PLA Strategy in a Taiwan Contingency

bebops said:

I think a war involved in landing troops into Taiwan is a bad idea. If I am in charge, I would just bomb every military installations, presidential palace, all bunker and hideouts, and schools and call it a day. That is how the israel won the war. Most gaza and Lebanon leaders are dead without even stepping foot on the enemy's territory.

Click to expand...

On the other hand, if the enemy is demoralized and doesn't want to fight, you can march in with 300 troops and take over without a single shot fired, see Syria and Afghanistan.

Note that Israel still does not control Lebanon or Gaza, but the Syrian rebels do control Syria and the Taliban does control Afghanistan. You can't acquire and hold territory without troops on the ground.

bebops said:

I think a war involved in landing troops into Taiwan is a bad idea. If I am in charge, I would just bomb every military installations, presidential palace, all bunker and hideouts, and schools and call it a day. That is how the israel won the war. Most gaza and Lebanon leaders are dead without even stepping foot on the enemy's territory.

Click to expand...

You call that a victory after wiping out entire Gaza city? China is not Israel where they are going to destroy each and every house calling them terrorist hideout. They believe Taiwanese are part of Chinese. What they are going to do is destroy every military base, bunkers, airports, ports, electric utilities, defense company, air defense system and any place that has missile launchpad before landing troops on Taiwan. The main goal of PLA is to reunify Taiwan not to wipe out the nation.

sequ said:

December '28 it is then. It's also twilight zone between Trump II and whatever comes after.

Click to expand...

Maybe. I genuinely wonder what the calculus is like, if any political significance is going to be more beneficial than all the other factors.

We have Shigeru Ishiba and likely Lee Jae-myung around that time too, but waiting a bit longer potentially benefits the military balance in China's favour.

Nonetheless, given recent developments, China's internal politics might be the big hurdle to watch. I.e. the economy, and leadership in the 2030s: will Xi remain in power for a 5th term? If so, will he be powerful enough? If not, will his successor view this as a priority?

bebops said:

I think a war involved in landing troops into Taiwan is a bad idea.

Click to expand...

China will almost certainly need to land troops on Taiwan and is preparing to do so nonetheless.

sequ said:

By that time >600 J-20 should be in service+up to 100 J-35(A).

At total of 1500 4.5th and 5th gen fighter should be in service by then.

Click to expand...

My projected PLAAF ORBAT for December 2027, using conservative figures:

4th gens:
330 J-10A/S (excluding obsolete base J-10s)
100 J-11A (excluding base J-11s & Su-27)
125 Su-30MKK/MK2/Su-35

Although many of these are receiving borderline 4.5gen upgrades like AESA, PL-10/15, and improved datalinks.

4.5th gens:
500 J-16
310 J-10B/C
220 J-11B/BS/BG/BGH

Total: 1584, NOT including J-15, J-15T or 200 JH-7As. This figure may be somewhat higher with variation in above figures, particularly uncertainty in J-10 & J-11 figures.

5th gens (J-20/A + J-35/A): minimum 700, possibly closer to 800 dependent on how fast SAC can produce J-35 in the next 2 years & J-20 rates. Total 4th + 5th gen: 2284 min.

Plus a massive number of force multiplier & special mission aircraft.

In combination with the PLARF, PLAN, H-6 fleet, & UCAVs, this is more than sufficient for a comprehensive defeat of US & allied forces in Westpac, imo.

003 & 076 should also be fully operational by that time.

00CuriousObserver said:

will Xi remain in power for a 5th term? If so, will he be powerful enough? If not, will his successor view this as a priority?

Click to expand...

President Xi has been overseeing military reform and construction since 2015. And there has been very good continuity in both of these policies.
I personally see see no reason to think that there is any reason to suddenly change leaders before the liberation of Taiwan. It would only undermine that continuity.

GOODTREE said:

President Xi has been overseeing military reform and construction since 2015. And there has been very good continuity in both of these policies.
I personally see see no reason to think that there is any reason to suddenly change leaders before the liberation of Taiwan. It would only undermine that continuity.

Click to expand...

Assuming it's not done shortly before or after 2030, his age is one reason (though depending on his health, it might be a relatively minor factor). A 5th term is also politically difficult.

I won't go into the politics of China too much but it's a complicated issue and there is far more to consider here than just his military accomplishments.

00CuriousObserver said:

Assuming it's not done shortly before or after 2030, his age is one reason (though depending on his health, it might be a relatively minor factor). A 5th term is also politically difficult.

I won't go into the politics of China too much but it's a complicated issue and there is far more to consider here than just his military accomplishments.

Click to expand...

The term limits for the State President has been eliminated since 2018, and there are no such limits for President Xi's other two key positions - General Secretary and Army Chairman - so I think it could work politically.
As for health reasons, I can only wish him well.

GOODTREE said:

The term limits for the State President has been eliminated since 2018, and there are no such limits for President Xi's other two key positions - General Secretary and Army Chairman - so I think it could work politically.
As for health reasons, I can only wish him well.

Click to expand...

Assuming President Xi's health deteriorates rapidly in the future (and let's hope it doesn't), I think he will at the very least hold out until he personally gives the resolution to liberate Taiwan. Leaders tend to be especially important when their decisions are needed.

GOODTREE said:

Assuming President Xi's health deteriorates rapidly in the future (and let's hope it doesn't), I think he will at the very least hold out until he personally gives the resolution to liberate Taiwan. Leaders tend to be especially important when their decisions are needed.

Click to expand...

It is considered that all of the general secretary have longevity, so the possibility is very small.

HardBall said:

For outlying islands, in most types of these large scale operations, would be for providing fire support, especially tube artillery that cannot reach from further afield; and also to some extent a greater variety of rocket artillery.

The Green / Orchid island locations (as well as some of Pascadores) seem also to be ideally placed for more short ranged A2AD (by short ranged, I mean range of SRBM), especially for tactical air defence and ASCM batteries that would help deter the approach of any outside amphibious force / reinforcement / supply from that direction. The sites can also be prepared in a few days, if you can spare some engineering resources, to set up austere fields that can support tactical drones that can either do ISR or CIS.

If they are undefended, and would not trigger any defense pact, seem like no brainers as initial gray zone moves.

Click to expand...

We're talking about 2 different topics. I have my own views on the viability of taking Green/Orchid islands to start with but I'm not engaging you on this.

I'm limiting my discussion to simply the barges and their relevance to logistics. You use Mulberry-like installations when you need to land large volumes of supplies on a beach to support an across-water log chain.

You're talking about the viability of taking outlying islands in case of a Taiwan AR.

My question then to you is what is the likely level of logistics flow in-to/out-of Green/Orchid Islands?
1. Does that envisioned operations on Green/Orchid require that "high" level of supply flow to support? If it does, then yes, it may make sense to construct a dock.
2. If it doesn't, then why? Cos Green/Orchid is not a source of supplies either. By way of example, if Green/Orchid had a captured, functioning refinery/bunkerage facility, then sure, it might make sense to construct a dock as it will then be a source of supplies.

Not even going to talk about possibility of that "high" volume supply line being interdicted ...