PLA Strategy in a Taiwan Contingency

FriedRiceNSpice said:

We are discussing the culture that gave birth to and glorifies seppuku, the banzai charge, and kamikaze attacks.

Click to expand...

Once again, what would you do if you were nuclear Japan?

People sacrificing their own lives in a violent heat of the moment and a government deciding that the entire country can just die simply out of the boredom of languishing are completely different things. America and its Western dogs often argue that XXX cannot be allowed to have a nuclear weapon because they are crazy and they'll turn the world upside down. It has never happened. When countries get nukes, they don't do anything with them but it allows them to live more confidently.

manqiangrexue said:

Once again, what would you do if you were nuclear Japan?

People sacrificing their own lives in a violent heat of the moment and a government deciding that the entire country can just die simply out of the boredom of languishing are completely different things. America and its Western dogs often argue that XXX cannot be allowed to have a nuclear weapon because they are crazy and they'll turn the world upside down. It has never happened. When countries get nukes, they don't do anything with them but it allows them to live more confidently.

Click to expand...

In geopolitics you cannot take the risk of assuming other actors will act rationally. Especially not when there is the certain combination of factors: your adversary 1) lacks the resources to be self-sufficient 2) is in irreversible economic and demographic decline and 3) its rapidly losing any economic competitive advantage it once had 4) has a history of massive gambles and surprise attacks. Why take the risk associated with allowing Japan to pursue nuclear weapons?

FriedRiceNSpice said:

In geopolitics you cannot take the risk of assuming other actors will act rationally. Especially not when there is the certain combination of factors: your adversary 1) lacks the resources to be self-sufficient 2) is in irreversible economic and demographic decline and 3) its rapidly losing any economic competitive advantage it once had. Why take the risk associated with allowing Japan to pursue nuclear weapons?

Click to expand...

What risk will you take? Militarily striking Japan to stop a nuclear program is an enormous risk, particularly if the US has not fully resigned itself outside of Asia yet. It seems much less risky to let the time go on until they accept that they are only a small animal in China's backyard. Sick dying people don't all go out and die in mass shootings/stabbings; most of them pass peacefully.

You've skipped the question multiple times asking what would you do if you were a nuclear Japan. That's because it's extremely hard to answer. The concept that keeping your enemies non-nuclear is easy to understand and accept, but the specifics of how a small weak nuclear country would offensively challenge a large powerful nuclear country are pretty much not possible.

Also, people are taking about going to war to prevent Japan from acquiring nuclear weapons but I can tell you confidently that if Japan were to announce nuclear weapon development tomorrow, China would not go to war. At most, we will warn them that they are digging their own graves while we build a new class of nuclear missile designed to deliver maximum payload to a Japan-distanced target, which we will reserve for only if they attack first.

How could China stop a nuclear weapon-capable Japan from interfering with AR of Taiwan?
As it is, a conventional power-Japan is already a formidable force to reckon with, imagine a nuclear Japan?
Japan is stockpiling enough Plutonium to make 5500 warheads, that's a fact.
Japan is known to take gambles against better strategy and judgement in the past, and had attacked China >3 times in the past to thwart China's modernization efforts. It had won every single time, except for the last time when it was forced to surrender to the Americans, but not to the Chinese, whom most Japanese despise. What's stopping Japan to gamble again, once it is nuclear capable??
Xi will be judged harshly if he allows Japan, an archnemesis of China, to acquire nuclear weapons under his watch.

Jono said:

How could China stop a nuclear weapon-capable Japan from interfering with AR of Taiwan?
As it is, a conventional power-Japan is already a formidable force to reckon with, imagine a nuclear Japan?
Japan is stockpiling enough Plutonium to make 5500 warheads, that's a fact.
Japan is known to take gambles against better strategy and judgement in the past, and had attacked China >3 times in the past to thwart China's modernization efforts. It had won every single time, except for the last time when it was forced to surrender to the Americans, but not to the Chinese, whom most Japanese despise. What's stopping Japan to gamble again, once it is nuclear capable??

Click to expand...

We stop Japan by being overwhelmingly more powerful than they are, which is a given since we are aiming to become overwhelmingly more powerful than their master. We kill everything they send near Taiwan with conventional means; we never intended to stop Japan by threatening to nuke a non-nuclear country. If China cannot even conventionally deter or defeat Japan, we are way far from thinking about the end of the Pax Americana and the start of Pax Sinica.

Jono said:

Xi will be judged harshly if he allows Japan, an archnemesis of China, to acquire nuclear weapons under his watch.

Click to expand...

He would be judged harshly if he ordered an attack on Japan, forcing China into an unfavorable fight against an American alliance prematurely, while the US was in notable decline. I'm sorry to tell you, but I can confidently say that if Japan were to announce nuclear weapon development tomorrow, China would not go to war. At most, we will warn them that they are digging their own graves while we build a new class of nuclear missile designed to deliver maximum payload to a Japan-distanced target, which we will reserve for only if they attack first.

「養虎遺患」[raising a tiger to become a calamity] is a famous Chinese idiom of warning against complacency, and not to trust anyone who harbours vile and evil intent against you to act rationally.
You trust an adventurist Japan can be persuaded with non-military means to back off, while history has clearly shown the opposite.
I guess we just have to agree to disagree on this viewpoint.

manqiangrexue said:

I am of the same opinion as he. It is not ideal that Japan or SK get nuclear weapons but depending on the situation and power dynamic, it may not make sense for China to use military power to stop it. If it happens, I also believe it will be very manageable for China and it will not change the power dynamic or calculus at all. Japan is a country that is so frail that Chinese economic hostilities can put them into recession, much less trade bans. So what do we have to fear from them?

In other words, we can game it out. Let's pretend you're Japan and you've acquired nuclear weapons. I'm China. Your economy is languid; my everything is booming. The US will not dare to fight kinetically after realizing its limits in Iran and American power is receeding in Asia to a rising China. What will you do to make trouble for me?

Click to expand...

I have to agree with this. If I am playing as Japan and my economy is being overshadowed every year and already lost conventionally, there is no reason to throw in the lot with US/Taiwan to nuke China. Is a game losing move that has no benefits at all except benefiting US by helping them firing nukes and taking a part of the nuclear retaliation.

FriedRiceNSpice said:

I'm not convinced - I believe that the more hopeless the economic situation is for Japan, the more likely it is for Japan to pursue rash actions. The most dangerous type of person is one who has nothing to lose. Once you get to the point of even considering nuking another nuclear power - are you really going to be thinking about economic repercussions? "Yes, I am aware that they have 1500 nukes available for a retaliatory strike - but at the moment I am more concerned about them retaliating with a trade embargo!"

Click to expand...

Why is there "nothing to lose"? Despite being economically behind, countries are able to move on and continue to exist. It is not a zero-sum game if China is winning that means me playing Japan is game over. There's nothing to gain by nuking China but everything to gain to make a new partnership with China over time.

If economy is shit, it would be very unpopular to join a foreigner's war.


If I am china and sees Japan declining further and further especially trying to afford a nuclear delivery and deterrence with chinese trade sanctions. I agree with manq that not attacking is the smarter move. China should never have ambition to take over japan or end it's existence to give them the reason to use the nuclear weapons.
Japanese election comes and goes, the next candidate could be anti-nuclear again and ask for sanction relief in exchange for denuclearization.


If history has shown us anything, preemptive attack to nip a potential enemy at the bud is not worth it. Germany did that in WW1 against Russia with France financial backing to modernize.
Japan did that to US in Pearl Harbour.
Russia is doing to Ukraine to prevent them to join NATO
US is doing it to Iran right now.

tamsen_ikard said:

China barely produces 200 fighter jets, barely produces 100 tanks per year.

Yes, China has developed plenty of new missiles and drone designs but they are iterating fast and do not have the time to acquire sufficient numbers.

Where do you think China's very limited 300 billion military budget goes? It mostly goes to research of new weapon systems rather than actual mass production of those systems.

Its clear China is prioritising rapid advancement of tech rather than stockpiling numbers.

So, no they dont have a massive stockpile because they never spent huge budget to acquire it. They purposefully kept their military budget low, and spent most of it on rapid catch up to US defense tech rather than mass production.

Click to expand...

Big part of R & D in military is not part of China's defense budget

Jono said:

「養虎遺患」[raising a tiger to become a calamity] is a famous Chinese idiom of warning against complacency, and not to trust anyone who harbours vile and evil intent against you to act rationally.
You trust an adventurist Japan can be persuaded with non-military means to back off, while history has clearly shown the opposite.
I guess we just have to agree to disagree on this viewpoint.

Click to expand...

It’s not a matter of trust. If you’re just overwhelmingly stronger than the tiger there’s not much the tiger can do.

manqiangrexue said:

What risk will you take? Militarily striking Japan to stop a nuclear program is an enormous risk, particularly if the US has not fully resigned itself outside of Asia yet. It seems much less risky to let the time go on until they accept that they are only a small animal in China's backyard. Sick dying people don't all go out and die in mass shootings/stabbings; most of them pass peacefully.

You've skipped the question multiple times asking what would you do if you were a nuclear Japan. That's because it's extremely hard to answer. The concept that keeping your enemies non-nuclear is easy to understand and accept, but the specifics of how a small weak nuclear country would offensively challenge a large powerful nuclear country are pretty much not possible.

Also, people are taking about going to war to prevent Japan from acquiring nuclear weapons but I can tell you confidently that if Japan were to announce nuclear weapon development tomorrow, China would not go to war. At most, we will warn them that they are digging their own graves while we build a new class of nuclear missile designed to deliver maximum payload to a Japan-distanced target, which we will reserve for only if they attack first.

Click to expand...

You apply the maximum economic pressure BEFORE they actually have the nukes.