4 ms·

ELI5 Why can't Japan just route its ships around Taiwan, into the open ocean?

by marstall 4y ago

2OEH8eoCRo0 4y ago
I don't understand why either. Shipping goods on these routes get more expensive and longer and the market adjusts.
- kube-system 4y ago
  Isn't that what the article concludes? > I am sure someone in Japan must have calculated the likely economic costs of rerouting Japan-bound traffic this way (or in a more extreme circumstance, replacing Middle Eastern energy supplies with North American ones) but I have not yet seen any actual numbers. But given alternate sea lane possibilities, I doubt clearing Japanese shipping out of Taiwanese waters entirely would be enough to threaten Japan with “famine.”
dirtyid 4y ago
I remember reading a decade old analysis for this scenario and JP shipping costs went up like ~10%, or some fairly marginal number. For years (like 2005-2015), entire JP shipping was threatened because PRC successfully took over TW narrative specifically overlooking the obvious to build up the PRC threat. Now to be fair, within the last 5 years, PLA capabilities have gotten to the point where the threat is legitimate, irrespective of TW ownership. PLAN ships now regularly operate east of TW so reroutes would have to be further, meanwhile PLA rocket force can destroy JP critical infra purely from the mainland and turn island nation reliant on calorie or energy imports to Yemen. The TLDR is currently US/JP military has capability to ward off an maritime invasion, but no capability to actually "defend" TW, or JP, or SKR from existing as developed economies. Ergo best avoid the fight, because if JP has to politically pick between preventing a TW invasion by hosting US forces, or become Yemen (let's face it PRC still has grudges), then that's likely how US/JP security alliance may fracture. Alternatively, US loses so much hardware it can no longer support JP long term even if wanted to. It isn't so much losing TW means losing JP as merely fighting large war over TW could lose JP.
- marstall 4y ago
  Wouldn't China be astronomically more deterred from invading Japan under any circumstances, given that it would lead to all out war with the US (wouldn't it?)
  - dirtyid 4y ago
    >under any circumstances If the US is intervening in the TW scenario from JP, then it's already all out war and there's every reason to hit JP targets. Historically CCP/PRC has fought with the US, USSR and threatened the UK, all nuclear powers over redline issues much less important than TW, sometimes while PRC not nuclear power herself. IMO there is no astronomically deterring PRC when it comes to TW. PLA TW war planning for the last few years (post Xi's PLA modernization) pretty much assumes US and JP will be involved, she's already on the hit list, as are most US military infra in the 1st and 2nd island chain. Would not be surprised if US infra in AU as well. Final consideration is as the balance of backyard war swings increasingly in PRC favour, an all out war might be in PRC strategic interests. Ultimately that's what it takes to kick the US out of East Asia - destroy so much US hardware that she can't project even if she wanted to, and target an US security partner (JP) and kick her face in so hard that the region would not even consider hosting US forces after. The biggest reason why the region is not signing up for PRC containment is no one wants to be missile sinks for the TW scenario, the second TW card is off the table, the region is free to pivot and go all in on US security hedging. This is bad for the PRC in the long term. There are so many other geopolitical benefits of elimnating JP as a regional power as well.
    - marstall 4y ago
      so Japan (and South Korea?) secretly want Taiwan to go China, because that will make it easier for them to be all-in on the American security umbrella?
      - dirtyid 4y ago
        Regions interests best served by status quo first and foremost. Then a peaceful political resolution. Then a limited TW scenario that doesn't spread to the rest of the region. Lastly, broad regional war. Which could end in PRC defeat, which ruins regions economics and will ensure long term instability because PRC will try again. Or ends in US defeat which removes the US as a security hedge to balance PRC. Basically they want the least disruptive PRC-TW settlement, after which they (not just SKR/JP) can enhance US presence without TW damocles hanging over their heads.

ELI5 Why can't Japan just route its ships around Taiwan, into the open ocean?

2OEH8eoCRo0 4y ago

I don't understand why either. Shipping goods on these routes get more expensive and longer and the market adjusts.

kube-system 4y ago
Isn't that what the article concludes? > I am sure someone in Japan must have calculated the likely economic costs of rerouting Japan-bound traffic this way (or in a more extreme circumstance, replacing Middle Eastern energy supplies with North American ones) but I have not yet seen any actual numbers. But given alternate sea lane possibilities, I doubt clearing Japanese shipping out of Taiwanese waters entirely would be enough to threaten Japan with “famine.”

dirtyid 4y ago

I remember reading a decade old analysis for this scenario and JP shipping costs went up like ~10%, or some fairly marginal number. For years (like 2005-2015), entire JP shipping was threatened because PRC successfully took over TW narrative specifically overlooking the obvious to build up the PRC threat. Now to be fair, within the last 5 years, PLA capabilities have gotten to the point where the threat is legitimate, irrespective of TW ownership. PLAN ships now regularly operate east of TW so reroutes would have to be further, meanwhile PLA rocket force can destroy JP critical infra purely from the mainland and turn island nation reliant on calorie or energy imports to Yemen. The TLDR is currently US/JP military has capability to ward off an maritime invasion, but no capability to actually "defend" TW, or JP, or SKR from existing as developed economies. Ergo best avoid the fight, because if JP has to politically pick between preventing a TW invasion by hosting US forces, or become Yemen (let's face it PRC still has grudges), then that's likely how US/JP security alliance may fracture. Alternatively, US loses so much hardware it can no longer support JP long term even if wanted to. It isn't so much losing TW means losing JP as merely fighting large war over TW could lose JP.

marstall 4y ago
Wouldn't China be astronomically more deterred from invading Japan under any circumstances, given that it would lead to all out war with the US (wouldn't it?)
- dirtyid 4y ago
  >under any circumstances If the US is intervening in the TW scenario from JP, then it's already all out war and there's every reason to hit JP targets. Historically CCP/PRC has fought with the US, USSR and threatened the UK, all nuclear powers over redline issues much less important than TW, sometimes while PRC not nuclear power herself. IMO there is no astronomically deterring PRC when it comes to TW. PLA TW war planning for the last few years (post Xi's PLA modernization) pretty much assumes US and JP will be involved, she's already on the hit list, as are most US military infra in the 1st and 2nd island chain. Would not be surprised if US infra in AU as well. Final consideration is as the balance of backyard war swings increasingly in PRC favour, an all out war might be in PRC strategic interests. Ultimately that's what it takes to kick the US out of East Asia - destroy so much US hardware that she can't project even if she wanted to, and target an US security partner (JP) and kick her face in so hard that the region would not even consider hosting US forces after. The biggest reason why the region is not signing up for PRC containment is no one wants to be missile sinks for the TW scenario, the second TW card is off the table, the region is free to pivot and go all in on US security hedging. This is bad for the PRC in the long term. There are so many other geopolitical benefits of elimnating JP as a regional power as well.
  - marstall 4y ago
    so Japan (and South Korea?) secretly want Taiwan to go China, because that will make it easier for them to be all-in on the American security umbrella?
    - dirtyid 4y ago
      Regions interests best served by status quo first and foremost. Then a peaceful political resolution. Then a limited TW scenario that doesn't spread to the rest of the region. Lastly, broad regional war. Which could end in PRC defeat, which ruins regions economics and will ensure long term instability because PRC will try again. Or ends in US defeat which removes the US as a security hedge to balance PRC. Basically they want the least disruptive PRC-TW settlement, after which they (not just SKR/JP) can enhance US presence without TW damocles hanging over their heads.