And quality!!
PLA Strategy in a Taiwan Contingency
- Thread starter pugachev_diver
- Start date
solarz
Brigadier
Take a look at this chart:
Japan and South Korea are major industrial and manufacturing players.
The goal of the US is to derail China's economic ascension by pulling it into a war with US proxies in the Pacific region, while the US supports them from behind. In order to do that, the US must be able to convince its vassals that they must fight China, and the only way that will happen is if China attacks those countries first. The American plan is then to goad China into launching AR against Taiwan, and then support TW from bases in Philippines, Japan, South Korea, and Australia. China would then have to either attack those aforementioned countries, or allow TW to be resupplied indefinitely. Either way, the US would be able to achieve its objective.
From the US perspective, they do not believe TW would get steamrolled. They believe that TW will be able to hold out long enough for the above scenario to play out.
US always uses its vassals or allies to fight proxy war for them.....Ukraine......against Russia.. Fat hope TW aginst China! Trick is sell them those old stuff [cluster bombs... old planes ....] and make tons of money Don't fall in this dirty trick!
I don’t think SK has a tenable position against China as China can leverage NK against SK. A simple shift of some air-defense assets along the China/NK border and the deployment of a naval task-force in the Korea Bay would provide NK sufficient air-cover to rain artillery and missiles into Seoul for months. One thing most folks don’t understand about developed nations and their complex economies is that a sufficiently a deep shock will not only have immediate effects, but also have effects that will ramify throughout, in unforeseen ways and for extended periods. SK simply cannot afford the damage to industrial capacity and the capital flight that would accompany a hell-fire of ordinance coming from the north.
And, speaking of capital flight, this is really what I think that the U. S. is hoping to cause in China!
Last edited:
If US doesn't send big invasion columns, China would just cordon off TW like they did with XJ? The rebels are encircled inside China, you need to punch a hole through the defenses to make them a credible threat. Without a supply line, they starve.
China basically just needs to hold the existing line, which wouldn't require first strikes on Japan, SK and Australia. US would be the one forced into a first strike on the Chinese lines, or be forced to watch the encircled rebels get wiped out. And that first strike translates into being forced to move massive columns of ships and planes towards China. There's no avoiding that.
Japan and SK are on paper not bad, but SK can basically be discounted because they will have their hands full with NK if they invoke the MDT. Both countries (especially SK) would be under major strategic bombing if they choose to attack, meaning that their manufacturing wouldn't contribute too much.
But obviously in order to have a remote chance of success at invasion, US MUST have Japan and Australia on its side (Philippines is so woefully lacking in air defenses that their only purpose would be to accuse China of genocide in the UN when their sloppily constructed cities get razed by bombing). Those are basic prequisites, even with those prequisites fulfilled, US would still need to be front and center, because no one else has the power to threaten China's border defenses.
solarz
Brigadier
Yes, an embargo of TW will almost certainly be the first response to a TW secession, but even then, I believe the US is planning on a series of provocations/skirmishes in order to goad China into throwing the first punch. Such a situation would be extremely volatile.
As for SK, I honestly have not seen any Western analysis on the TW conflict that included NK in the calculations. To me, that means they have not accounted for NK (or Russia for that matter) in their planning. This is a typical blindspot from US/Western thinking, where they believe China is isolated while they are able to command a grand coalition.
stop this victim mentality.
China will be attack America first when it decides to go for it, because it significantly improves China' chances have destroying American forces in westpac with minimal loss
I would divide potential US attack scenarios as:
1. Taiwan war: Invasion by US only with Japan reluctantly providing bases vs China only. MDT technically invoked, but turned down in order to not further escalate the situation by dragging in NK.
2. East Asia war: Invasion by an US, SK, Japan Axis. China and NK fighting with Russia providing "neutral" spying.
3. Pacific war: Invasion by the same above named pacific axis, but India starting it's own war in the west while the situation in ASEAN explodes. Russia overtly joins the war.
Each of the scenarios would be very different and have different scopes for what China should target as well. In low escalation scenarios, China's main goal would only be to cripple the invasion forces to make US back down before they lose too much face. It would still be possible to go back to status quo ante bellum, but with US obviously losing a lot of prestige for failing an invasion.
Whereas in higher escalation scenarios, China would very much have to totally mobilize and go on a crusade across Asia, creating new buffer zones and radically changing the map in Asia. This would be a true WW3 and entail similar levels of radical changes as the end of WW2, with the exception that neither US nor China are going to lose core territory due to nukes.
1. Taiwan war: Invasion by US only with Japan reluctantly providing bases vs China only. MDT technically invoked, but turned down in order to not further escalate the situation by dragging in NK.
2. East Asia war: Invasion by an US, SK, Japan Axis. China and NK fighting with Russia providing "neutral" spying.
3. Pacific war: Invasion by the same above named pacific axis, but India starting it's own war in the west while the situation in ASEAN explodes. Russia overtly joins the war.
Each of the scenarios would be very different and have different scopes for what China should target as well. In low escalation scenarios, China's main goal would only be to cripple the invasion forces to make US back down before they lose too much face. It would still be possible to go back to status quo ante bellum, but with US obviously losing a lot of prestige for failing an invasion.
Whereas in higher escalation scenarios, China would very much have to totally mobilize and go on a crusade across Asia, creating new buffer zones and radically changing the map in Asia. This would be a true WW3 and entail similar levels of radical changes as the end of WW2, with the exception that neither US nor China are going to lose core territory due to nukes.
solarz
Brigadier
I have no idea why you think what I wrote is "victim mentality".
Your second paragraph is exactly what I had in mind when I pointed out that some posters on here don't understand the full ramifications of war. What you propose is exactly what American strategists hope China will do.