PLA Strategy in a Taiwan Contingency

Biscuits said:

I'm not as sure of that. The nationalists might get angry, but the likes of Rubio or that Indian dude aren't gonna grab a gun and take part in the million American swim to Taiwan. It's gonna be US middle/lower class that gets drafted.

We can't discount the possibility of America fully rallying around the flag, but as I see it, its much more likely than a failed first wave would lead to hopelessness, a sense that Americans shouldn't have been sent to die in an impossible battle and a political sentiment to retreat from China before the loss of face becomes impossible to cover up.

Tbh even if US totally mobilizes as a response to failing the initial steps of an invasion, that would only put them at parity with China in terms of mobilization status. China by default would start out with a very strong rallying effect, given that it's the first time since ww2 that the homeland is directly being attacked. It is a totally unprecedented event ever since the war against the Axis.

Click to expand...

The bolded part is the only important one for the purposes of both PLA strategic planning and procurement demands, and also for the purposes of keeping ourselves have an open mind as to how high the ladder of escalation may go.

coolgod said:

In your opinion, are those political and natsec in control of the US military now or in the foreseeable future? Milley seemed adamant going to war with China would be the wrong choice.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Top US General Doubts Xi Planning to Take Taiwan by Force​

• Charles Q. Brown Jr. says he’s written to Chinese counterpart
• Xi, Biden expected to meet next week for first time in a year

Even though General Brown has made some fanatic comments about China previously, somehow I don't see him as the person to give the go ahead to go on a total war with China.

Click to expand...

It's less about whether those individuals are in "control" of the US military but rather the sentiment I described is present among sufficient elements of the US natsec community that in times of conflict can be significantly signal boosted and develop a life of its own.

My underlying point is that it is foolish to interpret the manner in which a military confrontation would go between the US and China will just result in the US losing resolve and will to fight if the PLA is able to carry out an initial couple of successful regional strikes against US bases and ships in the region.

Given how the young generations in Taiwan are brain washed through education and media (90% controlled by the DPP) to think they are not Chinese, I do not see a prospect for fully peaceful reunification. I have experienced the change first hand over several years on bussiness trips there (youg people's sentiment that received education before an after text book revision). I certainly hope they will be pressured to peaceful reunit once China's national strength becomes overwhelming. China is making a lot moves in that direction.

While it is true for planning purposes you cannot preclude escaltion to nuclear, but what is it in for the US? I have heard couple Generals from Taiwan that had dealings with the US military on this very subject stated that they were told "you do not try to save a dead horse". If China is able inflict heavy losses on the US side, it would mean China's weapons system are effective and that being the case what is the US going to fight China with? Manufacturing situation is like World War II, except China now occupies the industrial space US had at the time. Even today, the US is hard pressed to manufacture ships. I see the low nuclear bomb count on the China side may be of some incentive for the US go nuclear, but nobody really knows how many bombs China has and even if it is around the 300 low number, the situation is changing.

hkky said:

While it is true for planning purposes you cannot preclude escaltion to nuclear, but what is it in for the US?

Click to expand...

In the process of being a shit disturber in the Taiwan Strait, the US inadequately staked its hegemonic reputation on maintaining the status quo. Similar to the Ukrainian war, through its rhetorics and supports to Ukraine, US “owns” the Ukrainian and Taiwan problems now. Letting them go will damage the US’ hegemony.

vincent said:

In the process of being a shit disturber in the Taiwan Strait, the US inadequately staked its hegemonic reputation on maintaining the status quo. Similar to the Ukrainian war, through its rhetorics and supports to Ukraine, US “owns” the Ukrainian and Taiwan problems now. Letting them go will damage the US’ hegemony.

Click to expand...

To put it more bluntly, America's mouth wrote cheques its ass can't cash.

vincent said:

In the process of being a shit disturber in the Taiwan Strait, the US inadequately staked its hegemonic reputation on maintaining the status quo. Similar to the Ukrainian war, through its rhetorics and supports to Ukraine, US “owns” the Ukrainian and Taiwan problems now. Letting them go will damage the US’ hegemony.

Click to expand...

The US credibility in this respect is already put to the test and is erroding. The US put Diaoyudao in their mutual defense treaty with Japan and the island is now controlled by China. I think Japan recently tried to challenged that and did not get anywhere. Similar promise is also made to the Philippines in South China sea and yet we do not see the US directly get involved when Philippines's navy ships were blocked by Chinese navy ships in their effort to supply their grounded transport in Thomas Shaol. Outside of Philippines, I think all the other ASEAN members have deicded to stay neutral or sided with China.

hkky said:

The US credibility in this respect is already put to the test and is erroding. The US put Diaoyudao in their mutual defense treaty with Japan and the island is now controlled by China. I think Japan recently tried to challenged that and did not get anywhere. Similar promise is also made to the Philippines in South China sea and yet we do not see the US directly get involved when Philippines's navy ships were blocked by Chinese navy ships in their effort to supply their grounded transport in Thomas Shaol. Outside of Philippines, I think all the other ASEAN members have deicded to stay neutral or sided with China.

Click to expand...

Btw you said diaoyudao is now controlled by China, any evidence of this? Thanks!

China Maritime Report No. 32: The PCH191 Modular Long-Range
Rocket Launcher: Reshaping the PLA Army's Role in a Cross-StraitRocket Launcher: Reshaping the PLA Army's Role in a Cross-Strait
CampaignCampaign

Fresh report of 11-3-2023.

CMP said:

My baseline assumption is that the U.S. is ready and willing to go full nuclear holocaust even at cost of M.A.D. over Taiwan, and I would recommend C.M.C. plan precisely for that contingency. Build for nuclear parity and launch-on-warning posture.

Click to expand...

I have a different view of nukes. As Mao once said, Nukes are paper tigers. They are useful for deterring the other party from using it against you, but not useful offensively. Cause are you really willing to commit suicide? That's what nukes are. They are a suicide bomb. You attack another superpower with nukes, then you are guaranteed to get destroyed as well.

Ukraine war has shown how useless Nuclear red lines are. Even if China bombs continental US with conventional weapons, US will not go nuclear. Because you don't commit suicide no matter how offended you are. Yes, if China was literally invading and on the doorstep of washington DC, then it might be at play. But other than that, there is no way nukes will be used against another MAD capable country.

Now you can use nukes against weaker countries, and if push comes to shove, even weaker countries with a few nukes. Maybe you can be so offended nationally, and the public so riled up that they are willing to sacrifice one or two cities if it means completely destroying another small country like North Korea for example.

But sacrificing your entire country just cause you got offended is simply suicide. No national leader will ever agree to that.

SinoaTerrenum said:

Btw you said diaoyudao is now controlled by China, any evidence of this? Thanks!

Click to expand...

China now station several coast guard ships around the area all the time and Japanese coast guard is kept out. Used to the reverse not many years ago when fisherman from Taiwan were regulary chased away (they did not do the same thing to fishing boats from China). If you watch news you'd see these events. A quick search showed up a Reuters article,

.

"China said it drove away several Japanese vessels that "illegally" entered territorial waters on Monday around the islands, which it calls Diaoyu, and it urged Japan to stop all "illegal activities" in the area.

Japan controls the islands and calls them the Senkaku."

Typical Western media always put a spin from their perspective in the next sentence that contradict themselves. If China droves Japanes ships aways, how can Japan be controling it? After World War II, the US controlled the islands for a while and later handed administrative control to Japan without Chinese consent.

chinois49 said:

China Maritime Report No. 32: The PCH191 Modular Long-Range
Rocket Launcher: Reshaping the PLA Army's Role in a Cross-StraitRocket Launcher: Reshaping the PLA Army's Role in a Cross-Strait
CampaignCampaign

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Fresh report of 11-3-2023.

Click to expand...

this report came out roughly the same time as the reveal of DF480 missile, very timely. PLA's surface to surface firepower on Taiwan could easily double if we only count the number of projectiles.