PLA Strategy in a Taiwan Contingency

Kurt said:

Back to naval strategy, I stand by my word that the Taiwan issue is the continuation of the civil war because it poses a systemic challenge to the authorities on the mainland (and has nothing to do with any territorial reunification).
This threat is mainly cultural and therefore impossible to control. The upside for the mainland rulers is the visible economic boom that creates support or at least acceptance of their rule and thus negates a significant current political challenge.
However, for any booming economy a significant and compareably long economic depression seems inevitable according to current experience. A strong antagonistic Taiwan could tip the balance under such conditions and pose an out of proportion political threat. At least this could be expected from a Taiwan leadership with equal capabilities as the current mainland rulers after their long march.
So mainland China must empty the systemic threat and the best options are open doors for economic cooperation without imported political concepts, pressure against any formal independance claims and kindling a strong feeling of nationalism on both sides of the Taiwan Strait. This nationalism will be the enduring legacy because it allows to unite without much debate on a constitution. I consider current buy-ins into the Taiwanese media by mainland companies as serving the goal of heightened national awareness of Chinese identity. Hacker attacks for the rights of Chinese in South East Asian countries like Indonesia serve the same idea by providing a common base on national feelings about an identity to be proud of. The economic cooperation offers stellar chances for the Taiwanese elites, but binds their income to mainland politics, so important elite support for positions counter mainland interests are muted. (It's hard to make somebody understand something if his salary depends on not understanding it. English proverb) Most important these politics can gain traction among Taiwanese officers and scientists with sever effects on defenseability of the island.

From a military perspective any mainland attempt for a quick territorial occupation of the island is futile. The repercussions through naval mines in littoral waters negate all significant military transport capability from the mainalnd to the island and will shut down most current trade routes for both parties. Any continued Taiwanese resistance with even limited outside support and no open US intervention could force the Chinese mainland into an unsustainable economic situation with resulting political risks.
Connecting the South Asian Chinese string of pearls to the mainland's infrastructure could ease these economic repercussions and force the US into an excessive list of conflicts, while Taiwan will most certainly have all their naval trade blocked for the duration of hostilities. The string of pearls is vulnerable to Indian attempts to maintain their regional power status in South Asia and reset the borders China had forced them to accept. So it's natural that current Chinese naval blue water buildup is directed towards maintaining their freedom of movement in the Indian Ocean and directly compares future Indian carrier capability.
So the Taiwan Strait issue is an affair embedded among many smouldering regional conflicts and difficult to extract and solve on its own.

Click to expand...

Whether it's gonna be the hard way or the easy way for unification, it still ends up the Peoples Republic of
China's way. Any other fruitless excuses or explanations that veers to nowhere as to why Taiwan must maintain its 'status quo' of 'independence'?

Geographer said:

I disagree. You're referring to the promise that China will allow HK to keep the British Basic Law for 50 years after reunification. But the trend, however slowly, has been to grant (or allow HK to implement) more democratic powers. Universal suffrage is right around the corner. That's more democracy than HK had under the British. Fifty years is a long time, who knows what the mainland will look like by then. For all intents and purposes, fifty years of HK independence is enough time to guarantee their economic system indefinitely. China likes Hong Kong the way it is, why would it change it? The only thing, I believe, that could change Beijing's opinion of HK is if HK or its residents played a major role in trying to overthrow the government and Beijing cracked down hard, fearing it could no longer trust HK.

Click to expand...

OT

but Article 23 was also part of negotiated "basic law".
look what happened there?

What Beijing asked for in these cases is the basic safeguards that treason would not be legal in HK. something that every other major country in the world would not tolerate for a second.

look what happened? public opinions wipped up into a fever. and beijing compromised.

There is something deeply not right.

Kurt said:

Concerning a pan-East Asian alliance, reminds me a bit of the Japanese Co-Prosperity Sphere in ambition. If such a power really unites it will certainly be difficult to oppose, whatever ambition it has.
In my opinion unifaction will be more limited to economic issues with direct and verifiable positive effects for everybody's live in the region. Real political unions are a whole lot more difficult to master. At least, I hope they won't develop the idea that war can be as much fun as some American politicians think.
.

Click to expand...

Japan went on a war path does not mean china will too. so your analysis is flawed and only has sound bites. East /SE asia traditionally has had extensive trade network long before European "discovery" and subsequent military conquests based on boundless greed... the consequences that we are still dealing with today.
what is wrong with a SE/East Asia alliance based on trade and preservation of status quo. no more playing off against another? no more influences from america? Japan fear it could not dominate? Korea harboring ambitions way beyond its capabilities?

As far as "Cultural" threat goes.
I suggest my fellow sinophiles to watch some latest "China Got Talent" episodes.
look how many Contestants from TW? one time 2 out of 3 judges are from TW.

enough said about the Cultural challenges.
China was never a closed fragile cultural system. it is resilient and adaptive.
it always absorbed new and exciting new "culturs" and called its own.

I am not worried.

delft said:

Re-unification is based on the concept of one country two systems, see the position of Hong Kong. No problem there. RoC independence would not be recognized by any significant country in the world.
So the only objection to re-unification is the wish of the US to hem in PLAN. That needs the cooperation of Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and the Philippines. In time the US will be forced to remove its armed forces from Japan and South Korea, while all countries of East and South Asia will integrate their economies. There is not anymore a profit to be won from occupying part or all of another country as there was for Germany and France to fight over Alsace-Lorraine in former centuries so countries need not find allies to prevent this happening.

Click to expand...

Delft I always find your clearheadeness refreshing,
and as an European History Buff, I find your timely and aptly done european historical analogy very well done.

double bravo and extra likes.

East Asia is essentially a Confucius based society.

Confucius stressed a balanced society based on order of things. Its not an unchanging order. It is conservative in nature and stifling progress at times. but there is something deeping comfort and security in knowing one are part of a system.
contrasting to the prevailing western liberal ideology of the day, it has much more depth (political ideology extended down to the family level and relationship level) and much more resilience (full onslaught of both Westernization and Communism didn't kill it, in multiple countries)

China, Korea, and Japan (and to less extent SEA) once the shackles of conservatism is broken, thrived by basing on a political philosophy has a different facemask (democracy but single party domination in Japan, authoritarian - democracy, in SK. single party technocracy in China) but underneath a Confucius based system.

key to success here is balance, imho, balance the conservatism of Confucius with liberal forward looking technocracy. Balance Yin and Yang.

Actually it's no safe bet from my point of view that Taiwan ends up as another province of the PRC, but I'm sure both sides will work out a mutual agreement.

As I pointed out the military problem of naval operations makes the outcome of a military clash between PRC and ROC unpredictable.
The string of pearls is a Chinese ace up their sleeve opposite Taiwan, but unfortunately China violated Indian territorial integrity (from an Indian perspective) quite early on and is unlikely to pull back. So the PRC has the problem of Taiwan's asymmetric capabilities for a mutual naval sea lines of communications denial, creating a siege situation for both countries.
Russia can ease the situation a for mainland China that in turn has to absolutely cede any demands on the Russian Far East. Unfortunately for mainland China, the Russians had several times the impression that China was no easy partner to deal with, although from a third point of view it was a climate of great ambitions under mutual mistrust and double-crossing. Just that there's really a discussion in this forum that China might use it's increasing military potential to take back the Russian Far East shows that such thoughts just as easily will cross the Russian government's mind.
I'm not sure how much of a helping hand they will give China in an emergency and at what price. Nazi Germany might remind the Russians how quick a one-party state can bite the hand that feeds it.
India has a great opportunity, the moment China and Taiwan clash, to roll back their old territorial losses and prove their military's worth (look at Goa to realize that the Indians are far less patient than the Chinese were at Macao and HK).
So I consider the smouldering conflict between India and China over a few Himalaya hills to pose a major challenge for trying any real military pressure on Taiwan. I know, it's a really weird world.

At least the Chinese navy realized the complex implications and is on the right pass to secure the currently rather insecure naval position of China. Their blue water ambition is clearly aimed at least at a parity of blue water naval assets with India in the Indian Ocean. That's a workable and sensible approach from the Chinese perspective for the security of China and helps them to force the constant unification development concerning Taiwan. A potential conflict between PRC and ROC would under these conditions consist of the PRC grinding down ROC island defense and sea lines of communication interdiction with many naval platforms while the newest assets would be concentrated in the Indian Ocean to quickly counter any Indian attempts of interdicting the vital supply through the string of pearls (Burma will be the most important route among these). In the Indian Ocean the navy and the army on the Himalaya have quite an offensive role if India attacks the vital Chinese supply routes. Russia will be considered the safest border under these circumstances and require no naval watch.

The big problem is that the Indians consider the Indian Ocean their own ocean not by name only. They don't even like the US superpower there (so these are in the Arabian Sea and in the Persian Gulf). How much more will a Chinese naval build-up suit them that as specifically intent on destroying their regional power status and keep their nation's rightful territory occupied?
India is at a disadvantage if it wants to compete with China in all fields, but India is one of the carrier experienced navies and the Indians made it clear that their navy won't flinch from the Chinese challenge, but rather increase. One of the systemic advantages of India is that they have a long tradition of evaluating and operating a mix of Western and Russian weapons other than their own, while China is now limited to homegrown developments or Russian imports only.

i.e. said:

East Asia is essentially a Confucius based society.

Confucius stressed a balanced society based on order of things. Its not an unchanging order. It is conservative in nature and stifling progress at times. but there is something deeping comfort and security in knowing one are part of a system.
contrasting to the prevailing western liberal ideology of the day, it has much more depth (political ideology extended down to the family level and relationship level) and much more resilience (full onslaught of both Westernization and Communism didn't kill it, in multiple countries)

China, Korea, and Japan (and to less extent SEA) once the shackles of conservatism is broken, thrived by basing on a political philosophy has a different facemask (democracy but single party domination in Japan, authoritarian - democracy, in SK. single party technocracy in China) but underneath a Confucius based system.

key to success here is balance, imho, balance the conservatism of Confucius with liberal forward looking technocracy. Balance Yin and Yang.

Click to expand...

I think Confucius and his influence are severely overstated. He's just one among many influences. Others are Buddhism, Legalism with the absorbed Mohism and Taoism.
I read Confucius and had great problems recognizing him as a great thinker rather than a great conservative of an invented past. But one should add that it's not even certain this guy existed and wrote that stuff himself. Concerning the structure of Chinese society I consider it's developement rather independent of Confucius who provided some good concepts, but was adapted over time to ever changing interpretations.
That's what happens in every society with old concepts and I don't deem anyone superior in these because all concepts go back to the earliest humans. But like all human beings, I favour some concepts more than others. The decisive factor about the surviveability of a concept is whether one is willing to stand up for it in numbers.

So the influence of ideas in East Asia created societies with common grounds, but also major differences like Christianity in Korea and Shintoism in Japan. In my opinion developements can go both ways, people can agree on something in common and they can disagree according to their differences (and prejudices). I don't know what will happen, but from a naval warfare point of view Korea and Japan have all leeway to seriously disgaree with China whenever they want with little chances of military repercussions for them.

Considering the reunification issue for Korea, I'm not certain North or South Korea wants to become a political Austria as price for a reunification by China's favour. At least we German's declined an early chance for such a reunification because this would sell out our freedom, liberty and security and rather stood our chances at fratericide (take a look at the German hymn for a deeper understanding of our psyche). I also doubt that PR China has enough power to sell North Korea to the highest bidder because Russia still has a say in this issue.

How reliable is this piece of news?

China Says It Will Fire Its 'Carrier Killer' Missile Days Before Taiwan ElectionsRobert Johnson|December 14, 2011

Reporting on a recent report released by the U.S. the Taiwan News says China is planning to fire its Dong-Feng-21D ballistic missile at the Pacific Ocean in the days leading up to Taiwan's presidential election.
The Dong-Feng is the Chinese military's "carrier killer" ballistic missile, capable of disabling U.S. Navy aircraft carriers.
The 21D is an anti-ship missile that will drop vertically from space, as opposed to horizontally like most other anti-ship missiles. This flight path makes it infinitely more difficult to track and take down, and far more deadly.
The demonstration is intended to show the Taiwanese that they shouldn't rely too heavily on the U.S. for protection when it casts its votes for Independence candidates in their election.
Taiwan News says, "Opposition Democratic Progressive Party candidate Tsai Ing-wen has been drawing level in several opinion polls with President Ma Ying-jeou, a strong supporter of closer relations with Beijing."
This isn't the first time China has made this declaration in the weeks leading up to Taiwan poliing. The last time was during the 1996 Taiwan presidential campaign. Fifteen years ago the effort had the reverse effect hoped for by Beijing.
Following the threat, Taiwan President Lee Teng-hui was re-elected with more than 50 percent of the votes.

Rising China said:

How reliable is this piece of news?

China Says It Will Fire Its 'Carrier Killer' Missile Days Before Taiwan ElectionsRobert Johnson|December 14, 2011

Reporting on a recent report released by the U.S. the Taiwan News says China is planning to fire its Dong-Feng-21D ballistic missile at the Pacific Ocean in the days leading up to Taiwan's presidential election.
The Dong-Feng is the Chinese military's "carrier killer" ballistic missile, capable of disabling U.S. Navy aircraft carriers.
The 21D is an anti-ship missile that will drop vertically from space, as opposed to horizontally like most other anti-ship missiles. This flight path makes it infinitely more difficult to track and take down, and far more deadly.
The demonstration is intended to show the Taiwanese that they shouldn't rely too heavily on the U.S. for protection when it casts its votes for Independence candidates in their election.
Taiwan News says, "Opposition Democratic Progressive Party candidate Tsai Ing-wen has been drawing level in several opinion polls with President Ma Ying-jeou, a strong supporter of closer relations with Beijing."
This isn't the first time China has made this declaration in the weeks leading up to Taiwan poliing. The last time was during the 1996 Taiwan presidential campaign. Fifteen years ago the effort had the reverse effect hoped for by Beijing.
Following the threat, Taiwan President Lee Teng-hui was re-elected with more than 50 percent of the votes.

Click to expand...

The PRC wants to drop something from space and thus contribute less to the cloud of space debris. Good idea. If they want to time it with some political events on Taiwan, well, that's their choice. Concerning the ability to harm aircraft carriers I most certainly agree if they ever hit one. But last time they weren't able to spot two supercarriers with naval escorts in front of their coast, so I consider it more likely they will hit some unfortunate fishing boat . The threat of destructive munitions is rather dependant on the threat of sensor tracking and so far there are no news of Chinese subs or aircrafts stalking US carrier groups, that would be scary.