Fourth Taiwan Strait Crisis

[Biscuits]

Hi all,

War is the extension of politics.

Some factors in to play:

Local US Politics:
- Democrats are in for a hammering they haven't recieved in a long time due to US being actually being in recession. Biden is the most unpopular leader with questionable mental health. His no. 2 is so bad that Biden could get more votes if he was in ICU. So democrats are desperate to change the messaging from inflation and recession.

Ukraine war happened too early, the fatigue has set in, it isn't even a top headline daily anymore. Russia didn't run out of missiles in march and widened up after making mistakes early on and are gradually progressing. The ruble and economy are stable and the sanctions are biting back.

The Pelosi drama is a win-win at first thought. If Pelosi lands etc without any serious consequence, Democrats can claim 'we showed em!'. Normally, this messaging would die down as well by November and won't help democrats.

If China responds in any an impactful manner, then that will be the steroid injection into 'ChInA bAd' narrative. This messaging will sustain at a higher pitch and will allow democrats some distraction from the local economic issues. If Pelosi is hit, then China is offering US a cassus belli whether you guys agree or not. Public in west would and would be happy to part with their tax money to hit back at China. This is playing straight into their hands.

USA wins in both scenarios unless China can humiliate USA without hitting.

Furthermore, long term US policy is obviously to keep goading China into making mistakes and generate more bad PR so they can convince more of their allies to decouple faster.

Chinese Politics:
Now CCP has decided for whatever reason that this is the hill they will fight on. I feel they could've decided they'd fight on another hill, but it is what it is. Seeing the local social media trends, the public is laser focused and hyped. The legitimacy of CCP is at stake. The expectations have been set high and if they are not delivered it will certainly hurt CCP's image and US will walk away with an easy win.

Things such as:
- Live excercises,
- More rhetoric of this and that,
Etc will not satisfy the public.

The public expects something meaningful and consequential.

At the same time, I don't think CCP are dumb enough to start a direct war with US and allies. US is baiting them, and hoping to further galvanize their allies.

CCPs ideal response should be squarely on (1) Taiwan directly, and (2) indirectly, make the conflict with China unpopular amongst US masses. US lost Vietnam and Afghanistan not because they couldn't pound the local militias indefinitely, but because public had enough of it and it became a political liability. Hitting Pelosi will make a war against China more popular in west, hence it's counter-productive.

So with all of the above, what are the options on esscalatory ladder:l and it doesn't have to be instant, but multiple over multiple schedules.

1. China can take over some of the Islands. Warn that any economic sanctions from West, especially Europe will mean that they will retaliate by assisting Russia in fighting Ukraine. Ukraine is a proxy for west, where they hope to cut down Putin without sacrificing any of their own, an ideal scenario they hope to support indefinately. This suddenly becomes very expensive if China backs Russia, then Ukraine is a no win scenario for the West unless they wish to start a nuclear war with Russia. So, counter-baited. Also allows China go test their equipment in real world scenario. China can claim if West interferes in its internal matters, it will interfere in European matters.

There will be economic costs for all sides, but frankly, West is already through trade war and other restrictions, attempting that, but trying to minimize their blowback. This will neuter that strategy.

Taiwan would need to be made example of to deter local lapdogs like India and Japan not be a punching bag.

2. Announce ambiguous no fly zone over Taiwan, Taiwan and allies would need to escort every civilian aircraft, China can pick and choose, creating alot of cost with nothing on it. They can again warn any sanctions will result in Ukraine scenario mentioned above. It's a trump card.

3. Rare earth metals, start charging 50% Pelosi tax for x number of months, you know it's not permanent and not super escalatory, it hits US consumers, creates inflation without much impact. US is already busy trying to find alternate supply chains so milk this cow now.

4. Other factors that create inflationary impacts indirectly. Perhaps port closures due to military excercises. Global supply chains are expensive and fucked as they are, this creates more drama and makes things difficult.

5. Other indirect factors: oil etc, they can push Iran to go nuclear and bait a strike if things don't remain neutral on that front. Iran is willing to bat for Russia right now, they'll be delighted with China on their side.

6. Immediately start moving their reserves out of jurisdictions that can be locked / stolen like Russians and Iranians faced. This is key, if China isn't doing this already after Russia, now is the time.

7. Lots of private Chinese citizen investments sitting in west that can be stolen, start making a plan to get rid of those.

8. Seriously consider Rapid build up and preparation under pretext of Pelosi provocation for unification within days/weeks before US and allies can mobilize and [ eventually go for it.]( I will explain why time isn't necessarily on Chinese side)

The solution is to counter bait and make life miserable for the political elite. Knee jerk reactions like sHoOT dOwN pEloSi are childish and short sighted and wet dream come true for US.

Is time in China's side? Yes and no.

US has waken up, they're expediting 6th gen fighters, focusing on key technologies to stay ahead (recent example of Semiconductor subsidies) abd trying to limit China in areas it has edge in like cutting down Huawei, arguably which would have been no. 1 mobile manufacturer today but now is out of the picture due to 5g advantage they had.

They are also rallying allies, AUKUS is one example, there is talk of Economic NATO etc. They are going to do what every power would do in this scenario. China is not going to be against US alone in 10-20 years, theyd be up against a more armed up Europe, Japan, South Korea, Australia. (Not sure about India since they're so incompetent), but all of that Economic might will be much bigger than China even if China surpasses US one on one.

So I think the time window for reunification is earlier rather than later.

Meh, US is not "waking up". I've never heard of a country waking up while in a recession. Same goes for the decrepit NATO nations that also put themselves into economical shitter fighting Russia. If China can purge its consistent and large faction of US friendly politicians, US would find itself in far more frostier climate than it already is.

Anything economically US can do to try and limit Chinese development, China could hit back just as hard. It should be reminded that in the semiconductor race, China is ahead, except both US and China is behind Korea. If US thinks it can steal tech from Korea or even Chinese Taipei without evoking a response eventually, they're wrong.

In 10-20 years, China could likely improve Russia and Iran by a fair bit, and Russia will improve itself by grabbing Ukraine's farmlands. NK would grow as well. Pakistan growth continues. NATO fucked itself by already having a high spending, so they don't have anywhere higher to go without hurting their economy, while China can still remilitarize. In contrast, its doubtful NATO is going anywhere with receding economies and already high spending.

Wooing the "neutrals" or fencesitters like India, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Brazil, Latin America in general etc. is most important for China. With them onboard, China will physically control almost all grain and oil, in addition to already having control over consumer industry, heavy industry and rare earths/semiconductors.

Reading over recent Chinese statements, I'm now also more in the camp that the main moves from China will be to tilt the balance back asymmetrically by upgrading its activity above and near Taiwan and/or take administrative control from some remote islands. The permanent loss of ground for the rebel side will be far more badly felt than a temporary unofficial visit. US may be too humiliated if Pelosi is killed, forcing them to go to war even with poor chances, so taking over for example Kinmen or Penghu is preferable.

China may also abandon the idea of diplomatic resolution with the KMT remnant side and prepare for armed assault later down the line. However, I don't see China now waiting for more than 10 years to attack. The force balance is favorable enough, and there's enough popular demand. It's just, armed reunification won't be kicked off by killing Pelosi first, it'll happen a few years down the road from now.

 

[horse]

My 2 cents:
Pelosi plane will avoid Taiwan eventually , due to series of hostile warning from PLA being planned. The pilots and crew on board the plane are just not crazy enough like Pelosi.

The US army, navy, marines, is a professional military.

They will not deliberately send someone like Pelosi on a potential suicide mission.

It is kind of hilarious, because they insist on being sent.

 

[KenC]

We should see or consider what the plan is from the PRC.

Stopping Pelosi from visiting, does not achieve too much. We get a few laughs, but that is about it.

In a game like this, there are several rounds. A few more after this, like it is perpetual.

Something is going to change. We just do not know what.

I think next step will be taking over the Penghu Island and followed by Orchid Island. There will be salami slicing from China from this point onward. The economic sanction from Western bloc will also backfire on the West and will not weaken China relative to the West

 

[xypher]

It may be sufficient for the US and regional allies if they manage to sufficiently degrade Chinese weaponry and personal to an extent where the takeover of the Taiwan island, in the near future, won't really be easy enough for the PRC and the leadership to manage to gain a foothold on Taiwan or effect a leadership change. Even if America doesn't resolutely defeat China, the possibility that they might be able to keep China from fulfilling their objectives might be tempting enough for the civilian government of the US to try to risk it anyways.

Regional allies would be demolished in the event of hot war if they support the US or allow it to conduct attacks from their lands. North Korea alone can stall the South for quite some time with their mass artillery and Seoul in their firing range. Japanese already expressed concerns about the Pelosi's visit to Taiwan - you might be heavily overestimating the willingness of SK & Japan to jump the wagon in case of war. If the US shows weakness during conflict, I can easily see their 'allies' deserting them and without them, the US chances of winning the war go to absolute bottom. The US already cannot take China alone, that's a fact.

I doubt the US will be able to "sufficiently degrade" Chinese military because when the Chinese industrial machine transitions into war-mode, it will dwarf the US output during WW2. Moreover, it would be far easier for China to replenish its forces because of closeness to its borders, while the US supplying its ships would be a logistical nightmare. Another thing is that it will be far easier for Chinese government to 'sell' this war to its people and gain conscripts because it is an extremely sensitive & close to heart issue for many Chinese people. On the other hand, for the general US population (reddit neckbeards excluded) Taiwan would be another Iraq but with far more casualties & visible QoL degradation because of massive supply chain disruptions (expect double or triple digit inflation) and the war would be started by a very unpopular president with their own staged provocation.

 

[siegecrossbow]

The US army, navy, marines, is a professional military.

They will not deliberately send someone like Pelosi on a potential suicide mission.

It is kind of hilarious, because they insist on being sent.

Time will tell if sanity will prevail. If not, they are worse than the Trump admin that they often deride.

 

[Michaelsinodef]

Well the US does have three carrier battlegroups in place (one super carrier plus two LHAs carrying F-35Bs) in place, but having two LHAs as opposed to super carriers still appear to be an inferior force posture compare to 1996, unless another super carrier arrives within 72 hours. Also, we don't how many submarines are in place for launching tomahawks. In general the US posture appears to be normatively ready for war, but when taking a closer look, there aren't any significant mobilizations for a high-intensity draw out.

On the Chinese side, there are lots of rhetorical warning from the state-owned media outlets (thus, should be taken seriously if history were to be a credible source), but the PLA force posture is even less mobilized than those of the US or Taiwanese side. So far, we have only seen some movements of long-range rocket artilleries and HQ-22/HQ-9 units. We don't even see a general mobilization or large deployment of assets.

These are my confusions.

I don't really think we have any strong/good idea of the movements of the PLA, besides the very little we have seen.

DF-17 or DF-26s could be mobilized and out without us really knowing.

 

[ChongqingHotPot92]

I don't really think we have any strong/good idea of the movements of the PLA, besides the very little we have seen.

DF-17 or DF-26s could be mobilized and out without us really knowing.

but those movements could easily been tracked via satellite images and random folks who have nothing better to do taking pictures.

 

[siegecrossbow]

Well the US does have three carrier battlegroups in place (one super carrier plus two LHAs carrying F-35Bs) in place, but having two LHAs as opposed to super carriers still appear to be an inferior force posture compare to 1996, unless another super carrier arrives within 72 hours. Also, we don't how many submarines are in place for launching tomahawks. In general the US posture appears to be normatively ready for war, but when taking a closer look, there aren't any significant mobilizations for a high-intensity draw out.

On the Chinese side, there are lots of rhetorical warning from the state-owned media outlets (thus, should be taken seriously if history were to be a credible source), but the PLA force posture is even less mobilized than those of the US or Taiwanese side. So far, we have only seen some movements of long-range rocket artilleries and HQ-22/HQ-9 units. We don't even see a general mobilization or large deployment of assets.

These are my confusions.

And those videos have been pulled from Weibo very quickly. How long did it take for us to get a clear photo of the J-35?

 

[jwnz]

F-35B "Big Decks"...?

What, there're F-35B "Small Decks" in the USN?

Or is that just an opportune wordplay to demonstrate some sense of testosterone-infused machismo?

They only come in the following sizes: L, XL, and XXL.

 

[phrozenflame]

Meh, US is not "waking up". I've never heard of a country waking up while in a recession. Same goes for the decrepit NATO nations that also put themselves into economical shitter fighting Russia. If China can purge its consistent and large faction of US friendly politicians, US would find itself in far more frostier climate than it already is.

Anything economically US can do to try and limit Chinese development, China could hit back just as hard. It should be reminded that in the semiconductor race, China is ahead, except both US and China is behind Korea. If US thinks it can steal tech from Korea or even Chinese Taipei without evoking a response eventually, they're wrong.

In 10-20 years, China could likely improve Russia and Iran by a fair bit, and Russia will improve itself by grabbing Ukraine's farmlands. NK would grow as well. Pakistan growth continues. NATO fucked itself by already having a high spending, so they don't have anywhere higher to go without hurting their economy, while China can still remilitarize. In contrast, its doubtful NATO is going anywhere with receding economies and already high spending.

Wooing the "neutrals" or fencesitters like India, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Brazil, Latin America in general etc. is most important for China. With them onboard, China will physically control almost all grain and oil, in addition to already having control over consumer industry, heavy industry and rare earths/semiconductors.

Reading over recent Chinese statements, I'm now also more in the camp that the main moves from China will be to tilt the balance back asymmetrically by upgrading its activity above and near Taiwan and/or take administrative control from some remote islands. The permanent loss of ground for the rebel side will be far more badly felt than a temporary unofficial visit. US may be too humiliated if Pelosi is killed, forcing them to go to war even with poor chances, so taking over for example Kinmen or Penghu is preferable.

China may also abandon the idea of diplomatic resolution with the KMT remnant side and prepare for armed assault later down the line. However, I don't see China now waiting for more than 10 years to attack. The force balance is favorable enough, and there's enough popular demand. It's just, armed reunification won't be kicked off by killing Pelosi first, it'll happen a few years down the road from now.

I think you are viewing US alone and not with atleast it's western european allies. As you saw with Russia, Europeans will take the cost to it's own economies.