PLA Strategy in a Taiwan Contingency

Novice at best. Speaking from my own understanding and the information i got from battalion briefing. (my div specialise in amphibious assault though i retired many years ago.)

Firstly you are not going to cramp 250k troops in one single wave. They won't be able to advance inland quickly as all routes will be jam. It will only make them live artillery targets.

Secondly Taiwan got only a handful of suitable sites for beachhead. And limited space to accommodate 250k troops and equipments waiting to advance

Thirdly different waves can come in stages. Lst can make a round trip in a matter of 36 hours as the Straits is narrow.

Lastly WW2 setting is different from today's scenario. In those days you need to fight at close range. Thus more redundancy needed to conduct beach assault as high casualties were expected. In today's context, you can engage and destroy enemy's fortresses at great distance even before the first troop landed ashore. They should expect little or no resistance.

Bellum_Romanum said:

Any opinion on this former soldier thinks on supposed China's impending Taiwan reunification

Click to expand...

I was real worried about a war, but watching his video made me feel so much safer knowing that PLAN can't physically cross the Taiwan Strait. We need more clear-thinking people telling truths like this to help us Taiwanese folks sleep better at night

Seriously though, great production quality and very engaging as far as audience retention goes. But poor for actual information content

5unrise said:

I was real worried about a war, but watching his video made me feel so much safer knowing that PLAN can't physically cross the Taiwan Strait. We need more clear-thinking people telling truths like this to help us Taiwanese folks sleep better at night

Seriously though, great production quality and very engaging as far as audience retention goes. But poor for actual information content

Click to expand...

It’s the same old tropes from Western analysts on the PLA…
- PLA is corrupt, and any move to correct that corruption is political purging.
- PLA is too political due to the political officers system and the political indoctrination for recruits, and it undermines its combat effectiveness.
- PLA is made of conscripts (implying a lack of willingness and professionalism).
- PLA is has poor discipline and poor morale, due to all the above reasons.

In short, the video will make you lose brain cells. If the US is relying on these analysts for intel on the PLA, then good for China because they will greatly underestimate the PLA. This is literally Gordon Chang level of analysis…

Not to mention the video author made a pretty big factual mistake: the general he mentioned that wanted to change the commissar system but got arrested is from KMT, not CCP/PLA... Pretty ironic if you ask me lol

I decided to bring everyone some valuable content today.
First of all, it should be pointed out that the opinions of Chinese military enthusiasts are not completely consistent, which depends on their respective levels of knowledge and political tendencies.
These differences make them often despise each other very much.

Today, I will introduce the Colonel Sniper（上校狙击手）'s vision for Taiwan's future military operations.
This involves these closely related answers,limited by time and energy, I can only make simple descriptions. Interested and capable friends can read and translate by themselves.


First of all, the activities of the Chinese Navy and the Chinese air force around Japan cannot simply be regarded as political deterrence.In particular, the area where the Liaoning stopped in May will be the main position to block the U.S. Navy's intervention in the future.

At present, the Americans have proposed a plan, that is, to launch a surprise attack on the landing fleet of the PLA.
In order to prevent the comprehensive military intervention of the US Army, the aircraft carrier battle group will be deployed in this area.When necessary, the fleet will sacrifice itself in exchange for the main force landing undisturbed.

Meanwhile, another aircraft carrier battle group will be deployed to the east of the Philippines,screen the eastern entrance of the South China Sea channel, extend the defense range in the eastern part of the Yangtze River Delta, and cooperate with the air force aviation force to carry out a joint blockade campaign against Taiwan Island.

Under the cover of air power, the East China Sea fleet will divide the main force into two groups and join the two aircraft carrier battle groups.


The trajectory of these aircraft will be the main attack route of the air force during the war.

In this process, the nuclear submarine force will cross the Strait under the cover of the surface ship group, enter the far sea area where the SOSUS array is unable to listen, and break through the surface ship and submarine battle group of the US Navy in the vast triangular sea area composed of Guam, Ryukyu Islands and Taiwan Island. SSK forces and frigate detachments will be on duty in key waterways near the first island chain, forming a second maritime campaign echelon. This echelon will also maintain combat contact with the islands in the first island chain that have military bases or facilitate the establishment of temporary military bases, and annihilate the U.S. Marine Corps or Japanese Self Defense force mobile forces that try to reinforce.

The Rocket Force's long-range anti-ship forces and the Navy's shore-based anti-ship missile forces will work with naval and air force aviation to eliminate U.S. and Japanese military forces that dare to "fire the first shot" and ensure that U.S. and Japanese defenses are paralyzed before or when the PLA's two distant sea battle corps crosses key waterways.

Of course, the cost is there. Facing the superior navy of the United States, China's navy will be severely damaged.But at the same time, we should also realize that any warship, even an aircraft carrier, is a consumable in war.
The author dismisses those commentators who lack professional knowledge and those who are afraid of the loss of ships.Fearing losses and giving up the possibility of success, such a navy will be a worthless "new hochseeflotte".

This paragraph is difficult for me to translate.
He arrogantly believes that 90% of the commentators lack the necessary expertise.
None of them discussed the possible effects of decentralized shipping, camouflage shipping, feint shipping and electronic interference when CSG and SAG of the PLA pierced the waterway of the first island chain, and were unaware of the cooperation between the aviation fleet and the surface ship battle group.
No one discussed the mobility and support relationship between the two battle echelons of the Navy, no one discussed the scheduled operational sea area of the air force's long-range aviation force, the JSDF had observed the specific location of the PLA CSG, no one discussed how the SSK detachment of each fleet left the port under the protection of the surface ship and boat battle group and formed a submarine patrol line in key waterways.
He believes that those opponents simply do not consider the specific stability of the PLA's 2 battle groups in the distant seas to operate within the cover of the rocket force after implementing EMCON and covert movement in the complex electromagnetic environment in wartime, and these people simply repeat the invincible power of LRASM.

5unrise said:

I was real worried about a war, but watching his video made me feel so much safer knowing that PLAN can't physically cross the Taiwan Strait. We need more clear-thinking people telling truths like this to help us Taiwanese folks sleep better at night

Seriously though, great production quality and very engaging as far as audience retention goes. But poor for actual information content

Click to expand...

I do not like those who stare at the big eyes, exaggerated expression of the network anchor.
And only stupid people would be obsessed with this kind of network show.
“in the 4km range even a ww2 field gun could sink a landing craft”（viewer comments)，I think my IQ has been seriously insulted.
If he is just an ordinary infantry of the army, don't pretend to be "professional" on the topics of tactical missiles, air force and navy.

TheFoozyOne said:

It’s the same old tropes from Western analysts on the PLA…
- PLA is corrupt, and any move to correct that corruption is political purging.
- PLA is too political due to the political officers system and the political indoctrination for recruits, and it undermines its combat effectiveness.
- PLA is made of conscripts (implying a lack of willingness and professionalism).
- PLA is has poor discipline and poor morale, due to all the above reasons.

In short, the video will make you lose brain cells. If the US is relying on these analysts for intel on the PLA, then good for China because they will greatly underestimate the PLA. This is literally Gordon Chang level of analysis…

Not to mention the video author made a pretty big factual mistake: the general he mentioned that wanted to change the commissar system but got arrested is from KMT, not CCP/PLA... Pretty ironic if you ask me lol

Click to expand...

I mean modern conscript armies aren't bad. Like Israel armed forces or South Korean military. Through China runs an all volunteer system since there's simply no way to fund conscription for the whole country, if China raised the budget enough to allow conscription, the PLA would likely become even stronger.

It's funny how westerners often project their own inadequacies. The PLA ain't the one pissing away billions in budget for minimal gains. US army has shown several times that once they get thrown in difficult situations and when they're drafting people, professionalism and morale takes a nose dive into abysmal levels. Just look at all the officer self killings in Vietnam.

It is the US military that has become too "political" or rather it has become too nationalist. How many events of PLA soldiers raping and murdering locals have happened? Or for that matter, Russian military forces despite being in a full scale industrial war? Because of the impossibility to draft due to popular resistance, US army is forced to take many questionable indivduals into their ranks. Because of the cult of nationalism, US cannot allow proper prosecution of unprofessional soldiers.

This cult of nationalism also forbids the mention of possible defeat, meaning that the military does not constantly seek innovation in order to overcome new enemies, because even asserting the possibility that enemies can successfully win or are ahead in capabilities will break the fragile hearts of many US officials, making the person who suggested reforms into a pariah. Of course, occasionally a reform will still work, but the US ain't getting anywhere near the bang for their buck relative to their spending due to this internal rot.

Mao was not speaking from his ass when he said the US was a paper tiger. He had a very good understanding of every major country and how they worked internally. For the same reasons, he also predicted the collapse the Soviets.

Even so, the US military is obviously still very large, so it will take a military buildup and clever use of new tech in order to deal that one heavy blow needed to make the rotten shack collapse.

Biscuits said:

I mean modern conscript armies aren't bad. Like Israel armed forces or South Korean military. Through China runs an all volunteer system since there's simply no way to fund conscription for the whole country, if China raised the budget enough to allow conscription, the PLA would likely become even stronger.

Click to expand...

It's not just the money. If China were to conscript all males for 2 years, that would result in a standing force of 14 million conscripts.

That would be far too many soldiers.

Plus a truly conscript Chinese Army would be stronger from a defensive standpoint But also constrain the types of operations that are possible. But realistically, China doesn't need this type of army. A volunteer expeditionary Army would be more useful.

Biscuits said:

.

Even so, the US military is obviously still very large, so it will take a military buildup and clever use of new tech in order to deal that one heavy blow needed to make the rotten shack collapse.

Click to expand...

Realistically, it's not a rotten shack that will collapse after a single blow

AndrewS said:

It's not just the money. If China were to conscript all males for 2 years, that would result in a standing force of 14 million conscripts.

That would be far too many soldiers.

Plus a truly conscript Chinese Army would be stronger from a defensive standpoint But also constrain the types of operations that are possible. But realistically, China doesn't need this type of army. A volunteer expeditionary Army would be more useful.





Realistically, it's not a rotten shack that will collapse after a single blow

Click to expand...

The very mention of possible defeat is taboo much like Nazi Germany. The Nazis never thought they could lose so when they started losing they had no real strategy other than hold land, were easily encircled by the Red Army, and though they still inflicted casualties they had essentially strategic paralysis with no war goals reduction or loss backstopping at an internal defensive line. Instead they just everything including Germany itself.

TheFoozyOne said:

In short, the video will make you lose brain cells. If the US is relying on these analysts for intel on the PLA, then good for China because they will greatly underestimate the PLA. This is literally Gordon Chang level of analysis…

Click to expand...

Let me say a few more words.I think this video is not as valuable as the comic I shared.
The content of the military part is only for the first five minutes, and then for the next two-thirds of the time, you must endure the nonsense of this second-rate military science popularization program.Wearing a tactical vest and holding a rifle won't make him look very professional.
The host of the program is just propagandizing a kind of political correctness,what he said was just an excerpt of some cliches.
I don't expect such a network anchor who will produce a new program in a few days to spend a lot of time studying knowledges.

Many western researchers are still examining China roughly based on the experience of the Soviet Union.What's more, they decided that "the American army is the best" from the beginning.
I'm disappointed that even the program "the armchair historian", which I like very much, gives a very bad description of the Chinese revolution,no one is willing to seriously read China's official propaganda materials (even if it is deemed "untrustworthy", it is impossible to completely deviate from history).Considering that Americans once claimed that Americans liberated Auschwitz concentration camp, I can't imagine how much Chinese history will be "modified" by Western propaganda machines.

I don't understand why they are so contemptuous of "political education",at least Americans are not qualified to despise the discipline level of PLA.
In that era when soldiers could rob and escape at will, strict political education was necessary. At that time, Chinese officers were all wealthy property owners. They regarded poor workers as Dalits and soldiers as servants. Looting, massacre, corporal punishment and salary deduction were common.In this environment, the relationship between soldiers and officers is very tense, and no one is willing to devote their lives.Moreover, the military officers, including Chiang Kai Shek, used force many times to destroy the civilian government, making the army the most politically ambitious organization.
Political education is the most important measure for China to establish a modern army. This method has curbed the uncontrolled violent tendency of the army, improved the relationship between officers and soldiers, and shattered the crisis of military coup. In the most difficult period, this also ensured that the army did not waver out of control.
The most important thing is that the discipline of the army has been strengthened, and it has won the maximum trust and support of the people.And American soldiers show the arrogance of conquerors in any country.

Many people, including Taiwanese, have been repeating the lie that "PLA's command is very rigid".Mao Zedong is not Stalin,for a long time, the PLA was limited by poor communication capability, high casualty rate of officers and the power contrast between strong and weak, which placed great emphasis on the "initiative" of officers and soldiers, similar to the "Mission Command" of the German army.
Those claims that PLA was deeply influenced by the Soviet Union are nonsense. Those who say such words have never studied the development history of PLA at all.

In fact, cleaning up military corruption can be regarded as the final cleanup of the consequences of the reduction of military spending in the 1980s.I don't deny that this has a political purpose, but it's not a bad thing, and there is no mass execution of officers like the Soviets.As for other allegations, I just want to ask Americans why the STEED military cart is worth $100000 each.

（this kind of electric cart is very common in China，the PLA is also using）
The U.S. military occupation and equipment research and development are the hardest hit areas of corruption, but it seems that it is no longer corrupt to make all this public.
In the middle of writing, I think all this is meaningless, because the Internet is full of baseless speculation about PLA.But I can't bear to delete so much content.So I had to finish it.

This video has nothing to do with our topic other than the title, all it does is blather on about the PLA. the Normandy landings are almost 80 years old and outdated, just like using Napoleonic tactics in WWI.

tch1972 said:

Firstly you are not going to cramp 250k troops in one single wave. They won't be able to advance inland quickly as all routes will be jam. It will only make them live artillery targets.

Click to expand...

The distance between the Mainland Chinese coast and the Taiwanese coast is approximately 200km. The longest-ranged artillery in the ROCA's arsenal is their 45km Thunderbolt-2000 MLRS, or the 40km Excalibur shells fired from M109s. There were reports of the Thunderbolt-2000 MLRS receiving rockets that can reach 70-300km, but it still remains unconfirmed to this day. Even if that was available to the Taiwanese, the PLA already has 370mm and 750mm rockets with ranges of 220km-360km to reach quite some distance into Taiwan. These would no doubt be available in far greater numbers than any Taiwanese equivalent. If the Taiwanese decide to fire their longest-ranged rockets into the mainland, they should expect one hell of a counter-bombardment coming from the opposite direction.

Does Taiwan have missiles that can hit the Chinese mainland? Yes, and China has plenty more that can hit Taiwan back. Could the Taiwanese airforce conduct airstrikes on the Chinese mainland? Yes, and China is more than capable of shooting down these jets, and doing their own counter-airstrikes.

tch1972 said:

Secondly Taiwan got only a handful of suitable sites for beachhead. And limited space to accommodate 250k troops and equipments waiting to advance

Click to expand...

PLA troops is more than expected to conduct the amphibious landing when it is truly safe to do so. Before all that happens, Taiwan will be subjected to all kinds of heavy bombardment to neutralize their air power, naval power, and defensive positions overlooking the beach landing areas.

Drones should be expected to be heavily employed for round-the-clock ISR and quick strikes on remaining high-threat targets.

When drones have secured the area. Paratroopers and special forces should be sent in to perform probing, sabotage, and open beach landing zones. By the time the first PLAN Marines make their landing on the beaches, these areas should be pretty much secured.

tch1972 said:

Thirdly different waves can come in stages. Lst can make a round trip in a matter of 36 hours as the Straits is narrow.

Click to expand...

When the Taiwan Straits and beachheads have been secured by the PLAN, they can do all the round trips that they need.

tch1972 said:

Lastly WW2 setting is different from today's scenario. In those days you need to fight at close range. Thus more redundancy needed to conduct beach assault as high casualties were expected. In today's context, you can engage and destroy enemy's fortresses at great distance even before the first troop landed ashore. They should expect little or no resistance.

Click to expand...

This I agree. The PLAN Marines landing on Taiwanese beaches would look more like the US Marines landing on Iraqi beaches in Desert Storm, not like the US landing on Omaha beach in WW2. By the time they make the amphibious assault, the defenders would have been effectively silenced.