PLA Strategy in a Taiwan Contingency

AndrewS

Brigadier
Registered Member
US air strikes would amount to an escalation of war zones from Taiwan to Japan, Guam, and possibily the Korean peninsular as well. PLA is not going to just concentrate their effect on the Taiwan alone. They are fully aware of the possibility of Japan and US intervention. With more than 100 stealth J20 (at end of 2021), and their capability to intercept enemy aircraft in areas thousands of km from Taiwan is very real.

We can see that Japan has accepted that the US cannot win a war by itself over Taiwan, and the US needs access to Japanese bases.
At a minimum, that becomes an East Asian regional war with China versus US/Japan.

At the same time, it would be foolish to allow Japan to provide safe rear area bases when these are only 1100km from Northeast China, if they could cross a small strip of North Korea or Russian territory.

If China goes down, then North Korea knows they will be next to fall. So I don't see North Korea protesting very much if Chinese aircraft based in Northeast China start conducting operations against Japanese bases. That begs the question of a renewed South Korea war.

My guess is that Russia would likely stay neutral in such a scenario.

PLA also has the capability to strike all US bases in Japan and South Korea with their land based missiles and cruise missiles from H6K/J bombers which would render US to pull their war machines further back to Guam.

The Japanese Air Force and South Korean Air Force have nowhere to withdraw, so they would take the brunt of any missile attacks.
But after the missiles are mostly expended, we could expect US reinforcements to arrive.

So the big question is would US want to escalate the war of unification Taiwan to a regional East Asia war. And don't forget Russia might get themselve involve as well.

US and Japan simply have to accept that the if Taiwan is unified with Mainland China, they just lost a castle or a horse in their chessboard game in containment of China that would not justify a full blown regional war with China. They probably would freeze all Chinese asset in US and Europe and throw in an economic sanction like what they did to Iran.

Yes. But the Chinese economy is far larger and more self-contained than Iran.

The key is to persuade the US that it is not in their interests to get involved in Taiwan.

If the H-20 stealth bomber is comparable to the B-2 with a range of 11000km, that means the few US bases in the Pacific, Australia, Alaska and Diego Garcia are now subject to sustained attack. Even Hawaii wouldn't be safe from long-range cruise missiles if the H-20s were refuelled offshore from Y-20U tankers but still under fighter cover.

You could also achieve something similar in the future with SSGNs carrying land-attack cruise missiles.

---

We could also see H-20s or SSGNs operating in the Persian Gulf.

Afghanistan has no Air Force or air defences. Again, if H-20 bombers started to overfly Afghanistan, I doubt they would protest very loudly if the targets were US ships in the Persian Gulf. It's a similar scenario for Iran, although they do have an Air Force and Air Defences.

Both Afghanistan and Iran have nothing left to lose because they are already subject to maximum sanctions imposed by the USA.

So now we've now an active war zone in the Middle East, with many US-aligned countries panicking that they will be drawn into a wider war involving Iran and/or China. At the same time, their main oil customer (China) will be embargoed by the US military forces they are hosting.

As mentioned earlier, Iran literally has nothing left to lose because its few remaining oil exports to China have now been blocked by the US military. So from the Iranian perspective, why not block the Straits of Hormuz and all oil exports from the Persian Gulf? So now you have a regional war in the Middle East.

---
We could also see Chinese SSGNs and SSNs operating globally, once they've ramped up production at the 2 new assembly halls at Bohai which have a ridiculously high amount of capacity.

At this point, I think Russia will still remain officially neutral against the US, but they may decide this is an opportunity against Georgia and Ukraine.

But you've pretty much got a world war at this point, because the US decided to intervene in Taiwan.
And we haven't even considered the possibility of a nuclear exchange yet.

---
And it's not like this is the first step in China rampaging and invading the entire world like an evil Darth Vader as some suggest.

The Chinese military voluntarily withdrew from Northeast India (1962) and North Korea (1955) when it would have been straightforward to annex these lands. And the Communist Party founding myth for the past 70 years is that it created a strong unified China against nasty colonial powers like the British Empire or Japanese Empire who tried to carve up the country. It's a big stretch to go from this founding myth to celebrating conquest like nasty colonial empires of the past. These days, the driving goal is domestic economic development.

Taiwan fits into this because it is the result of an unresolved Chinese Civil War and is seen as taken by the Japanese Empire during a war. Consider the question of whether the Confederate States of America should have been allowed to exist?

And on the military side of things, Taiwan is the lynchpin of any effort to keep the Chinese military contained. An independent Taiwan would inevitably host foreign military forces and cement this situation. So any attempt at Taiwanese independence or hosting foreign military units will likely trigger China to start a war.

But as mentioned previously, China can live with the Taiwan status quo as it has done for the past 70-odd years.
There's still at least another 20 years of domestic development and relatively fast growth in China.
The economic and military balance will shift sharply towards China over this time.
But at the same time, China will be a very different place as the generation shaped by the cultural revolution dies out. They will be replaced by a softer generation who grew up after the 1980s.

So this is how I see a Chinese Grand Strategy playing out over the next 20 years.
 

AndrewS

Brigadier
Registered Member
Benefits of defending an island is that it is surrounded by water so that an invading force must cross by air or by water. However, the key detriment of defending an island is it must be resupplied the same way. Guerilla warfare is next to impossible.

I would agree that an *extended* guerrilla war is not possible if Taiwan is cutoff.

But it's not implausible for 8 weeks of supplies to be stockpiled by Army infantry units.
 

plawolf

Lieutenant General
Look at the distances from Alaska to Taiwan.

From Anchorage Air Force Base, it's 6000km to Japan.
With an airborne refuelling over Japan, a B-2 would have a combat radius of another 5000km which easily reaches Taiwan.

With B-2s, it's not about integrated systems. It's about operating as lone wolves and slipping through.

If you want to slip through somewhere quiet and bomb some random fixed targets, maybe. But trying to send B2s into a crowded, complex battlespace saturated with sensors of all sorts including integrated naval and air defence networks, AWACS, AESA fighter radars, enemy stealth fighters and possibly sensor fused drone based radar networks. One would be hard pressed to come up with scenarios more likely to get B2s killed.

---

If you look at how air operations actually work, let's say China can generate 600 aircraft sorties per day for Taiwan.
If a typical strike package comprises 40 aircraft (with a mix of fighter, strike, support aircraft), that would happen 15 times a day.

In comparison, the US can choose when it wants to concentrate its own sortie of 50 aircraft and send them to Taiwan.
So the US would have numerical superiority in this scenario.

So the PLAAF is totally passive and cannot scramble to meet the new threat?
 

AndrewS

Brigadier
Registered Member
If you want to slip through somewhere quiet and bomb some random fixed targets, maybe. But trying to send B2s into a crowded, complex battlespace saturated with sensors of all sorts including integrated naval and air defence networks, AWACS, AESA fighter radars, enemy stealth fighters and possibly sensor fused drone based radar networks. One would be hard pressed to come up with scenarios more likely to get B2s killed.

That is how B-2s work. They slip in. The point is that there are always gaps because you can have 100% coverage everywhere all the time.


So the PLAAF is totally passive and cannot scramble to meet the new threat?

It takes time to scramble. You're looking at a minimum of 30 minutes to reach Taiwan.
 

plawolf

Lieutenant General
That is how B-2s work. They slip in. The point is that there are always gaps because you can have 100% coverage everywhere all the time.
That’s how they work against static and well mapped out ground based air defence radars! That way they can plan complex routes to keep outside of detection ranges while keeping the most beneficial aspects at the radars closest to them at the time. And even then B2s were meant for nuclear delivery so the point wasn’t that they would all get through, but rather it would be prohibitively expensive to try to reliably stop all of them.

You are acting like someone who refuses to read the actual instructions of how things work or apply basic logic and common sense and just expect things to work per your unrealistic expectations and than get mad at the product because it doesn’t behave like how you imagined.
It takes time to scramble. You're looking at a minimum of 30 minutes to reach Taiwan.

And where did you pull that figure from?
 

AndrewS

Brigadier
Registered Member
In times of war, with pilots seated on their cockpits and their planes hot, you can cut that time in half, even less .

You're going to wear out the pilots, aircraft and missile lives like that.
Personally I think they're better off being used on offensive missions against the originating airbases or carriers.
 

Julio Ramos

Junior Member
Registered Member
You're going to wear out the pilots, aircraft and missile lives like that.
Personally I think they're better off being used on offensive missions against the originating airbases or carriers.
You'll wear pilots, naturally.
But I said "in times of war"

Just in case of conflict, with a "punching war" going on.
 

AndrewS

Brigadier
Registered Member
That’s how they work against static and well mapped out ground based air defence radars! That way they can plan complex routes to keep outside of detection ranges while keeping the most beneficial aspects at the radars closest to them at the time. And even then B2s were meant for nuclear delivery so the point wasn’t that they would all get through, but rather it would be prohibitively expensive to try to reliably stop all of them.

You are acting like someone who refuses to read the actual instructions of how things work or apply basic logic and common sense and just expect things to work per your unrealistic expectations and than get mad at the product because it doesn’t behave like how you imagined.

Note that the F-22 and F-35 have a dynamic radar detection and assessment system, so they can reliably route around mobile radars.
It's a reasonable assumption for the B-2 to have this as well.
And the upcoming B-21 will definitely have this feature.

In any case, US bombers could use SDBs (range 110km) and potentially JASSMs (370km+) if they don't want to get that close.

So I think it's a fair assessment that Stealth Bombers can get close enough to launch at targets.

The Taiwan Straits would be the toughest target to get close to, but if you look at a map of the airbases/units located in Eastern Theatre Command and Southern Theatre Command, I just see too large an area to be comprehensively monitored by radars (both ground and airborne) to prevent stealth bombers slipping through to attack those bases.

And when Chinese H-20s start coming into service, the Chinese Air Force will have a similar stealth bomber capability against the USA anyway.


And where did you pull that figure from?

5-10min for a quick reaction takeoff PLUS 300km+ to reach an intercept point.
That should be obvious if you look at a map of Taiwan and the closest Chinese airbases in ETC/STC that host fighter units.
 

AndrewS

Brigadier
Registered Member
You'll wear pilots, naturally.
But I said "in times of war"

Just in case of conflict, with a "punching war" going on.

In times of war, those pilots are better off conducting offensive missions to support strikes against enemy airbases with planes on the ground.

Offensive missions generally have a much higher payoff than keeping planes in a high level of readiness for a defensive counter-air mission.
 
Top