Lessons for China to learn from Ukraine conflict for Taiwan scenario

Status
Not open for further replies.

Godzilla

Junior Member
Registered Member
one use of Penghu is so that tube and shorter ranged rocket artillery can be put to use. due to range limitations, ~100 km is all they'll get. While they can't bombard possible landing beaches for amphibs since there's none around Chiayi across the water from Penghu (it's all wetland), they can cut coastal routes around Chiayi. they can also provide a short ranged drone base and close-in radar station. am I missing anything?

in exchange will be the problem of managing a population of 100k.
You can also wack a temporary offloading facility there and lead the civilian transports to unload there to minimize exposure. From there it is only a 20km swim to Chiayi.
Magong port is good for 50,000 tonne class cruise ships, and its on the side facing the mainland. Good place for the RORO ships to come in and unload. The other 1 at longmen is smaller but has cargo handling facilities, so makes for a good secondary logistics hub, for the expendable little ships to do the 20km dash. Having the maritime militia dash a couple hundred tons of good across in hundreds of boats makes it safer for the larger ships.

I would also evacuate the 100k pop back to the mainland and make this place a hornets nest of mobile SAM and SP artillery to pop Taiwanese targets as they come up.
 

Broccoli

Senior Member
Does China have or planning to have anything like JASSM cruise missile what can be dropped from multiple different fighters? Americans are buying them by the hundreds each year. Such weapons give flexibility for striking missions and military isn't stuck on few kinda dedicated delivery platforms.
 
Last edited:

Minm

Junior Member
Registered Member
With the rate of 1-2% rise above the GDP growth, it would take 36 years to reach 2.5% mark. An annual rise of 6% above nominal growth allows for 2.5% in 2034. For example, for a 5% growth and 4% inflation the increase should be 15%. I think that should be the case. Of course, the government should increase numbers arbitrarily. It should be buying according to the need which means the budget growth shouldn't look like a perfect exponential curve.
I am sure many ambitions of the PLA are being canceled because of low budgets. For example who can say 20 more nuclear subs wouldn't make things a lot easier?
I just don't see the urgency. It's not like Taiwan is about to declare independence. 20 nuclear subs today would be great, but 20 far more advanced subs 5 years from now might be better.

The military is also not the only priority, investing in technology will also make western countries more dependent on Chinese supply chains and therefore prevent Western intervention in a war.
 

Rettam Stacf

Junior Member
Registered Member
the russian loss around kiev further illustrates the stupidity of the crowd that are gung-ho about going "straight for taipei" and thinks that PLA can simply ignore the islets west of taiwan because this is supposed to be "modern warfare". The approach of taking islets first, especially penghu, has been further proven to be the most viable option for PLA.

Since there were several discussions on Penghu Islands, I like to repost something I wrote in this thread 3 weeks ago which may be relevant.

Russia has Donbas and Crimea to help launch her current campaign. China can do the same.

When the Taiwan red line is crossed or closed to being crossed, I can see China doing salami slicing of her own by taking possession, one after another, of remote islands currently under Taiwan administration, and IMO, in the following sequence :

(1) Penghu Islands
(2) Dongsha Island (Pratas Islands)
(3) Taiping Island
(4) Kinmen Islands
(5) Matsu Islands

China probably will take Penghu and Dongsha in one go. Controlling them means controlling the Southern part, if not all, of the Taiwan Strait. Dongsha has few residents and only lightly defended. But the Penghu Islands have just over 100K residents and is only 30 km from main Taiwan Island. So China needs to take it with surprise and lightning speed. Taking Penghu and Dongsha will be a preparation run for the PLA for eventual military unification with Taiwan. If China has problem with Penghu, she can forget about the main Taiwan Island.

Taiping Island, being the biggest island in the South China Sea with its own fresh water supply, is also of strategic value for China to further strengthen her dominance over the South China Sea.

Taking control of Kinmen and Matsu is a walkover for China due to their proximity to the Chinese coast. The two have few military value for China. But Kinmen does have about 130K civilian residence and 13K for Matsu. So the psychological impact of losing them is high for Taiwan.

Taking control of all these 5 groups of islands and fully militarize the first 3 may even induce Taiwan to negotiate a peaceful reunification instead of a military one.
 

Coalescence

Senior Member
Registered Member
I just don't see the urgency. It's not like Taiwan is about to declare independence. 20 nuclear subs today would be great, but 20 far more advanced subs 5 years from now might be better.

The military is also not the only priority, investing in technology will also make western countries more dependent on Chinese supply chains and therefore prevent Western intervention in a war.
I agree that it's not urgent now, but the situation could shift very quickly as we see they are getting desperate in trying to contain and/or weaken China. They should at least spend more to bring up more facilities to maintain and produce more ships and submarines.

For the investing in technology point, dependency on Chinese supply chains is not reliable deterrence for the long-term, the West is keen on trying to wean of economic links with China, which sure they are failing at the moment, but we can't put our bets that they won't succeed in the future.

What China should do instead is to get the Western elites in their pockets, by tying their prosperity and wealth to China. This gives China more control and influence over the politics in US, allowing them to lobby pro-China/self-sabotaging laws and weakening anti-China/self-improvement laws.

On the surface, investing in technology right now is to create self-sufficiency so that in the event of a war between China and the West, China wouldn't be catastrophically affected by it. As these technology become more competitive, they can be used as a bargaining chip and a honey trap for the elites following the strategy I written above.
 

supersnoop

Major
Registered Member
I agree that it's not urgent now, but the situation could shift very quickly as we see they are getting desperate in trying to contain and/or weaken China. They should at least spend more to bring up more facilities to maintain and produce more ships and submarines.

For the investing in technology point, dependency on Chinese supply chains is not reliable deterrence for the long-term, the West is keen on trying to wean of economic links with China, which sure they are failing at the moment, but we can't put our bets that they won't succeed in the future.

What China should do instead is to get the Western elites in their pockets, by tying their prosperity and wealth to China. This gives China more control and influence over the politics in US, allowing them to lobby pro-China/self-sabotaging laws and weakening anti-China/self-improvement laws.

On the surface, investing in technology right now is to create self-sufficiency so that in the event of a war between China and the West, China wouldn't be catastrophically affected by it. As these technology become more competitive, they can be used as a bargaining chip and a honey trap for the elites following the strategy I written above.

Throwing this out there, the reason western countries are failing at severing the economic links is because they are 15 steps behind and tripping over themselves. Their only strategy is to try to move to the next lowest cost producer, Vietnam, other SEA, India, Africa, etc.

Their problem is that these countries are infrastructure and industry poor. So they inevitably turn to China for lower cost industrial equipment and infrastructure.

Then Biden tries to make a B3W and fails because Wall Street doesn’t finance for free and the government knows they will not find political support for them to do it themselves, only China is willing to do this because of the communist government.

China is already responsible for lining the pockets of Western companies, Apple, all German car companies, GM, Tesla, Wal-Mart, Amazon (indirectly). Yet the US government has already passed self sabotaging laws (25% tariff on electronics, responsible for some of the inflation which is why they are suspended now).

Honestly the US government is a joke. As long as people like Marsha “define woman” Blackburn, Marjorie Qanon Greene, Tom Cottonmouth, and now that orgy guy keep getting elected, all China has to do is not be totally retarded (pardon the language) and already you’re 10 steps ahead.
 

drowingfish

Junior Member
Registered Member
one use of Penghu is so that tube and shorter ranged rocket artillery can be put to use. due to range limitations, ~100 km is all they'll get. While they can't bombard possible landing beaches for amphibs since there's none around Chiayi across the water from Penghu (it's all wetland), they can cut coastal routes around Chiayi. they can also provide a short ranged drone base and close-in radar station. am I missing anything?

in exchange will be the problem of managing a population of 100k.
it can also accommodate field hospital. and be a helicopter base for air assaults and air delivery of supplies.
 

Volpler11

Junior Member
Registered Member
Since there were several discussions on Penghu Islands, I like to repost something I wrote in this thread 3 weeks ago which may be relevant.
Just as the current Ukraine war has shown, salami-slicing can also backfire because it will permanently rule out any chance of peaceful resolution. It will make inspire Taiwanese nationalism and invests more into the island's defence. China has really 1 opportunity to attack, so it should act decisively.
 

supersnoop

Major
Registered Member
Just as the current Ukraine war has shown, salami-slicing can also backfire because it will permanently rule out any chance of peaceful resolution. It will make inspire Taiwanese nationalism and invests more into the island's defence. China has really 1 opportunity to attack, so it should act decisively.

I don’t think the issue is inspiring nationalism as much as homogenizing the base. All the major pro Russians left after Maidan, so only nationalists were left.

You see the same thing happening in HK, the central government is likely happy to see BNOs go and make it hard for them to return.

Why you don’t want to take over Kinmen and other salami slice tactics is because the Taipei government now has to waste resources convincing them that PRC is not their best interest.
 

Jingle Bells

Junior Member
Registered Member
On a second thought, I don't think there this thread here is even necessary.

Mainland and Taiwan might look like they are bickering with each other all the time, but they actually have pretty decent working relationship, and very well integrated economy and a pretty good mechanism of de-escalation.

Just my personal opinion, no offense to anyone. Things discussed here are of high quality and value, nonetheless.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top