China can and will achieve total air superiority over Taiwan

Actually, Operation Iraqi Freedom has shown that anti-jamming capability would be important for all PGMs in the future. USAF made it sounds so easy to counter the Russian-made GPS jammers in Iraq, and revealed the ironic fact that one of the six Iraqi jammer was destroyed by GPS weapon. But guess what? In 2003, USAF asked Boeing to develop anti-jamming devices for weapons such as JDAM, and asked how fast it could be done. Ultimately they did not have to rush anything new in service during wartime, but jamming capability is one of the technical "lesson-learned" that came out of OIF.

Improving accuracy is "relatively" easy, even if it may not be the most cost effective in the short run. You could use more expensive guidance devices to achieve the accuracy. By comparison, ECM and anti-jamming capability is difficult. If the technology is not there yet, spending more money now would not give you the capability now.

Taiwan's lack of strategic depth is an extremely serious operational drawback to say the very least. But here, this also indicates smaller cover area, for missile defense or jamming defense measures. A smaller number of strong jammers combine with large quantity of expendable jammers could be cost-effective.

Of course, nothing says it would be easy for ROCAF. One obvious problem is that PLA has multiple guidance sources, GPS / GLONASS now and in the future indigenous and EU satellites.

Production cost is certainly important, but so is ECM. I would not dismiss the jamming issue so easily against the cost equation. In fact anti-jamming capability will also affect the overall cost and cost effectiveness.

Indeed. If the effectiveness of jammers are effective enough to increase the CEP of the LS-6 or FT-1 beyond their effective area of destructive effect, then that would necessitate more bombs allocated to each target to ensure target destruction. The ROCAF may invest in a number of airborne jamming platforms targeting the GLONASS and Beidou system's operating frequency. (GPS and Galileo signals need not be targeted since they would probably not be available to China in the event of a cross strait conflict).

Problem is, ROCAF has not considered jamming of Beidou signals before, as they obviously underestimated (to say the very least and on a wide margin to boot) the PLA's growing homegrown technological capabiltiy. Even now, there may be sceptics and the common response is to arrogantly deny (deny such things exist in the PLAAF's arsenal).

Even if you do manage to jam the signals, the INS still takes over, so your CEP still manages to get 30 or 40m instead of 16m. That is far from enough to stop a 500kg bomb (over 1000lbs) from doing its damage.

That's why I say it's important to see what the accuracy of the INS alone can do. Of course this kind of data may be impossible to obtain. But this kind of data gauges the level of INS system technologies in China and the overall effectiveness of their missile systems in general.

I think one reason for pan-blue's opposition to the purchases might be that they're foreign purchases. That means in a war they'd have to rely on shipments from the U.S. That would be hell for them. Especially considering the only effective course of action would be to send shipments to the eastern coast and transport everything through the mountains to the western coast.

On the other hand, domestic weapons would be easier to replace.

Originally Posted by Vlad Plasmius

I think one reason for pan-blue's opposition to the purchases might be that they're foreign purchases.

Given that they bought US/foreign weapons like crazy when they were in power, I think that shows that particular theory can't apply here.

Generally they oppose arms purchases because:

a) they're not getting any kickbacks like they did in the 1990s.
b) they want to grandstage for the public about "stopping public money being wasted."
c) the last thing they want to do is let the government look like it's successfully increasing Taiwanese security.
d) they're still sore about losing the Presidency in 2000 and 2004.

If the KMT regains the Presidency in 2008, first thing they'll do is place orders for plenty of gear.

If the KMT regains the Presidency in 2008, first thing they'll do is place orders for plenty of gear.

Which will prove a very handy horse trading asset to put on the table, when they start negotiating "normalisation" with the PRC

Originally Posted by SampanViking

Which will prove a very handy horse trading asset to put on the table, when they start negotiating "normalisation" with the PRC

Except that if that was ever a real possibility, the US would refuse to sell Taiwan anything. In which case Taiwan's military would be severely crippled. In which case Taiwan would have absolutely no negotiating power with China and have to accept anything and everything Beijing demanded - or there would be no deal at all.

The KMT aren't that stupid - they want unification with a lot of caveats. Believing they would put US technology on the table, when they need it to give themselves a defence capability, is complete pie-in-the-sky.

No you misunderstand me Fu.

I mean that the placing of the order is the bargaining chip, not the goods themselves. Yes that offering US Military secrets could upset a few people in Washington.

What I meant is that thry would have something to negotiate with and still be able to pocket a sweetener or two

Originally Posted by SampanViking

I mean that the placing of the order is the bargaining chip, not the goods themselves.

I think the Beijing leadership would be too proud for that - they'd see it as agreeing to blackmail. Also if Taiwan were using US goodwill over arms sales as a means of getting concessions out of China (i.e. that it wasn't serious about buying in the first place) then it would be another reason not to sell any more weapons. Which would again remove the baragining chip, as well as harming Taiwanese security.

How exactly do you think these kind of things are conducted

Lots of very polite people discussing human betterment over Cucumber Sandwiches

These are serious guys talking serious business, realpolitik and all that. I know how these guys get just over the sale of a load of DVD Players, if it comes to something really serious; then trust me, the gloves really come off and anything goes and any angle or advantage is fair game. Its what everybody expects and frankly would be worried and suspicious if it did not happen.

The US defence contractors will happily pay the bungs as nobody knows how things will turn out or how long they will take, which means there is always a chance that their deal might actually go through

Originally Posted by SampanViking

How exactly do you think these kind of things are conducted

No offence, Sampan, but you don't have any direct knowledge of US defence contract negotiations, do you? So why ask a question like that?

These are serious guys talking serious business, realpolitik and all that. I know how these guys get just over the sale of a load of DVD Players, if it comes to something really serious; then trust me, the gloves really come off and anything goes and any angle or advantage is fair game. Its what everybody expects and frankly would be worried and suspicious if it did not happen.

Is there a point in that paragraph relevant to the discussion?

The US defence contractors will happily pay the bungs as nobody knows how things will turn out or how long they will take, which means there is always a chance that their deal might actually go through

Rather forgetting the bit about the US government having to approve the sale as well. The fact the F-16 sale was turned down due to the political bickering rather indicates that the US will block weapons purchases if it suspects Taiwanese political parties are putting petty points-scoring over being serious in regards to defending themselves. Thus I doubt very much the US would authorise sales for Taipei to use them as a bargaining chip.

No offence, Sampan, but you don't have any direct knowledge of US defence contract negotiations

Whose talking US defence contracts? I'm talking Inter Party talks between CCP and KMT and before you say no I am not a PRC/Taiwanese negotiator, but I have been involved in UK interparty negotiations at various levels over many years. Ultimatly they are business negotiations like any other, its just the product thats a bit different.

Is there a point in that paragraph relevant to the discussion

Yes, I have first hand experience of negotiating deals with Chinese companies, some of them even SOE's effectively run by Party Officers. The point is that KMT CCP normalisation discussions will be essentially the same only a lot more complex ans for far higher stakes.

Rather forgetting the bit about the US government having to approve the sale as well.

One step at a time Fu, you do need to have a deal agreed on the table in order to apply for approval. Its not exactly an automatic process and approval is just another hurdle.

Sampan, those are all lovely comments. But they do not explain to me why on earth Taiwan would risk losing US arms sales. Really I think you're losing sight of the big picture. The US has shown it won't let Taiwan jerk it around. If the KMT were to ignore that they would be doing so at their own peril. So I doubt very much they would use arms purchases as a negotiating point because:

a) the Americans may well tell Taiwan to get lost.
b) the Chinese may take umbrage at being "threatened" and get nasty. The CCP is very proud and sees Taiwan as an inferior/subordinate political entity. They won't take kindly to any political party from there, even the KMT, trying to blackmail them.

The members of China´s corps diplomatique (this includes also the specialized CCP functionaries for external/foreign relations) are highly competent people with extensive experience. The delicate negotiations with a KMT delegation about ´normalization´ would be prepared in an extreme elaborate way for not taking any chance for failure.

In recent years several high ranking KMT delegations have been visiting the mainland and mutual confidence and understanding has already built up steadily. Interestingly Singapore was very helpful in establishing direct links with a broad range of important taiwanese and this indicates also how the course of this essentially ethnically chinese cityrepublic might change if the somewhat sinophobic ´foundingfather´Lee Kuan Yew eventually passes away. The current primeminister of Singapore Lee Hsien Loong (a son of the elder Lee) has already been busy distancing his administration from the splittist Chen Shuibian government on Taiwan and has significantly reduced the longstanding military cooperation of Singapore with Taiwan. Additionally Singapores stateowned investment corporation Temasek (chaired by Lee jr. wife Ho Ching) has recently poured billions of US$ into Hong Kong and mainland investments (e.g. Bank of China) and persistant rumours are around that the Government of Singapore Investment Corporation (GIC) which manages Singapores currency reserves (in excess of 100 bn $) has bought dozens of billions of Yuan in anticipation of a further appreciation of the Renminbi.

After all in every corner of Asia chinese people are deepening their mutual economic, cultural and political relationship and late but certainly not too late the politicians who will determine Taiwan´s future have finally decided to join in. Of course nothing will come over night but after as few years the sheer economic and social (migration, intermarriage) dynamics will make the whole process irreversible.

(Remaining problems like seperate or unified military forces will be of secondary importance by then and will eventually be solved without haste in an orderly manner. China will obviously be keen not to offend or provoke the US during the whole critical normalization (eventually reunification) procedure and Beijing will accordingly be prepeared to make significant concessions regarding Taiwan´s strategic status.)