PLA Strategy in a Taiwan Contingency

LawLeadsToPeace

Senior Member
Staff member
Moderator - World Affairs
Registered Member
If the US was serious about competing, they would've folded the marine corps into the navy like normal countries do. The original justification for marines as an independent branch is centuries out of date.
To be fair, given the state of the US Navy, anybody would prefer to stay away from them. They are a complete disaster.
 

Phead128

Major
Staff member
Moderator - World Affairs
The US is behind all this redline testing. US has been pressuring Korea to clarify it's role in a Taiwan contingency, whether they allow USFK bases to operate offensive forces from US bases in Korea. Korea has been highly reluctant under new PM. US pressuring new Japan PM to be explicit in their role in Taiwan contingency, or else US question their alliance. RAND wargames have shown only scenario where US would lose a Taiwan contingency is if Japan refuses to provide basing, logistics, and support from their territory. The fact Japan PM refuses to retract, and US diplomats say they fully back Japan means it's a coordinated effort to test the redlines of China (not unlike the coordinated US-Dutch effort on Nexperia). It's consistent with the "gathering the allies" approach of Biden admin, to counter China.

Taiwan is a symptom of a broader issue, it's fundamentally the entire security alliance of East Asia, where US can compel or force it's allies to share logistics, bases, even troops for a Taiwan contingency, in an all-or-nothing effort to preserve US influence in the region. China should not see Taiwan AR in isolation, but the entire US alliance structure in East Asia will be drawn in.
 

votran

Junior Member
Registered Member
The US is behind all this redline testing. US has been pressuring Korea to clarify it's role in a Taiwan contingency, whether they allow USFK bases to operate offensive forces from US bases in Korea. Korea has been highly reluctant under new PM. US pressuring new Japan PM to be explicit in their role in Taiwan contingency, or else US question their alliance. RAND wargames have shown only scenario where US would lose a Taiwan contingency is if Japan refuses to provide basing, logistics, and support from their territory. The fact Japan PM refuses to retract, and US diplomats say they fully back Japan means it's a coordinated effort to test the redlines of China (not unlike the coordinated US-Dutch effort on Nexperia). It's consistent with the "gathering the allies" approach of Biden admin, to counter China.

Taiwan is a symptom of a broader issue, it's fundamentally the entire security alliance of East Asia, where US can compel or force it's allies to share logistics, bases, even troops for a Taiwan contingency, in an all-or-nothing effort to preserve US influence in the region. China should not see Taiwan AR in isolation, but the entire US alliance structure in East Asia will be drawn in.
US can do that and their allied have alot of interest to come and save taiwan because china allow taiwan become very worthy to save

allow the place you want to take become so worthy to save in the eyes of other = worst strategy ever

so ...how about china start "making taiwan less worthy , less valueable to save" now ? instead of sit there wall of texts comment and worry so much about ....what US and their allied gonna do ?

when taiwan not worth the saving effort anymore then all those problem from US , japan and their allied gang automatically go away
 
Last edited:

Nevermore

Junior Member
Registered Member
US can do that and their allied have alot of interest to come and save taiwan because china allow taiwan become very worthy to save

allow the place you want to take become so worthy to save in the eyes of other = worst strategy ever

so ...how about china start "making taiwan less worthy , less valueable to save" now ? instead of sit there wall of texts comment and worry so much about ....what US and their allied gonna do ?

when taiwan not worth the saving effort anymore then all those problem from US , japan and their allied gang automatically go away
In reality, as China's military and economic strength rises while America's military and economic strength declines, calls for abandoning Taiwan will gradually gain traction. Given the current trend, China need only wait.
 

Wrought

Senior Member
Registered Member
Increment 1 only had its first batch delivered to the US army in 12/23. Ally requests from Europe to procure this were rejected throughout 2024 and 2025 due to supply constraints. Australia only received and then tested its first batch on 7/25.

Increment 2's first live test was conducted on 7/24 and their hope is to double Increment 1's 500 km range to 1000 km. They're also hoping to have the Increment 2 complete delivery of the initial order to US Marines in 2028.

Increment 3 of the missile will include most of the same technology of Increments 1 and 2. Its main addition is to be the extension of the variety of armaments for the missile can carry, with it likely carrying more explosive munitions.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
However it is believed they will be made available following Increments one, two and four.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
So, no range improvements for Increment 3 and my guess is likely first delivery around the mid 2030s, give or take.

Increment Four is currently being competed for contracts by;
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, as well as a combined
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
-
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
team.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
. Not even any projections for delivery dates yet, but definitely long after 2028. Based on what I found, this one will be hoping to create a version of Increment 1 that can reach beyond 500km and a version of Increment 2 beyond 1000km.

For Increment 5: In December 2024, the director of the
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, Brig. Gen. Rory Crooks, separately explained that initial work on a fifth increment is underway, and a science and technology development initiative will kick-off in fiscal year 2026. The idea, he explained, is to design a missile that can be fired from an autonomous vehicle. "If you’re familiar with an [M270 Multiple Launch Rocket System] MLRS pod, it's about 13-feet long [4 meters]", the one-star general told the audience. "If you have something without a cab, that’s autonomous, you might be able to employ something longer than that."
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
So maybe they'll have autonomous missile trucks that can carry longer missiles.

Just looking at the pattern of rejecting European allies who want this and focusing on US and Australia only, want to take bets on how limited volumes will be and just as importantly, how high unit prices will be? Increment 1 is already $3.49 million a pop. My guess is $6.99 million for each unit of Increment 2, and lord knows how much for each unit of 3, 4, or 5.

They'll try to catch up to China in non-hypersonic missile technology but they'll never come close in production volume and cost. And let's not even mention how far behind they are in hypersonic missile technology, in large part due to lack of new cutting edge wind tunnel designs (theirs are old and technologically insufficient, and no new ones are in the pipeline to be built as of last time I checked). China's real challenge will be to rapidly improve missile defense technology and scale those up to mitigate the risk to it coming from PrSM. Although it's only used by the US army and Australian army right now, and eventually US marines in 2028 if they don't get delayed, I imagine it'll only be a matter of time before we see it in Japan, South Korea, Philippines, etc. Probably in the 2030s.

I have no idea why you would write so much while completely ignoring the important part of my comment. None of what you said is relevant to the actual point.

Increment 1, yes. Subsequent increments extend that considerably. But the point was that it's not long-range and they don't need to deploy their "longest range weapons" there. Distance works the same for everyone.
 

tokenanalyst

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
US can do that and their allied have alot of interest to come and save taiwan because china allow taiwan become very worthy to save

allow the place you want to take become so worthy to save in the eyes of other = worst strategy ever

so ...how about china start "making taiwan less worthy , less valueable to save" now ? instead of sit there wall of texts comment and worry so much about ....what US and their allied gonna do ?

when taiwan not worth the saving effort anymore then all those problem from US , japan and their allied gang automatically go away
Looks like that China is going to use everything it takes to take a target that is 130 km from its vast coast. Probably a full mobilization of the country resources. The issue comes the US and their vassals are willing to sacrifice for that island. Because a week or two show is not going to cut it. What is going to happen when TSMC fabs are destroyed? When most of talent migrated to the US? When the threat of nuclear war become apparent? my guess if that after that island get destroyed will lose its value and will be abandoned.

You see the Taiwanese could have reached a good deal with the Mainland before any contingency
, but no, stooges are going to try to force that island to get decimated from coast to coast and the lives of the people who live there become an inferno. For nothing.
 

CMP

Captain
Registered Member
I have no idea why you would write so much while completely ignoring the important part of my comment. None of what you said is relevant to the actual point.
Simple. PrSM is much too little in scale of production, much too expensive per unit, and much too late, both in delivery "deadlines" and in terms of being behind Chinese capabilities. The end result is it will not make any difference to the final political outcome.
 
Last edited:

Sinnavuuty

Captain
Registered Member
This further reinforced my long held conviction that the heavy lifting must first be done by missile, drone, air, and naval forces. Amphibious units must not make their final approach until a beachhead and its surrounding terrain have been cleared of all or most fortified positions. This is not world war 2. They should not be trying to pull D-Day landings while hoping that air dropped troops can flank enemy fortified positions from inland.
There will always be opposition on the beach. It is realistically unlikely to completely eliminate the threat of opposing forces on the beach. The very artillery barrage, air strikes, and drone attacks against the defenders on the beach could indicate prior preparation for the landing, giving the enemy the location—hence the emphasis on the amphibious demonstration—from where the amphibious attack will occur.

Your statement that "amphibious units must not make their final approach until a beachhead and its surrounding terrain have been cleared of all or most fortified positions" is the most realistic within the context of an amphibious operation, which in the exercise itself seems not to have been fully executed, as there was still strong enemy fire resistance against the landing units.
 

Sinnavuuty

Captain
Registered Member
In reality, as China's military and economic strength rises while America's military and economic strength declines, calls for abandoning Taiwan will gradually gain traction. Given the current trend, China need only wait.
I don't believe that, because the trend is heading towards the militarization of the Western Pacific, which makes things much more unbalanced, especially when you have an actor encouraging any and all efforts to contain China.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CMP

CMP

Captain
Registered Member
I don't believe that, because the trend is heading towards the militarization of the Western Pacific, which makes things much more unbalanced, especially when you have an actor encouraging any and all efforts to contain China.
I'm with you on this one. China cannot achieve its political objectives in East Asia without first completely dethroning the US.
 
Top