Exclusive: U.S. and China hold first informal nuclear talks in 5 years, eyeing Taiwan
...
The Chinese representatives offered reassurances after their U.S. interlocutors raised concerns that China might use, or threaten to use, nuclear weapons if it faced defeat in a conflict over Taiwan. Beijing views the democratically governed island as its territory, a claim rejected by the government in Taipei.
"They told the U.S. side that they were absolutely convinced that they are able to prevail in a conventional fight over Taiwan without using nuclear weapons," said scholar David Santoro, the U.S. organiser of the Track Two talks, the details of which are being reported by Reuters for the first time.
Participants in Track Two talks are generally former officials and academics who can speak with authority on their government's position, even if they are not directly involved with setting it. Government-to-government negotiations are known as Track One.
...
Read more
reuters.com/world/us-china-hold-first-informal-nuclear-talks-5-years-eyeing-taiwan-2024-06-21/
===
This is how I imagine the conversation went with respect to China "winning" in a Taiwan scenario.
1. Within 1 week, the Taiwanese Air Force will essentially be destroyed. Taiwan's air defences will also have been destroyed or run out of SAMs.
2. China has the ability to impose an indefinite air and sea blockade of Taiwan, even if the US military gets involved. Taiwan is too close to China, and too far away from external support.
3. Given Chinese air superiority over the skies of Taiwan, large numbers of drones, missiles and bombs can be used to turn Taiwan itself into a "hellscape". Imagine all dual-use infrastructure and Taiwanese military targets being under constant surveillance and attack. There's no electricity or fuel for vehicles. Taiwan is a small but densely populated island that relies on imports for fuel and food. So it is a matter of weeks before a complete Taiwan collapse. Note that this scenario does not require an amphibious assault and invasion of Taiwan.
===
And in a longer war which involved the USA? China would build a significantly bigger military than the US within 5 years, even if industrial facilities in China came under attack from the USA. Data points include:
1. China has 232x the shipbuilding capacity of the USA. In terms of naval shipbuilding, the implied disparity is 171x. As per US Navy below
2. China acquires new weapons 5x faster than the USA. China has a 20x cost advantage in hypersonic missiles. As per US Air Force below
3. China has an automated factory capable of producing components up to 1000 cruise missiles per day. As per CCTV7 newsreel on Youtube below.
Sources
1. twz.com/alarming-navy-intel-slide-warns-of-chinas-200-times-greater-shipbuilding-capacity
2. thedrive.com/the-war-zone/china-acquiring-new-weapons-five-times-faster-than-u-s-warns-top-official
3. youtube.com/watch?v=RoObgUTsZ0M
===
The implication is that:
1. the Chinese Navy would be larger and win in a blue-water naval battle against the US Navy in the Pacific. That gives China control of the seas and global trade. At the same time, the Chinese Navy would seek to impose a blockade on the USA.
2. Japan and any other country in the Western Pacific that supports the US military would meet a fate similar to Taiwan.
===
But of course, such a Chinese "win" would come at significant loss of lives and economic cost, potentially derailing China's development.
I don't see this being better than the current Taiwan status quo, which China can live with, particularly since the economic, technological military balances continues to shift in China's favour each year. (At the same time, remember that by 2040, the current generation of Chinese leaders will be gone, and will have been replaced by a softer generation whose formulative experiences were during the 1980s/1990s reforms era)
On the economic front, US growth is around 2% whilst China is still a middle-income country and is aiming for about 4-5%.
So in terms of actual output of goods and services measured on a PPP basis, today China is about 25% larger than the US, but would grow to 2x larger in a 2035-2040 timeframe. Economic heft is ultimately the source of all other forms of power and influence
In terms of technology, China has a commanding overall lead in terms of future technologies. Think solar, wind, nuclear, electric vehicles, batteries and 5G. China lags behind in terms of semiconductors, biotech and AI, but we can see rapid catchup occurring in these fields. Within 10 years, I expect China to have completely caught up. In addition, China is systematically developing domestic technologies to replace unreliable foreign imports which may be subject to US sanctions.
In terms of the military, if you model the "stock" of modern Chinese military weapons and assume an average 30 year service life, China is still growing fast. There's a whole bunch of caveats here, but I got a doubling in a 2021-2030 timeframe. It increases again by another 50% in a 2030-2035 timeframe. In comparison, the equivalent US "stock" of military modern equipment is roughly stagnant.
...
The Chinese representatives offered reassurances after their U.S. interlocutors raised concerns that China might use, or threaten to use, nuclear weapons if it faced defeat in a conflict over Taiwan. Beijing views the democratically governed island as its territory, a claim rejected by the government in Taipei.
"They told the U.S. side that they were absolutely convinced that they are able to prevail in a conventional fight over Taiwan without using nuclear weapons," said scholar David Santoro, the U.S. organiser of the Track Two talks, the details of which are being reported by Reuters for the first time.
Participants in Track Two talks are generally former officials and academics who can speak with authority on their government's position, even if they are not directly involved with setting it. Government-to-government negotiations are known as Track One.
...
Read more
reuters.com/world/us-china-hold-first-informal-nuclear-talks-5-years-eyeing-taiwan-2024-06-21/
===
This is how I imagine the conversation went with respect to China "winning" in a Taiwan scenario.
1. Within 1 week, the Taiwanese Air Force will essentially be destroyed. Taiwan's air defences will also have been destroyed or run out of SAMs.
2. China has the ability to impose an indefinite air and sea blockade of Taiwan, even if the US military gets involved. Taiwan is too close to China, and too far away from external support.
3. Given Chinese air superiority over the skies of Taiwan, large numbers of drones, missiles and bombs can be used to turn Taiwan itself into a "hellscape". Imagine all dual-use infrastructure and Taiwanese military targets being under constant surveillance and attack. There's no electricity or fuel for vehicles. Taiwan is a small but densely populated island that relies on imports for fuel and food. So it is a matter of weeks before a complete Taiwan collapse. Note that this scenario does not require an amphibious assault and invasion of Taiwan.
===
And in a longer war which involved the USA? China would build a significantly bigger military than the US within 5 years, even if industrial facilities in China came under attack from the USA. Data points include:
1. China has 232x the shipbuilding capacity of the USA. In terms of naval shipbuilding, the implied disparity is 171x. As per US Navy below
2. China acquires new weapons 5x faster than the USA. China has a 20x cost advantage in hypersonic missiles. As per US Air Force below
3. China has an automated factory capable of producing components up to 1000 cruise missiles per day. As per CCTV7 newsreel on Youtube below.
Sources
1. twz.com/alarming-navy-intel-slide-warns-of-chinas-200-times-greater-shipbuilding-capacity
2. thedrive.com/the-war-zone/china-acquiring-new-weapons-five-times-faster-than-u-s-warns-top-official
3. youtube.com/watch?v=RoObgUTsZ0M
===
The implication is that:
1. the Chinese Navy would be larger and win in a blue-water naval battle against the US Navy in the Pacific. That gives China control of the seas and global trade. At the same time, the Chinese Navy would seek to impose a blockade on the USA.
2. Japan and any other country in the Western Pacific that supports the US military would meet a fate similar to Taiwan.
===
But of course, such a Chinese "win" would come at significant loss of lives and economic cost, potentially derailing China's development.
I don't see this being better than the current Taiwan status quo, which China can live with, particularly since the economic, technological military balances continues to shift in China's favour each year. (At the same time, remember that by 2040, the current generation of Chinese leaders will be gone, and will have been replaced by a softer generation whose formulative experiences were during the 1980s/1990s reforms era)
On the economic front, US growth is around 2% whilst China is still a middle-income country and is aiming for about 4-5%.
So in terms of actual output of goods and services measured on a PPP basis, today China is about 25% larger than the US, but would grow to 2x larger in a 2035-2040 timeframe. Economic heft is ultimately the source of all other forms of power and influence
In terms of technology, China has a commanding overall lead in terms of future technologies. Think solar, wind, nuclear, electric vehicles, batteries and 5G. China lags behind in terms of semiconductors, biotech and AI, but we can see rapid catchup occurring in these fields. Within 10 years, I expect China to have completely caught up. In addition, China is systematically developing domestic technologies to replace unreliable foreign imports which may be subject to US sanctions.
In terms of the military, if you model the "stock" of modern Chinese military weapons and assume an average 30 year service life, China is still growing fast. There's a whole bunch of caveats here, but I got a doubling in a 2021-2030 timeframe. It increases again by another 50% in a 2030-2035 timeframe. In comparison, the equivalent US "stock" of military modern equipment is roughly stagnant.
