Taiwan - China Brewing Conflict : Discussions

[Parthu]

Technology's changed a lot. Yasen-M's silent mode takes it up to 28 knots for example. New SSNs are capable of littoral operations.

That helps to hide from passive sonar in the deep seas. Doesn't do anything against active sonar in littorals.

That's why all new SSNs either have VLS out of the box or at least some provision for torpedo tube-launched long range missiles. So that they don't have to get into the littorals to perform anti-ship and/or land-attack.

Why?

They need something akin to the outer hull of Type-212CD to reliably defeat active sonar in littorals.

An anti-infantry bombing campaign is very different from an anti-shipping or anti-infra campaign. For the former, you need a lot of bombs. Not as much for the latter 'cause of the advanced weapons involved. That's why ship-killers carry just 8-16 AShMs.

USAF's 100+ B-21s and 200 NGADs are also timed to deal with a Chinese force that's far bigger and more advanced than today. And as I said, they don't need to blow up China, just 400 PLAN ships and a handful of ports and shipyards. The US have excess capability for that.

If you don't blow up China & the means of production, then everything will be rebuilt. On a war footing this time. In the meantime, production of drones & missiles (which have more than enough reach to attack anywhere in the first island chain) which can be more rapidly produced at pretty much any factory will continue to place Taiwan & first chain bases under constant attack.

You can't seriously expect the Chinese to fold & submit after just the initial round of attacks? They aren't Iraq.

The West also has all that.

Among the top 10 in the world today, only 3 are Chinese.

2023 Top10 Fastener Manufacturer in The World

2023 Top10 Fastener Manufacturer in The World, Panda Fastener

www.pandafastener.com

That's ownership. That's like saying Apple is an American company. Sure it is, but everyone knows most iPhones are made in China. And even the production in other countries can't really exist without sourcing a lot of things from China lower down the supply chain.

And even a lot of the production that does happen in the West relies on cheap Chinese steel imports as the raw material. Countries like UK are dismantling traditional steelmaking infrastructure to accommodate green goals, which will leave them able to produce only the highest-grade steels for specialist applications to secure enough margin. Production of low-end steel is no longer viable in the West.

Yes, they do. Who else is gonna provide area defense?

They don't need area defence, they just need point defence.

Taiwan is only <200 km away from the mainland. Coastal AD like HQ-9B can easily cover landing zones if needed. Once landed, the troops will have their own mobile & static AD. By that point most first-island chain Allied facilities would have been degraded significantly & a lot of carriers would be sunk, so US won't have sufficient assets to sustain a bombing campaign flying out of the second chain.

That's why they want B-21 & NGAD.

Not true. Although China's industry is big, most of it's useless for the purpose of war. US military production is very impressive, and can be scaled up in many areas. For example, they can manufacture 400 F-35s a year if necessary. At the current rate of production, China needs 20 years to catch up to the USN. If the USN increase their production by just 20-30%, the Chinese will likely never catch up. And if the USN decides to push retirement dates of ships and subs further, the distance will get much worse for the Chinese.

Chinese produce way more ships than the US does - PLAN commissions around 7-10 destroyers every year, USN commissions 1 or 2.

Talking of the kind they need to take Taiwan? Even more.

You're just looking at the existing commitments of industry. If a war between US & China actually breaks out, every single factory in China will be producing war material. That would eclipse the production capacity of the US several times over.

Without Taiwan, the seas will be highly contested because the PLAN can move ships from other 2 fleets to the north. Right now, Taiwan divides PLAN into two. With Taiwan gone, the entire area will belong to PLAN.

No because then then PLAN will have to engage the US & Allies in environments that would be totally advantageous to the Allies. It won't be a problem that China can solve by just throwing more infantry, landing craft or missiles at it.

Strategically, it makes perfect sense to simply use Taiwan as a bulwark to be used for dulling the Chinese blade, but ultimately something to be sacrificed. Kinda like the Baltics are for Russia. Nobody expects them to hold out forever, but being forward positioned allows them to wear down the Russians and give you time to prepare the more defensible Poland & Romania. That's Japan & SoKo in the INDOPAC context.

But trying to make your last stand on Taiwan itself is not doable - not yet. US isn't where it needs to be in order to do that.

You are arguing my point. That's what I'm saying too. Which makes a potential war with Taiwan a big one which will force the US to enter, and that will force Trump to fight.

Hell, the US (even Japan) will start sending troops over to Taiwan the minute China starts preparing for an invasion. If US presence in Taiwan doesn't serve as a deterrence, they are in for a fight.

The US will be involved - as a supplier of material to help Taiwan fight. Not as a party to the conflict directly. Very much like in Ukraine.

Yes. My point exactly. So this is why the Trump era is the best time for the Chinese to attack,

That's what I've been saying since the beginning:

Taiwan - China Brewing Conflict : Discussions

Pretty big development. https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2025/01/china-suddenly-building-fleet-of-special-barges-suitable-for-taiwan-landings/ This new ship design is meant to navigate around the lack of landing beaches in Taiwan. Difficult to invade during Trump's era though. The last...

www.strategicfront.org

But you seemed to have a different opinion, saying that Chinese won't risk invading Taiwan because there's an unpredictable POTUS in office.

and the best time for Trump to pretend to be the next Roosevelt.

You seem to have the opinion that Trump is just a stupid, unthinking glory hound. He's not.

He would rather take the PR loss & make up for it by saying they only won because we didn't intervene, rather than get America into a war it's not guaranteed to win. Because regardless of how devastating the initial American attacks, Chinese will rebuild & continue the invasion until Taiwan is theirs. The US military isn't yet equipped with the kind of assets it needs to dislodge embanked PLA from Taiwan. They will be in a decade, but not now. The US economy isn't yet equipped to maintain their current standard of living without China. They might be in a decade, but not now.

Er... No. That's not how this works. This is an air and navy-led war for a short period of time. You are confused between what Taiwan War will be and a WW2.

And the US has a lot of war production.

If you think a US-China war over Taiwan will be over in a short while, you're mistaken.

Either it won't happen at all (even in the event of invasion, US would only supply Taiwan but won't directly engage China) or if it does happen, it'll be a multi-year, possibly multi-term conflict (Trump's successor would finish it) and the world that emerges out the other side would be entirely different.

 

[randomradio]

That helps to hide from passive sonar in the deep seas. Doesn't do anything against active sonar in littorals.

That's why all new SSNs either have VLS out of the box or at least some provision for torpedo tube-launched long range missiles. So that they don't have to get into the littorals to perform anti-ship and/or land-attack.

SSNs have become quiet enough to operate anywhere. VLS is for a totally different requirement.

They need something akin to the outer hull of Type-212CD to reliably defeat active sonar in littorals.

Nah. That's just a next gen design, nobody in East Asia has it.

If you don't blow up China & the means of production, then everything will be rebuilt. On a war footing this time. In the meantime, production of drones & missiles (which have more than enough reach to attack anywhere in the first island chain) which can be more rapidly produced at pretty much any factory will continue to place Taiwan & first chain bases under constant attack.

You can't seriously expect the Chinese to fold & submit after just the initial round of attacks? They aren't Iraq.

With the PLAN gone, even if they rebuild at current rates, ie, 10+ large ships a year, they will still take 20+ years.

That's ownership. That's like saying Apple is an American company. Sure it is, but everyone knows most iPhones are made in China. And even the production in other countries can't really exist without sourcing a lot of things from China lower down the supply chain.

And even a lot of the production that does happen in the West relies on cheap Chinese steel imports as the raw material. Countries like UK are dismantling traditional steelmaking infrastructure to accommodate green goals, which will leave them able to produce only the highest-grade steels for specialist applications to secure enough margin. Production of low-end steel is no longer viable in the West.

No, we are talking about local manufacturing.

The State of the U.S. Fastener Industry in 2021 - International Fastener Show

The U.S. fastener industry is a major contributor to the overall manufacturing sector and underpins most of the other hardware and production industries.

fastenershows.com

The U.S. fastener industry is a major contributor to the overall manufacturing sector and underpins most of the other hardware and production industries.

India's fastener industry is also domestic. It's one of those evergreen industries where govt makes pro-local policies.

They don't need area defence, they just need point defence.

Taiwan is only <200 km away from the mainland. Coastal AD like HQ-9B can easily cover landing zones if needed. Once landed, the troops will have their own mobile & static AD. By that point most first-island chain Allied facilities would have been degraded significantly & a lot of carriers would be sunk, so US won't have sufficient assets to sustain a bombing campaign flying out of the second chain.

That's why they want B-21 & NGAD.

Area defense is just 20-30 km. Point defense is less than 10 km. HQ-9B is useless against modern sea skimmers.

Chinese produce way more ships than the US does - PLAN commissions around 7-10 destroyers every year, USN commissions 1 or 2.

Talking of the kind they need to take Taiwan? Even more.

If you count the Constellation class, the US is building more destroyer types than that. Then there are American allies too. Japan's building 2 per year of the Taiwan types too. So the overall construction speed of both sides is pretty high, with the USN with a massive initial lead.

You're just looking at the existing commitments of industry. If a war between US & China actually breaks out, every single factory in China will be producing war material. That would eclipse the production capacity of the US several times over.

So what? You are assuming a war over Taiwan will last years, but it will barely last a month at sea.

The main argument is PLAN won't survive. So who cares about how many artillery shells they can produce every month. What's more important is naval production and all those ports required for exports that will all be shut down for years. Without exports, the entire Chinese economy will collapse on its own. That's why I said it will take them 40-50 years to get back on their feet.

No because then then PLAN will have to engage the US & Allies in environments that would be totally advantageous to the Allies. It won't be a problem that China can solve by just throwing more infantry, landing craft or missiles at it.

Strategically, it makes perfect sense to simply use Taiwan as a bulwark to be used for dulling the Chinese blade, but ultimately something to be sacrificed. Kinda like the Baltics are for Russia. Nobody expects them to hold out forever, but being forward positioned allows them to wear down the Russians and give you time to prepare the more defensible Poland & Romania. That's Japan & SoKo in the INDOPAC context.

But trying to make your last stand on Taiwan itself is not doable - not yet. US isn't where it needs to be in order to do that.

There is absolutely no advantage to be had in WESTPAC once Taiwan falls. The US has no mass presence in WESTPAC. If Taiwan falls, the USN falls back to Hawaii, part of the Third Island Chain. The Pacific will divide into two zones and Japan and SoKo will end up in the Chinese zone. PLAN will dominate the seas all the way up to beyond Guam.

The US will be involved - as a supplier of material to help Taiwan fight. Not as a party to the conflict directly. Very much like in Ukraine.

The Democrats assured military intervention and so have the Republicans. The only question is what Trump will do since he's a maverick.

That's what I've been saying since the beginning:

Taiwan - China Brewing Conflict : Discussions

Pretty big development. https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2025/01/china-suddenly-building-fleet-of-special-barges-suitable-for-taiwan-landings/ This new ship design is meant to navigate around the lack of landing beaches in Taiwan. Difficult to invade during Trump's era though. The last...

www.strategicfront.org

But you seemed to have a different opinion, saying that Chinese won't risk invading Taiwan because there's an unpredictable POTUS in office.

Incorrect. My position is this is the best time for China to invade and if they are willing to sacrifice much, they will invade. If they don't within the next 5 years or so, the next opportunity is decades later. But Trump is such a big wild card that it's impossible to tell if he will just stick with defending Taiwan militarily at the minimum or make things way worse. So while you are saying Trump will not intervene, I'm saying Trump will not only intervene, he can even escalate to the point the Chinese never calculated, which is why they are unlikely to invade during his presidency.

You seem to have the opinion that Trump is just a stupid, unthinking glory hound. He's not.

He would rather take the PR loss & make up for it by saying they only won because we didn't intervene, rather than get America into a war it's not guaranteed to win. Because regardless of how devastating the initial American attacks, Chinese will rebuild & continue the invasion until Taiwan is theirs. The US military isn't yet equipped with the kind of assets it needs to dislodge embanked PLA from Taiwan. They will be in a decade, but not now. The US economy isn't yet equipped to maintain their current standard of living without China. They might be in a decade, but not now.

You haven't understood the scale of the generational loss the US will face if Taiwan is lost to China. Half the Pacific gone, alliances lost, rise of a new superpower, Cold War 2.0, two big political blocs and so on.

If you think a US-China war over Taiwan will be over in a short while, you're mistaken.

It will. There are limits to what they can do around an island. They can always fight a second time or a third time, but all these wars will be very quick because the endgame is lodgment. For example, Hitler lost the Western Front by the end of July 1944 due to the success of the Normandy invasion. With a Chinese lodgment established in Taiwan, most of the war will just be about retreating to Japan. Taiwan can't absorb years of fighting. At that point, the best the US can hope is the Chinese victory was Pyrrhic.

 

[Parthu]

SSNs have become quiet enough to operate anywhere. VLS is for a totally different requirement.

Their noise level is irrelevant. We're talking about defeating active sonar, not passive.

In the deep seas, you only really have to worry about passive sonar because nobody is foolish enough to go active constantly. In the littorals, you're surrounded by active emitters.

You can't risk a billion-dollar asset by sending it into the littorals against a near-peer opponent. The risk isn't worth it - it's much cheaper (and safer) to sink enemy ships with long-range missiles (supported by localized ISR where needed) instead.

Nah. That's just a next gen design, nobody in East Asia has it.

Which is why no sub fleet in East Asia is equipped to stop PLAN from taking Taiwan. What they can do, is to stop PLAN from operating freely outside the first island chain.

With the PLAN gone, even if they rebuild at current rates, ie, 10+ large ships a year, they will still take 20+ years.

The large ships are to deter US/Allies from intervening. They don't need the large ships to take Taiwan, only small ones, in large numbers.

No, we are talking about local manufacturing.

The State of the U.S. Fastener Industry in 2021 - International Fastener Show

The U.S. fastener industry is a major contributor to the overall manufacturing sector and underpins most of the other hardware and production industries.

fastenershows.com

The U.S. fastener industry is a major contributor to the overall manufacturing sector and underpins most of the other hardware and production industries.

India's fastener industry is also domestic. It's one of those evergreen industries where govt makes pro-local policies.

The only protected jobs & facilities are those exclusively catering to the existing defence/strategic industry. Remember that ruckus a while back when it was found that F-35 has Chinese-sourced components? That's the type of thing this local industry is meant to prevent. Not to substitute Chinese imports for the whole economy.

But if you're talking about a long war where the whole country pivots to a war economy, that's what you need to do. Scaling to that level requires a lot of time, at least a few years. But China would have that scale from the get-go.

Yes, US might eventually be able to ramp up to levels that match Chinese production, but by then Taiwan would be long gone and it won't be possible to dislodge dug-in PLA from the island.

Area defense is just 20-30 km. Point defense is less than 10 km. HQ-9B is useless against modern sea skimmers.

Area defence is much more than that. You can take advantage of offboard targeting with area defence.

Point defence is basically your horizon. That's all that's needed to defeat subsonic sea skimmers.

If you count the Constellation class, the US is building more destroyer types than that. Then there are American allies too. Japan's building 2 per year of the Taiwan types too. So the overall construction speed of both sides is pretty high, with the USN with a massive initial lead.

Allied yards in the region will be taken out just like the Chinese yards. Only the yards on continental US will remain. And their build rate is quite poor compared to what the Chinese have.

In a war economy, every shipyard in China will be building something for the PLAN. By that measure, US won't even be close. USN is actually deeply worried about this.

So what? You are assuming a war over Taiwan will last years, but it will barely last a month at sea.

The main argument is PLAN won't survive. So who cares about how many artillery shells they can produce every month. What's more important is naval production and all those ports required for exports that will all be shut down for years. Without exports, the entire Chinese economy will collapse on its own. That's why I said it will take them 40-50 years to get back on their feet.

You seem to be totally dismissive of China's ability to rebuild. Or you think that for some reason, they won't rebuild.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1880620121498267722

And you seem to think as though all Allied ships & facilities on the first & second island chains will have total freedom to continue swatting down Chinese infrastructure whereas the truth is, most of them will be busy defending their own infrastructure & assets from nearly endless numbers of Chinese missiles & drones.

If the invasion of Taiwan does start, the only way it'll be over quickly is if the US/Allies don't do anything at all. Not even resupply Taiwan.

If Allies decide to get involved, then China won't be able to stop until they've either taken the island or till their entire means of production are permanently destroyed i.e. 'blowing up China' that we talked about. That's a long war. With the possibility of things going nuclear.

There is absolutely no advantage to be had in WESTPAC once Taiwan falls. The US has no mass presence in WESTPAC. If Taiwan falls, the USN falls back to Hawaii, part of the Third Island Chain. The Pacific will divide into two zones and Japan and SoKo will end up in the Chinese zone. PLAN will dominate the seas all the way up to beyond Guam.

No, they'll dominate inside the first island chain & will be able to project power up till the second.

But this is the price for letting China grow to these proportions - you can't make that go away for free. If your policy is heavily Eurocentric with the only thing in sight being the Russian boogeyman, you'll end up paying the price for it somewhere else.

This is the price.

The Democrats assured military intervention and so have the Republicans. The only question is what Trump will do since he's a maverick.

He's a smart maverick so he'll do the smart thing.

Incorrect. My position is this is the best time for China to invade and if they are willing to sacrifice much, they will invade. If they don't within the next 5 years or so, the next opportunity is decades later. But Trump is such a big wild card that it's impossible to tell if he will just stick with defending Taiwan militarily at the minimum or make things way worse. So while you are saying Trump will not intervene, I'm saying Trump will not only intervene, he can even escalate to the point the Chinese never calculated, which is why they are unlikely to invade during his presidency.

You contradicted yourself.

You're saying the Chinese will invade if they're willing to sacrifice much, but then say they're afraid of escalation.

But if they're afraid of escalation and decide to wait it out, the next opportunity may never come - and even if it does come, the current trajectory of things will mean that they'd be fighting a much more disadvantaged battle if they wait Trump out.

The only smart thing to do is to invade in Trump's term. IF they're not okay with being boxed-in by US forever.

You haven't understood the scale of the generational loss the US will face if Taiwan is lost to China. Half the Pacific gone, alliances lost, rise of a new superpower, Cold War 2.0, two big political blocs and so on.

If the Chinese invade, all that is inevitable. A war with China, were it to happen before 2035, will also result in a generational loss of economy, the tech/services boom will disappear and the average American will be working a blue collar job in a factory, not a white-collar job in an air-conditioned office. Essentially set the country back by 60 years.

Keeping Taiwan out of China's hands is a high-level geostrategic goal that Trump, Republicans, Democrats might all agree with. But destroying the living standards of the average American to achieve that goal isn't a sellable idea in this day & age. If Trump tries that, he'll lose all political capital.

And still, there won't be a guarantee that the objective of defending Taiwan will succeed - because US/Allies aren't equipped for that. They're only equipped for a different kind of warfighting. Current plans call for US to be equipped for this kind of fight by around the middle of next decade.

If the US build-out of China-focused capabilities is complete, then they might be ready to take on China without necessarily having to destroy their living standards to do so - that's the kind of position Trump wants to put the US in.

But that takes time. If China decides not to wait, there's not much Trump can do other than support Taiwan with supplies and then save face by saying the Chinese only succeeded because we didn't intervene.

With a Chinese lodgment established in Taiwan, most of the war will just be about retreating to Japan. Taiwan can't absorb years of fighting. At that point, the best the US can hope is the Chinese victory was Pyrrhic.

That's how it's gonna be - if the deterrence fails and China invades, Taiwan is effectively lost.

There's nothing anyone can do about it, unless they're prepared for a long war with China.

 

[Parthu]

Thread:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1881429082505883825

 

[Parthu]

First photo of the 'invasion barges'

https://twitter.com/x/status/1900097518983151955

 

[Bon Plan]

Ahhh yes the Taiwan will be easily defeated prediction... same prediction that was said about Ukraine and look where that is. Difference is Taiwan actually has teeth unlike Ukraine. PLA suffers from the same illness the Russian military suffers from and that is lack of combine arms fighting capability and corruption. PLA have no Joint-Command style military which is thee most important part of warfare in todays high-tech conditions.

All PLA airbases and naval bases that will be used to attack Taiwan are in range of Taiwan cruise missiles and those airbases and naval bases will be packed with volatile equipment and weapon systems. As we seen in Ukraine and Israel conventional ballistic missiles are useless in war with Russia firing over 11,000 since the start of the war and Iran firing almost 600 with no effect.

Taiwan is likely going to have weeks worth of heads-up and more than likely start with a naval blockade which is an act of war giving Taiwan the excuse to go weapons free.

I agree. Add to that that chinese army have no real war training for decades.
So I don't see them succeed to land on the Taiwanese soil.
But they can easily made a full blocus, for months or years. and then....

In this last scenario the sole solution is the wide and powerfull america SSN fleet. But will america be ready to fight for Taiwan? less sure with Trump.

So what? You are assuming a war over Taiwan will last years, but it will barely last a month at sea.

Sure.
Some weeks, not more.
But what about a chinese full embargo ?

First photo of the 'invasion barges'

https://twitter.com/x/status/1900097518983151955

View attachment 41513

A nice target for artillery or tactical missile.

 

[randomradio]

Sure.
Some weeks, not more.
But what about a chinese full embargo ?

A blockade is an act of war according to the UN, and China becomes the aggressor. They can use this tactic for negotiations for a short period of time, but they cannot do it indefinitely, it can attract sanctions from other countries and a military response from Taiwan.

Taiwan has already announced that a blockade is their red line.

https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/taiwan-says-chinese-aircraft-carrier-group-sailed-through-taiwan-strait-2024-10-22/

Also, it appears China's blockade is aimed at keeping the USN away.

China military: Simulated Taiwan blockade aims to deter US intervention | World News - The Times of India

China News: China conducted its largest military drills in 30 years from December 6-12, 2024, aiming to blockade Taiwan and deter US intervention. The exercises i

timesofindia.indiatimes.com

I don't believe such a maneuver will work out. Or they think they will finish the invasion before the US can get through the blockade. Plus a 1500-2000 km AShM can ensure Taiwan can create a counter-blockade environment where they can sink any civilian ship that trades with China.

Alternatively, Taiwan could stock up enough to survive a blockade for many years, while China's global trade could stop almost entirely during that time.

So a blockade is not feasible. The real reason may be just to consolidate more funds for the QUAD navies.

China has no choice but to finish the war as soon as possible. And most countries will stop caring about Taiwan if it ceases to exist, like Hong Kong.

 

[Parthu]

First photo of the 'invasion barges'

https://twitter.com/x/status/1900097518983151955

View attachment 41513

https://twitter.com/x/status/1900444200128397374

 

[randomradio]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1900444200128397374

View attachment 41586

View attachment 41587

Xi has set 2027 as the target to be ready to invade Taiwan. Meaning, PLA needs to get all the hardware and training necessary to pull off an invasion by 2027. It's unclear if that date includes war with Japan/US alongside the invasion. That could throw off the date by quite a bit. But I think it includes it.

Of course, he's unlikely to invade in 2027 or even in 2030, but I suppose PLA will be ready whenever the decision is made after 2027.

 

[Bon Plan]

A blockade is an act of war according to the UN, and China becomes the aggressor. They can use this tactic for negotiations for a short period of time, but they cannot do it indefinitely, it can attract sanctions from other countries and a military response from Taiwan.

China don't care about sanctions. They are the factory of the world : all the others has most to fear of a trade stop with China.

Alternatively, Taiwan could stock up enough to survive a blockade for many years

Big doubt.

 

[randomradio]

China don't care about sanctions. They are the factory of the world : all the others has most to fear of a trade stop with China.

We need to see how well China + 1 strategy will work out over the next few years, especially 'cause of Trump.

Example:

Japanese firms eye India as part of 'China Plus One' strategy

Post-Covid, Japanese companies are increasingly looking to India as part of their 'China Plus One' strategy to diversify manufacturing and supply chains. India has overtaken China as the top destination for Japanese FDI, driven by its large domestic market and competitive costs, with investments...

economictimes.indiatimes.com

It's difficult to say how things will move until we are very close to any Taiwanese invasion. India's goods export goal is $2T by 2030 from $800B today. China already exports $3.6T, we need to see if Trump's trade war can decrease that. Similarly, other countries in ASEAN and Turkey are coming up.

Big doubt.

As per the Taiwanese, they have sufficient supplies of everything they need to last many months except gas, meant to manage natural disasters. Their plan is to use more coal-powered plants to generate electricity during a blockade/war to compensate.

They are planning on reviewing it.

But if they decide a few months is enough, they may plan to force the lifting of the blockade via military means.

We also need to remember that the Taiwan Strait is calm for only 2 weeks across 2 months in an entire year. They can use that to their advantage.

 

[Ginvincible]

It feels like the biggest challenge for Taiwan is keeping the PLA from establishing a secure beach head. These new "invasion barges" won't be useful in the initial phases but will make on-going resupply from the ro-ro ships a lot easier. It's a moot point if the Chinese can somehow secure one of Taiwan's harbors.

In the event of a blockade the Taiwanese could potentially hold out for months but that equation changes if things get hot. It's widely accepted that China has informants throughout the island and any stockpiles would be targeted.

The overwhelming advantages in cruise/ballistic missile, UCAV, and overall air power China will bring over Taiwan will be hard to deal with. Short of a US coalition I'm not sure they could meaningfully resist.

 

[randomradio]

It feels like the biggest challenge for Taiwan is keeping the PLA from establishing a secure beach head. These new "invasion barges" won't be useful in the initial phases but will make on-going resupply from the ro-ro ships a lot easier. It's a moot point if the Chinese can somehow secure one of Taiwan's harbors.

In the event of a blockade the Taiwanese could potentially hold out for months but that equation changes if things get hot. It's widely accepted that China has informants throughout the island and any stockpiles would be targeted.

The overwhelming advantages in cruise/ballistic missile, UCAV, and overall air power China will bring over Taiwan will be hard to deal with. Short of a US coalition I'm not sure they could meaningfully resist.

A blockade is survivable for many months. But a war will be quick and decisive.

Anyway, they have a lot of air defense, including a new one that's a step up over the PAC-3 in some ways. Penetrating their IADS is gonna take a lot of effort, even without US involvement.

 

[Ginvincible]

A blockade is survivable for many months. But a war will be quick and decisive.

We'll see the resolve of the Taiwanese people when a blockade occurs. I think how willing they are to bear shortages and chance larger conflict will ultimately dictate how effective a blockade will be. The population could just demand a peaceful resolution and submit to some sovereignty agreement where they eventually end up like Hong Kong. I think US commitment will play the determining factor for their morale.

Anyway, they have a lot of air defense, including a new one that's a step up over the PAC-3 in some ways.

How many SAMs do they have stockpiled? I'm going to assume that if it's a hot conflict they won't have the luxury of producing more - most manufacturing will be disrupted pretty quickly. Even resupply from the West will be a challenge. If there is any nation that has the ability to perform an overwhelming saturation attack, it's China.

Penetrating their IADS is gonna take a lot of effort, even without US involvement.

I don't think anybody doubts this. SEADs against Taiwan will be extremely punishing. They'll have to do it while maintaining a blockade that is being continually picked away at and also while preparing for a herculean amphibious assault. When it comes to a China-Taiwan conflict I always assume that the Chinese will accept everything short of state collapse to win. I think, like Russia, they won't back off even if faced with massive casualties and getting into economic uncertainty. It is a very emotional issue for them.

 

[randomradio]

We'll see the resolve of the Taiwanese people when a blockade occurs. I think how willing they are to bear shortages and chance larger conflict will ultimately dictate how effective a blockade will be. The population could just demand a peaceful resolution and submit to some sovereignty agreement where they eventually end up like Hong Kong. I think US commitment will play the determining factor for their morale.

That's among the reasons why I believe Taiwan will attempt to break the blockade militarly. Why allow it to fester, after all.

How many SAMs do they have stockpiled? I'm going to assume that if it's a hot conflict they won't have the luxury of producing more - most manufacturing will be disrupted pretty quickly. Even resupply from the West will be a challenge. If there is any nation that has the ability to perform an overwhelming saturation attack, it's China.

Their long range systems are more than what we have. They are now in the process of building 12 new SAM batteries for their new TK-3 missiles. Expected to be fully operational by end-2026.

TK-1/2. 6 sites. Fixed radar and primarily fixed silos. 472 missiles ready to fire.

ONN Thoughtroom

The Thought Room serves as the Data Centre's intellectual incubator, featuring a diverse collection of the latest analyses, commentaries, and observations from internal and external experts.

platform.opennuclear.org

PAC-2/3. 9 batteries. 580 missiles in inventory (200 PAC-2 GEM and 380PAC-3 CRI), that we know of. More of the MSE variant are coming.

ONN Thoughtroom

The Thought Room serves as the Data Centre's intellectual incubator, featuring a diverse collection of the latest analyses, commentaries, and observations from internal and external experts.

platform.opennuclear.org

TK-3/4. TK-3 is a SAM, TK-4 is a THAAD-class ABM. 384 TK-3s ready to fire. Lots of reloads on mobile launchers, will operate alongside TK-2.

ONN Thoughtroom

The Thought Room serves as the Data Centre's intellectual incubator, featuring a diverse collection of the latest analyses, commentaries, and observations from internal and external experts.

platform.opennuclear.org

Basically 9+12 effective mobile batteries. And that's 1000+ ready to fire. They will end up with a somewhat large reserve of TK-3, and the Americans and Japanese will likely supply more Patriots.

At the lower end, they are getting 3 NASAMS batteries. Not sure if more will follow.

I don't think anybody doubts this. SEADs against Taiwan will be extremely punishing. They'll have to do it while maintaining a blockade that is being continually picked away at and also while preparing for a herculean amphibious assault. When it comes to a China-Taiwan conflict I always assume that the Chinese will accept everything short of state collapse to win. I think, like Russia, they won't back off even if faced with massive casualties and getting into economic uncertainty. It is a very emotional issue for them.

The goal would be to make the invasion untenable, like what the Ukrainians did in the first month.

There will be some pre-invasion preparation time which could allow US forces to step in before the invasion.
If the Chinese blockade the island before beginning the pre-invasion preparation, Taiwan could focus on lifting it militarily. Or the US could step in to lift it.
Or the US could step in when they think China is struggling during the invasion.
Or the Taiwanese could fend off an attack successfully without foreign intervention.

The reason why I think the US will be forced to step in is because Japan is sure to step in on their own if they have to 'cause the Japanese believe it's their war. Their entire financial existence depends on the Taiwan Strait. Plus the next target in the coming years would be Japan, and the US would have to fight anyway. So holding Taiwan would prevent an even bigger war.

In this article, the Japanese would like to see Taiwan capable of surviving by any means for many months or more, even using an insurgency if necessary, before the SDF could assist the US in retaking the island.

Taiwan is moving too slowly to prepare for war. Japan can help

Lai administration must be persuaded to accelerate push into asymmetrical defense

asia.nikkei.com

So the question has always been how resilient the Taiwanese are and how much the US was willing to lose over Taiwan before they could consider giving up.

And Biden confirmed the US will intervene.

https://www.reuters.com/world/biden-says-us-forces-would-defend-taiwan-event-chinese-invasion-2022-09-18/

 

[Ginvincible]

That's among the reasons why I believe Taiwan will attempt to break the blockade militarly. Why allow it to fester, after all.

The reason why I think the US will be forced to step in is because Japan is sure to step in on their own if they have to 'cause the Japanese believe it's their war. Their entire financial existence depends on the Taiwan Strait. Plus the next target in the coming years would be Japan, and the US would have to fight anyway. So holding Taiwan would prevent an even bigger war.

In this article, the Japanese would like to see Taiwan capable of surviving by any means for many months or more, even using an insurgency if necessary, before the SDF could assist the US in retaking the island.

So the question has always been how resilient the Taiwanese are and how much the US was willing to lose over Taiwan before they could consider giving up.

I think that the lack of public support for war, in both Japan and Taiwan is the biggest issue. I get that the political leadership understands the need to fight, but I don't think there is as much buy in from the general populace. A big reason Ukraine survived in the first few months is because many civilians stepped up and took up arms to slow the Russian advances. Would the Taiwanese do the same? I'm inclined to believe not.

I'm also not so certain that Japan will immediately (& especially unilaterally) come to the aid of Taiwan and I think the US is uncertain of this too. Right now, if Japan for whatever reason decides to not participate and restrict the US from using its bases, any US action would simply be unfeasible. I think this is why the US is focusing so much build up on old WW2-era pacific island bases, the Philippines and of course Guam.

And Biden confirmed the US will intervene.
https://www.reuters.com/world/biden...end-taiwan-event-chinese-invasion-2022-09-18/

Statements from 2 years ago might as well be ancient history by this point. Trump admin is a house of waffles and offers more weekly flip-flops than actual policy. I'm personally doubtful Trump would honor NATO commitments, let alone defend Taiwan.

 

[randomradio]

I think that the lack of public support for war, in both Japan and Taiwan is the biggest issue. I get that the political leadership understands the need to fight, but I don't think there is as much buy in from the general populace.

The average civilian never really supports war until it comes to his doorstep. Any Taiwan invasion at start will be devastating enough to anger civilians. Plus, due to conscription, there will be enough motivated manpower, even if not currently trained very well.

Since last year they have seriously started training conscripts by increasing the training period from 4 months to a year. They are retraining 1.6 million reservists too, so the overall size of the prepared forces is set to increase in just another 1-2 years. Purely going by numbers alone, it's unlikely that the Chinese will be able to bring sufficient manpower over when under fire. Especially if you count another million trained troops coming in from the US and Japan.

Taiwan is now adopting US tactics and training their army for a land war. Earlier, they had focused on air and sea power while letting their army stagnate, the former now rendered unsurvivable due to China's advancements. But due to pressure from Washington, they have switched gears to focus on the army. This indicates the US aims to provide air and sea power.

In the meantime, civilian defense initiatives like Kuma Academy have started training civilians to prepare for an invasion.

https://kuma-academy.org/about?lang=en

And you can tell from all of the above that Taiwan is indeed preparing to resist.

A big reason Ukraine survived in the first few months is because many civilians stepped up and took up arms to slow the Russian advances. Would the Taiwanese do the same? I'm inclined to believe not.

Civilians? Nah. They died for propaganda. What stopped the Russians is their own incompetence. A small army that was unmaintained and mismanaged, no pre-war preparation, inadequate manpower and logistics, inadequate ammo, inadequate motivation etc. Whereas the Ukrainian army was prepared to fight.

It took the Russians a year to fix things.

I'm also not so certain that Japan will immediately (& especially unilaterally) come to the aid of Taiwan and I think the US is uncertain of this too. Right now, if Japan for whatever reason decides to not participate and restrict the US from using its bases, any US action would simply be unfeasible. I think this is why the US is focusing so much build up on old WW2-era pacific island bases, the Philippines and of course Guam.

US, UK, Japan, Australia, and the Philippines will be involved in any Taiwan war. Only Canada and NZ are suspect.

Statements from 2 years ago might as well be ancient history by this point. Trump admin is a house of waffles and offers more weekly flip-flops than actual policy. I'm personally doubtful Trump would honor NATO commitments, let alone defend Taiwan.

What Biden stated seems to be official US policy rather than determined by the opinion of individuals.

The Congress decides whether the US goes to war via supermajority, not the sitting president. The same with NATO.

 

[Ginvincible]

And you can tell from all of the above that Taiwan is indeed preparing to resist.

I truly hope so.

What Biden stated seems to be official US policy rather than determined by the opinion of individuals.

US official policy is ambiguity, but I agree it has generally been a thinly veiled ambiguity. The sense I get is that a Taiwan conflict is one that the US cannot afford to lose, but looking increasingly difficult to win.

The Congress decides whether the US goes to war via supermajority, not the sitting president. The same with NATO.

While Congress deciding whether the US goes to war is technically true, it is absolutely not true in practice. I think almost every president has ignored the War Powers Act and deployed forces longer than 60 days without congressional authorization. Ironically Trump in his first term didn't.

Most presidents see the restrictions from the Act on military deployment as an unconstitutional restriction on executive authority, but nobody has been impeached over violating them, so no administration has challenged it in courts.

Also, while Congress might authorize military action, the President is not legally bound to initiate or continue the action. The President's role is to execute the military strategy, but the specifics of how and when is left to the President's judgment. I don't think a scenario where Congress has authorized the military, but a President dragged his heels has ever played out in reality.

 

[randomradio]

US official policy is ambiguity, but I agree it has generally been a thinly veiled ambiguity. The sense I get is that a Taiwan conflict is one that the US cannot afford to lose, but looking increasingly difficult to win.

Within this decade, China will still retain a significant inferiority over the US. And this could go on at least until 2035 or so. The Chinese don't have an answer to American SSNs, the B-21, and LRASM, whereas the Americans have an answer to every weapon the Chinese possess.

So even if China takes Taiwan, best case for them could be a Pyrrhic victory, with most of their ships sunk and shipbuilding, logistics, and ports damanged or destroyed.

What works against the Chinese is a lot of their trade is now dependent on high technology trade to non-American countries, so the infra related to that can be attacked.

While Congress deciding whether the US goes to war is technically true, it is absolutely not true in practice. I think almost every president has ignored the War Powers Act and deployed forces longer than 60 days without congressional authorization. Ironically Trump in his first term didn't.

Most presidents see the restrictions from the Act on military deployment as an unconstitutional restriction on executive authority, but nobody has been impeached over violating them, so no administration has challenged it in courts.

Also, while Congress might authorize military action, the President is not legally bound to initiate or continue the action. The President's role is to execute the military strategy, but the specifics of how and when is left to the President's judgment. I don't think a scenario where Congress has authorized the military, but a President dragged his heels has ever played out in reality.

Congress gave the Executive some additional powers to deal with insurgencies after 9/11, not conventional warfare.

The president is legally bound to go to war as per the Congress' demands. He can veto it, but Congress can veto his veto. If he refuses even after that, Congress can impeach him. So warfare is not up to the president. While the president can decide on what actions and strategies to use, the finances are determined by Congress.

As for ignoring the WPA, that's after the president has taken action, then Congress issues a joint resolution. Meaning, the president has to inform the Congress about any armed action taken within 48 hours after it was carried out for the resolution to go through. But going to war with a near-peer or even a peer requires massive funding, which only Congress can clear. Which means, if Trump decides to sit on his a**, Congress will decide for him, and that becomes the will of the people.

 

[Rajput Lion]

USA will defend Taiwan at any cost. There is not an iota of doubt about it. I would love to see the haughty Chinese get humbled by USAF/USN while trying to capture Taiwan. Their loss would also mean more breathing space for us whilst vice-versa could be the beginning of war with us.