PLA Strategy in a Taiwan Contingency

delft

Brigadier
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
A very interesting article. He admires the way the Marines are training the army of Georgia to perhaps land on a coast in West Africa in support of US interests. That of course went horribly wrong. He also identifies local contractors responsible for easing unofficial use of airfields by US aircraft. I'm sure people who want their country to be independent of the US and are prepared to use violence will want to kill them. And he describes how many governments are dependent on the US.
 

Spartan95

Junior Member
This is why critical thinking is so important. You ignored my point that making reforms to an organization is completely different from having control over that organization. You also ignore the fact that civilian institutions are run completely differently from a military organization.

Now, if the leadership has control of the organisation, it wouldn't be hard to make reforms to that organisation right? Or do you have an explanation as to why when the leadership has control of an organisation but they have difficulty carrying out reforms to the said organisation?

As for civilian vs military organisation, what is the difference between a provincial authority and a Military Region authority (or a fleet for that matter)? As the traditional saying goes, the mountain is high and the emperor is far away.

The loyalty of the PLA to the CCP is ingrained in the very foundation of the PLA command structure, as numerous posters have pointed out. The effectiveness of CCP's control over the PLA is demonstrated by history: in over 80 years, through highs and lows, the armed forces branch of the CCP has *never* turned against the party.

Not yet.

But, what happens when there is a split in the leadership as happened to Zhao Ziyang?

Arizona, and several other states, have passed legislation allowing law enforcement officers to discriminate against illegal immigrants. Does this mean USA is swamped by illegal immigrants? I think you will find differing view points on that issue. Same thing with HK.

My original point was that HK was swamped by people from PRC, which makes the "1 country 2 system" pitch a lot less attractive as an incentive. And here's 2 news articles in English (those published in HK media in Chinese/Cantonese are not so civil):

From Dec 2006:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Pregnant Mainland Women Face Tough Rules
(China Daily HK edition December 15, 2006)

The Hong Kong government will take steps to stop pregnant mainland women who have not undergone proper medical check-ups from entering Hong Kong to curb the increasing misuse of hospital resources.

The government announcement came after an inter-departmental meeting, headed by Chief Secretary for Administration Rafael Hui.

Government statistics show that the number of babies born to mainland parents in Hong Kong had risen from 620 to more than 10,000 in five years. Also, some mainland women had not settled their hospital bills, putting more pressure on the SAR's medical system.

The government generally welcomes tourists, Secretary for Security Ambrose Lee said, but some pregnant mainland women were not coming as tourists, even though they had valid tourist visas, but to misuse Hong Kong's public resources.

The government will discuss with the mainland authorities ways to stop such women from entering Hong Kong, he said, although they could be denied entry even under the existing laws despite having a tourist visa.

"The Director of Immigration has the authority to ban the entry of tourists if he finds that they are not coming to Hong Kong for tourism," he said. The Health, Welfare and Food Bureau and the Hospital Authority will be consulted on ways to stop such women from misusing their tourist status in Hong Kong.

But, Lee said, the government will not ask the National People's Congress Standing Committee (NPCSC) to interpret the Basic Law to tackle the problem.

Some academics had suggested that NPCSC interpret the Basic Law to clarify the rights and benefits enjoyed by children born to mainland parents in Hong Kong.

"The government has stressed many times that the interpretation of the Basic Law is an important and sensitive issue. We will not carelessly ask for an interpretation. Under the circumstances, we should aim at providing enough labour facilities for local women and reduce the use of medical resources by mainland women soon," he said.

Secretary for Health, Welfare and Food York Chow, too, said steps would be taken to deter pregnant mainland women who have not undergone pre-natal check-ups from abusing Hong Kong hospitals' emergency services, though a concrete plan to tackle the problem was yet to be devised.

The government has analysed the January-June data on local pregnant women who underwent pre-natal medical check-ups, and found that hospitals have enough capacity to cater to their needs.

Chow said the Hospital Authority would announce a series of measures to tackle the problem after discussing it at a board meeting.

The government will ensure that local women get the medical care they need, and strengthening of resources was under consideration.

A more recent one published by Beijing Today:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


HK eager to keep out expecting mothers
April 8, 2011
By Han Manman

Hong Kong authorities are examining their options to combat an endless flow of pregnant tourists from the mainland.

The Hong Kong Hospital Authority and Department of Health recently revealed that mainland mothers accounted for approximately 40,000 births in Hong Kong during 2010; nearly half of the island’s 88,000 total.

The numbers represent a massive increase from the “few hundred” births of 2004 and 2005. The island’s healthcare officials are projecting 92,000 births by mainland mothers this year, and another 100,000 to follow in 2012.

“It’s a situation that must be resolved quickly before community services are affected,” said York Chow, secretary for food and health under the Hong Kong government.

He said his bureau is studying ways to tackle the issue, including placing limits on the number of pregnant non-resident mainland women allowed to access local hospitals and urging local private hospitals to limit the number of pregnant mainland women they treat.

The measures would be the second of the kind placed on mainland mothers since 2007.

At that time, the Hong Kong local government introduced legislation that prohibited women past their 28th week of pregnancy from entering the city without providing proof of a booking at a local hospital.

The prohibitions and punishments, initially successful, have eroded in the face of the mainland’s recent economic success.

The demand has given birth to many related business, such as one-stop service agencies to assist expecting mothers.

For mainlanders, there are a number of incentives for giving birth in Hong Kong.

“The biggest reason to give birth in Hong Kong is that we will be able to have a second baby,” said He Li, 38, manager of a local software company.

He said both he and his wife want to have a second child, but they are prohibited from this on the mainland. The nation’s family planning policy required that both parents be from single-child families if they want to have a second child.

He spent more than 100,000 yuan two years ago to have a daughter in Hong Kong.

Though the cost is 10 times higher than giving birth in Beijing, He said it was a worthwhile investment in his daughter’s future.

“My daughter has a Hong Kong passport, so she will be able to enter the most prestigious educational facilities in the mainland with greater ease than her local peers,” He said.

He and his wife are considering sending their daughter to Hong Kong to study when she reaches high school age so she can get used to an international atmosphere and improve her English skills.

Additionally, as a Hong Kong passport holder, the girl is eligible for traveling to more than 130 countries without needing a visa.

While Hong Kong authorities have not announced how they plan to keep mothers out, observers are already pessimistic about their ability to resolve the problem, First Financial Daily reported.

Several local legislators said any attempt to ban non-resident women from the mainland from entering Hong Kong could be struck down as illegal discrimination. They also said private hospitals are likely to oppose any proposal to ban mainlanders, since pregnancy tourists are one of their largest sources of income.

From the figures given by Beijing Today, it is quite clear that HK is being swamped by people from PRC. Does Taiwan want to follow in the footsteps?

Errr... American authors publish *much* worse.

2 big and obvious difference:

1. US is known for their freedom of speech, PRC is not. Hence, writers in America routinely publish rather sensational books to boost sales. The same cannot be said of writers in PRC. For example, some historians in the US refer to Mao Zedong as the Peasant Emperor. I don't think a PRC writer will get away with that.

2. The CCP's official line is "Peaceful Rise", and the PLAN's official line is "Harmonious Ocean". And here there are 2 colonels in the PLA that writes about "Unrestricted Warfare" that contracts the official line. Has it become the norm for senior PLA officers to contradict official lines now?
 

Mr T

Senior Member
Chinese will never allow military rule, because of the painful history of warlords.

The warlord era was a problem for China largely because there were so many of them and they fought for control. That doesn't mean that Chinese people would never accept a unified government made up of members of the military.

But we have to remember that the PLA already have significant influence in this civilian-led government. Aren't two senior generals members of the Politburo? They wouldn't need to directly sieze power to encourage a military operation. Whereas, as I mentioned earlier, Yang Jiechi doesn't have the ability to counter anything they might say during Politburo meetings.
 
Last edited:

solarz

Brigadier
Now, if the leadership has control of the organisation, it wouldn't be hard to make reforms to that organisation right? Or do you have an explanation as to why when the leadership has control of an organisation but they have difficulty carrying out reforms to the said organisation?

As for civilian vs military organisation, what is the difference between a provincial authority and a Military Region authority (or a fleet for that matter)? As the traditional saying goes, the mountain is high and the emperor is far away.

Not yet.

But, what happens when there is a split in the leadership as happened to Zhao Ziyang?

I think you're being rather disingenuous with this line of reasoning. What do you think is easier: telling someone what projects they need to work on, or telling them that they need to change the way they approach their work?

As for civilian vs military, how about the fact that the military chain of command is far more rigid? And that military personnelle live separate from the civilian society and do nothing but learn to obey orders all day long?

And finally, a hypothetical scenario where the CCP leadership itself is split is hardly evidence that the CCP does not have control over the PLA. How did the Zhao Ziyang incident support your point again?


My original point was that HK was swamped by people from PRC, which makes the "1 country 2 system" pitch a lot less attractive as an incentive. And here's 2 news articles in English (those published in HK media in Chinese/Cantonese are not so civil):

From Dec 2006:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


A more recent one published by Beijing Today:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


From the figures given by Beijing Today, it is quite clear that HK is being swamped by people from PRC. Does Taiwan want to follow in the footsteps?

That's great, I'm sure you can find much more venomous articles published by right-wing US media on the issue of illegal aliens. That STILL doesn't mean the US, or HK, is being "swamped", as you claim.

Do these pregnant mainland mothers stay in HK after giving birth? Do they get medical treatment for free? If not, how are they "swamping" HK?


2 big and obvious difference:

1. US is known for their freedom of speech, PRC is not. Hence, writers in America routinely publish rather sensational books to boost sales. The same cannot be said of writers in PRC. For example, some historians in the US refer to Mao Zedong as the Peasant Emperor. I don't think a PRC writer will get away with that.

2. The CCP's official line is "Peaceful Rise", and the PLAN's official line is "Harmonious Ocean". And here there are 2 colonels in the PLA that writes about "Unrestricted Warfare" that contracts the official line. Has it become the norm for senior PLA officers to contradict official lines now?

Ummm... no. I see you also subscribe to the western line that the CCP has complete control over anything published in PRC. That's completely untrue, of course. The CCP censorship is reactive, often after materials are published. You probably think the PRC never publishes anything controversial.



The warlord era was a problem for China largely because there were so many of them and they fought for control. That doesn't mean that Chinese people would never accept a unified government made up of members of the military.

But we have to remember that the PLA already have significant influence in this civilian-led government. Aren't two senior generals members of the Politburo? They wouldn't need to directly sieze power to encourage a military operation. Whereas, as I mentioned earlier, Yang Jiechi doesn't have the ability to counter anything they might say during Politburo meetings.

Remember Yuan Shikai and what happened to him? Yeah, that's what happens to warlords that want to create a government by force in China.

Your second argument could easily be turned around, as CCP political officers are present in every echelon of PLA command. And you also assume, falsely, that just because someone is in the military, he/she must be a warmonger.
 
Last edited:

Spartan95

Junior Member
I think you're being rather disingenuous with this line of reasoning. What do you think is easier: telling someone what projects they need to work on, or telling them that they need to change the way they approach their work?

Having control means being able to get the organisation to do what the leadership wants it to do. Yet, you are saying that having control does not mean that the leadership can get the said organisation to reform? How does that work again?

As for civilian vs military, how about the fact that the military chain of command is far more rigid? And that military personnelle live separate from the civilian society and do nothing but learn to obey orders all day long?

That did not prevent Marshal Lin Biao(林彪), 1 of the most decorated PLA generals, from leading an attempted coup now did it?

Having a rigid chain of command is exactly what makes it easier to mount coups if a particular general wanted to.

And finally, a hypothetical scenario where the CCP leadership itself is split is hardly evidence that the CCP does not have control over the PLA. How did the Zhao Ziyang incident support your point again?

If there is a split in the CCP leadership (hypothetically, say the President and the Premier had a falling out), who would the PLA listen to since they "do nothing but learn to obey orders all day long"? Whose orders would they take (especially when the CMC itself is split)?

That's great, I'm sure you can find much more venomous articles published by right-wing US media on the issue of illegal aliens. That STILL doesn't mean the US, or HK, is being "swamped", as you claim.

Do these pregnant mainland mothers stay in HK after giving birth? Do they get medical treatment for free? If not, how are they "swamping" HK?

I take it you didn't read the articles I posted?

It is clearly stated in the articles that:
1. some bills go unpaid,
2. the kids are registered as HK citizens, stay in HK and go to school in HK,
3. when ~50% of newborns in HK are from PRC mothers.

How is that not being swamped?

Ummm... no. I see you also subscribe to the western line that the CCP has complete control over anything published in PRC. That's completely untrue, of course. The CCP censorship is reactive, often after materials are published. You probably think the PRC never publishes anything controversial.

No. I did not say that.

General publications and publications authored by senior PLA officers are not the same thing, yet you attempted to lump all these together. Writings by PLA officers are generally published by the PLA. And the PLA is quite strict about what gets published, particularly those events/facts it deems "inconvenient". That's already 1 level of censorship.

After publication, if it is deemed "unsuitable", it gets recalled (or banned if necessary, such as Zhao Ziyang's memoirs). That's another level of censorship. Yet, no such thing happened to "Unrestricted Warfare".

Remember Yuan Shikai and what happened to him? Yeah, that's what happens to warlords that want to create a government by force in China.

Yuan Shikai (袁世凯) died because of disease. He was not tried for war crimes.

And since we are talking about PLA generals, why not mention Peng Dehuai (彭德怀), a great hero of the Chinese Civil War who was disgraced, beaten up, tortured, exiled and died in ignominy? So much for serving the CCP eh?

Your second argument could easily be turned around, as CCP political officers are present in every echelon of PLA command. And you also assume, falsely, that just because someone is in the military, he/she must be a warmonger.

I did not say "that just because someone is in the military, he/she must be a warmonger." That's you putting words in my mouth.

As for political officers, they certainly didn't prevent Marshal Lin Biao from planning an attempted coup now did they?
 

optionsss

Junior Member
there is a split in the CCP leadership (hypothetically, say the President and the Premier had a falling out), who would the PLA listen to since they "do nothing but learn to obey orders all day long"?

In China, the Central Military Commission commands the military, so essentially, the President have almost exclusive command over the military. Premier can not give orders to even low ranking military personal without at least one of the Vice Chairmen of CMC. This was pretty evident during the SiChun earth quake.
Historically the Chinese military have always been aligned with the command of the President, even during the CPP split. The military stayed on the sidelines when Hu took down the ShangHai party boss, and they stayed on the sideline when Jiang took down the Beijing party boss.
 

Geographer

Junior Member
The whole reason people are talking about Hong Kong in a thread about PLAN strategy in the Taiwan Strait is because the Hong Kong SAR example is held out as framework for the reunification of Taiwan. Some have said Hong Kong has gotten worse since 1997 and therefore is unappealing to Taiwan.

The case of Hong Kong hospitals swamped with PRC babies is a red herring. The Hong Kong economy has prospered immensely since 1997. The stock market has grown immensely. The government runs a budget surplus. Hong Kong's fertility rate is the lowest in the world at 0.9 babies per woman according to Wikipedia. That is lower than even Portugal, Spain, Italy, and Greece, the sickmen of Europe. Hong Kong needs young people to pay taxes and support the elderly. If HK has to choose to between tightening border controls against pregnant women, and diverting funds to hospitals to cover the costs of so many newborn children, it should do the latter. Hong Kong should value more children, not discourage them! Children are a long-term investment in the city's future. The problems of a swelling population should be dealt with by urban planners, not demographers.

Even if you believe Chinese immigration to HK has been, on balance, a detriment, consider how much larger Taiwan is in both population and territory. It can afford to absorb millions of immigrants without the perceived overcrowding issues Hong Kong faces.
 

Spartan95

Junior Member
In China, the Central Military Commission commands the military, so essentially, the President have almost exclusive command over the military. Premier can not give orders to even low ranking military personal without at least one of the Vice Chairmen of CMC. This was pretty evident during the SiChun earth quake.
Historically the Chinese military have always been aligned with the command of the President, even during the CPP split. The military stayed on the sidelines when Hu took down the ShangHai party boss, and they stayed on the sideline when Jiang took down the Beijing party boss.

OK, the President and Vice-President split was a bad example.

A more relevant example will be a split between the Chairman of CMC (a civilian) and the Vice-Chairman of CMC (a general). The litmus test will be who the PLA backs in such a scenario.

The whole reason people are talking about Hong Kong in a thread about PLAN strategy in the Taiwan Strait is because the Hong Kong SAR example is held out as framework for the reunification of Taiwan. Some have said Hong Kong has gotten worse since 1997 and therefore is unappealing to Taiwan.

The case of Hong Kong hospitals swamped with PRC babies is a red herring. The Hong Kong economy has prospered immensely since 1997. The stock market has grown immensely. The government runs a budget surplus. Hong Kong's fertility rate is the lowest in the world at 0.9 babies per woman according to Wikipedia. That is lower than even Portugal, Spain, Italy, and Greece, the sickmen of Europe. Hong Kong needs young people to pay taxes and support the elderly. If HK has to choose to between tightening border controls against pregnant women, and diverting funds to hospitals to cover the costs of so many newborn children, it should do the latter. Hong Kong should value more children, not discourage them! Children are a long-term investment in the city's future. The problems of a swelling population should be dealt with by urban planners, not demographers.

Even if you believe Chinese immigration to HK has been, on balance, a detriment, consider how much larger Taiwan is in both population and territory. It can afford to absorb millions of immigrants without the perceived overcrowding issues Hong Kong faces.

The point about HK hospitals being swamped with PRC babies is that there is public anger over this issue. If you consider that a red herring, that's fine by me. Suffice to say that heavily pregnant women have gathered and marched in public demonstrations on this issue.

The point about the fertility rate is important because despite having below replacement fertility rate for many years, HK's population has been growing. That's the other part of "being swamped" by people from PRC.

With regard to urban planning for HK, it seems that the Chief Executive of HK and his administration isn't doing a particularly good job. Housing shortage is a perennial issue. Crime is starting to be an issue. Over-crowding is a serious issue. Pollution is also an issue. To be fair, HK has done well for big businesses. But the perceived benefits of economic growth doesn't seem to have trickled down to the masses.

That's hardly an attractive case for the masses in RoC.
 

Geographer

Junior Member
Housing shortage is a perennial issue.
I am curious as to why this is. Why isn't the market responding to demand by building more apartment skyscrapers? I know HK has a lot of green space off limits to developed but they also have a lot of low-density in the outer areas, away from the Kowloon CBD. Is it a question of the government not approving building permits? HK is supposed to have a famously free market so this appears to be a market failure. What's going on?
 

MwRYum

Major
I am curious as to why this is. Why isn't the market responding to demand by building more apartment skyscrapers? I know HK has a lot of green space off limits to developed but they also have a lot of low-density in the outer areas, away from the Kowloon CBD. Is it a question of the government not approving building permits? HK is supposed to have a famously free market so this appears to be a market failure. What's going on?

That's because the luxury flats, the profits this field generates, and the potential revenue the government can reap that caused the squeezing effect on the common folks...if you compare with Singapore, HK housing policy is a bloody failure.

And being a free market as it is the developers have no incentives to build "entry / mid-level" housing that the common folks can afford, because they won't profit much from it. If that's not the worse enough, developers in HK have grown into super monsters that have reaches into every fabric in HK economy, so big they're that the gov't listen to them almost literally.

It's pretty hopeless for the common folks, and no surprise this make the HK model very bad sell to Taiwan, despite they only got clowns to vote into office...at least there's the illusion of control (you can use vote to kick that clown from his/her seat) by the people.
 
Top