist in Hong Kong, it would have to be run more like China (maybe even like in Xinjiang).

The strategy should be one of co-existance and of maintaining permanent good relations with Taiwan by removing the military threat to the island. Then there's no threat of "containment" because it's a win-win situation for both China and Taiwan. Ok, you don't get the bases either, but it's still better than where things are now. And with aircraft carriers on the way for China, it will be able to project power even more than it can now.