5 ms·
I don't disagree with the war assessment, it makes reasonable points. It doesn't consider the very plausible scenario where Taiwan chooses not to fight (or cho
by adventured 8y ago
I don't disagree with the war assessment, it makes reasonable points.
It doesn't consider the very plausible scenario where Taiwan chooses not to fight (or chooses not to fight for very long). Instead they choose capitulation as an ideal decision to spare the enormous destruction they'd suffer, so as to keep their relatively high standard of living intact. Among nations with at least 10m people, Taiwan ranks around #21 in GDP per capita with a very respectable $25k. They've built something nice for themselves over a long, difficult climb.
China can play a long-term game of decimation, spanning years. They don't have to invade short-term, they can flatten Taiwan with non-stop bombing, terror-inspiring hits (when is the next air raid going to go off?!?), wait them out until inevitable capitulation. It's about long-term territorial gain and the national premise of unifying greater China, they can easily spare the loss of economic output from Taiwan's devastation. Just 15 years ago Taiwan would have been a huge share of Chinese output if unified; today that's no longer true and China is increasing the gap by the day. Who's going to stop the stand-off rain of missiles and bombing that can go on indefinitely against Taiwan? The people eventually give up, China has no need to invade to win a war.
They'll approach it as a hundred plus year project as needed. The only thing that might change that style of thinking, is if Xi needs to prop up his position (through military adventure, gaining prestige from reclaiming Taiwan), which may be eroded if China's economy falters.
- barry-cotter 8y ago> Among nations with at least 10m people, Taiwan ranks around #21 in GDP per capita with a very respectable $25k. They've built something nice for themselves over a long, difficult climb. The Taiwanese are aware of what waits for those who cooperate with the PRC. Look at Hong Kong. Where’s their freedom now? Look at Xinjiang, at the treatment of Falun Dafa. Taiwan will be colonised, again. First the Dutch, then the Japanese, then Guomindang and finally the CCP. http://scholars-stage.blogspot.com/2019/01/reflections-on-chinas-stalinist.html http://scholars-stage.blogspot.com/2019/01/reflections-on-ch... > After the Party seized power in 1949, Mao would systematically apply the same techniques to one group of Chinese after another: “landlords” and village leadership; gamblers, gangsters, and criminals; Christian congregations, Daoist temples and the Buddhist sangha; business circles, corporations, and stock-jobbers; universities, schools, and intellectual clubs; hospitals, aid workers, and relief organizations; minor political parties and independent political groups; workers associations and unions; clan groupings and ancestral schools; martial artists and Confucian hold-overs—any set of organized and self-governing citizens was soon a target of a struggle campaign. In time each would be destroyed or brought into a subservient relationship with the Communist Party. ... > Today The Cause has flipped—officially—from socialist revolution to national rejuvenation. The Party works under the same schema but has shifted the “people” that Mao identified with specific economic classes to the nation at large.[6] Mass mobilization campaigns have been retired. But struggle and united front campaigns have not. Xi’s great corruption purge, the Uyghur labor camps of Xinjiang, the attack on Christians across China—these all follow the same methods for crushing and coercing “enemies” developed by Mao and the Party in the early ‘40s. “One Country, Two Systems,” interference campaigns in the Chinese diaspora, the guided, gilded tours given to Musk and his ilk—these all follow the same methods for corrupting and controlling “allies” developed by Mao and the Party that same decade. The tools have never changed. The only thing that has changed is the Party’s assessment of who is an "enemy" and who is part of the "people." You’re quite right that if China puts conquering Taiwan above all other aims they can do it, if the US and Japan let them. If they back Taiwan up it’s not happening. The US is quite capable of defending Taiwan all by itself and if the US doesn’t back Taiwan up its credibility as an ally is dead.
- Aeolun 8y agoI don’t think any serious bombing of Taiwan would be tolerated by the rest of the world.
- YorkshireSeason 8y agoWho would fight for Taiwan? The 1995-96 Taiwan Strait Crisis is illustrative in this regard: The Clinton administration sent two aircraft carriers and accompanying ships toward Taiwan. Beijing threatened a fierce response: if the U.S. Navy entered the Strait, it would face a "sea of fire." Washington turned the ships around. See [1]. China is a lot more powerful today that it was 2 decades ago. [1] J. A. Bosco, The 1995-96 Taiwan Strait Crisis: Three What Ifs?. https://taiwaninsight.org/2019/01/26/the-1995-96-taiwan-strait-crisis-three-what-ifs/ https://taiwaninsight.org/2019/01/26/the-1995-96-taiwan-stra...
- Apocryphon 8y agoThey could enact sanctions and apply non-military pressure.
- Aeolun 8y agoChina is a lot more powerful every day. That’s not the same as saying they can expect to win if they challenge the US to battle. Either way, I suspect US involvement in a scenario like that would be less direct.