3 ms·

The US and Taiwan don't have military alliance. The Taiwan Relations Act is carefully worded to avoid any commitment and maintain strategic ambiguity and keep

The US and Taiwan don't have military alliance. The Taiwan Relations Act is carefully worded to avoid any commitment and maintain strategic ambiguity and keep both sides in check. The strategic interest of the US is limited in terms of the cost of defending Taiwan. The article and many articles like it fail to explain the big picture. The US has indirect way to counter Chinese aggression. Sea blockade from distance where the US has military advantage would cut almost all sea traffic to China and isolate it from the world economy. Chinese are well aware of their position as a logistic cul-de-sac. The Belt and Road Initiative can be seen as long term strategic plan to go around this problem. It loses money but Chinese need it to work so they do it anyway.

PhilWright 7y ago
No doubt the US could blockade China. But given a big percentage of their trade is with the US, it involves a lot of pain and certain recession for the US as a consequence. It would hurt the US just about as much as China. A Pyric victory?
- naval-gazer 7y ago
  Typical modern war is net loss for every participant. The US could probably do without China but US partners would not. Australia, Japan, South Korea etc. would at some point break rank.
- simonblack 7y ago
  Blockading a country on the 'world-island' is a pointless task. The US is a sea-power, China is a land-power. As a land-power already situated on the 'world-island' China has no need of a huge SEA-going Navy. All it needs is a bunch of anti-ship missiles. Meanwhile, the US that lives on the peripheral 'americas-island' is powerless without a means to reach the 'world-island' where all the action is. See Mackinder and GeoPolitics.
zaphirplane 7y ago
Pearl Harbor was partially a response to economic strangulation, countries have gone to war over economic isolation. Blockading a nuclear power with ICBM and hypersonic missile is the same as claiming the guard at checkpoint Charlie is a USSR deterrent

PhilWright 7y ago

No doubt the US could blockade China. But given a big percentage of their trade is with the US, it involves a lot of pain and certain recession for the US as a consequence. It would hurt the US just about as much as China. A Pyric victory?

naval-gazer 7y ago
Typical modern war is net loss for every participant. The US could probably do without China but US partners would not. Australia, Japan, South Korea etc. would at some point break rank.
simonblack 7y ago
Blockading a country on the 'world-island' is a pointless task. The US is a sea-power, China is a land-power. As a land-power already situated on the 'world-island' China has no need of a huge SEA-going Navy. All it needs is a bunch of anti-ship missiles. Meanwhile, the US that lives on the peripheral 'americas-island' is powerless without a means to reach the 'world-island' where all the action is. See Mackinder and GeoPolitics.

zaphirplane 7y ago

Pearl Harbor was partially a response to economic strangulation, countries have gone to war over economic isolation. Blockading a nuclear power with ICBM and hypersonic missile is the same as claiming the guard at checkpoint Charlie is a USSR deterrent