A Taiwan Hypothetical

CaptainChewbacca · Post by **CaptainChewbacca** » 2004-12-02 02:45am

Ok, so I was watching the West Wing tonight, and was wondering;

What would happen if, tomorrow, Taiwan decided to declare itself a separate nation from China? Would China attack? Would we defend?

Stofsk · Post by **Stofsk** » 2004-12-02 03:03am

CaptainChewbacca wrote:What would happen if, tomorrow, Taiwan decided to declare itself a separate nation from China? Would China attack?

It's possible. I don't see them trying to go for a full blown invasion, but low-level 'intimidation' sorties would be seen as demanded in the higher echelons of Chinese leadership. It's been a facet of Chinese politics for the leader to be tough on Taiwan.

That said, I doubt Taiwan would do anything to radicalise their situation. China doesn't want to lose face, and if the Taiwanese keep their mouths shut about independence, when they're already a de facto state anyway, then China won't feel antagonised nor will feel compelled to strike Taiwan.

Would we defend?

Probably not. Clinton sent two CVN BGs to the straits when China performed 'missile drills' over Taiwan, in response to democratic elections. On the other hand, Clinton a few years later came out publically opposed to Taiwanese independence and supported the One China policy. This is a bipartisan supported position btw, Bush's faux pas regarding "Doing whatever it takes" in response to an attack by China vis a vis Taiwan was empty rhetoric, and was overturned within 30 mins of him saying it anyway. (or so I've been told)

Also, what are they going to defend Taiwan with? You're currently tied down in Iraq at the moment. The Taiwanese defence forces are no pushover, they would give the PLA a bloody nose. It all depends on how committed either side is to their position. The American perspective has always been to maintain a level of 'strategic ambiguity' regarding this issue, so as to properly obfuscate their possible actions, and to confuse China as to the US' intentions. That MAY mean the US will come to Taiwan's aid, or they MAY NOT. No-one really knows, unless you're a member of the POTUS' cabinet.

CaptainChewbacca · Post by **CaptainChewbacca** » 2004-12-02 03:07am

Maybe Australia could help?

HemlockGrey · Post by **HemlockGrey** » 2004-12-02 03:15am

One China is a pragmatic fiction, but I hope to God that when the ChiComs come a-knockin at Taiwan's door the President has enough balls to send a CVBG to seal off the straits.

And, frankly, I wouldn't be surprised if popular opinion in China demanded invasion. The Chinese - at least the middle class and intelligensia - are hugely nationalistic.

Lusankya · Post by **Lusankya** » 2004-12-02 03:16am

Maybe Australia could help?

I doubt it. From what I've gathered, John Howard wants to keep his nose out of China's internal policies, and I think he'd probably do whatever it took to avoid a China-US war from happening - no matter whose side we take, we're screwed.

Stofsk · Post by **Stofsk** » 2004-12-02 03:23am

Lusankya wrote:
Maybe Australia could help?
I doubt it. From what I've gathered, John Howard wants to keep his nose out of China's internal policies, and I think he'd probably do whatever it took to avoid a China-US war from happening - no matter whose side we take, we're screwed.

The ANZUS Treaty was signed and would obligate us to come to the US' aid if indeed there is some kind of conflict. That said, I believe there IS room to maneuver in the treaty stipulations. But if it's a choice between China and the US, I would think the nation would choose the US... unless we have a Labor government in power. *shudders*

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2004-12-02 03:26am

The worst China could do without nuclear weapons is attempt a blockade. That will be crippling trade sanctions and probably several world navies down onto it, foremostly the USN which can sweep the seas of Chinese ships and given time and USAF support crush their air force. I don't think they'd bet on the slim chance the US wouldn't get involved and take military action.

Stofsk wrote: Also, what are they going to defend Taiwan with? You're currently tied down in Iraq at the moment.

The only thing Iraq is occupying is ground troops, one thing which is completely unnecessary for fighting China because we won't invade them, and they can't invade Taiwan. The USN is quite available for the task and the USAF's commitment of combat aircraft to Iraq isn't much bigger then it was before the invasion. The only real shortage would be transport aircraft sorties, and more of those can be acquired by calling up the civilian reserve fleet.

Stofsk · Post by **Stofsk** » 2004-12-02 03:26am

[EDIT] And though I would be against any action taken on China, since war sucks in general, I would still feel we should help the US (though there likely isn't much we COULD do, what with out piss poor military). Not to sound like a dutiful sidekick or anything, but I'm happy for my country to follow the US' lead in such a matter.

frigidmagi · Post by **frigidmagi** » 2004-12-02 03:31am

I would be honestly pro Taiwan and pro Action. Because to me allowing a tryantical government crash a free one sucks more than war. All it really takes is few carrier task forces, China can't invade if we sink all their pretty boats right?

Omega18 · Post by **Omega18** » 2004-12-02 05:16am

The reality is right now China can't pull off a fullscale invasion and would have to resort to a blockade at best. One thing worth noting is that the US Navy is not tied up significantly in Iraq, and the US Nuclear Submarine fleet alone could relatively easily defeat China's current submarine force.

While this may change in the future, right now China lacks enough amphibious transport capability to take out Taiwan. Taiwan also has approximately a 200,000 man standing army and a 1.5 million army reserve.

The major reason China can't simply take over Taiwan is due to the fact that Taiwan enjoys the defensive advantage of having a large streach of ocean between them. With regards to amphibious landing operations against Taiwan, Taiwan's small size actually works against China. If Taiwan were the size of England, there would be alot of coastline for Taiwan's army and navy to protect and defend, but Taiwan's coastline means that China has little chance of simply sneaking by Taiwan's defenses and pulling off a landing.

A Chinese invasion of Taiwan is even further complicated by the fact that the western coast of Taiwan is mostly covered by tidal mudflats that streach for miles off the coast and ensure that any transport crossing the area would get stuck, while much of the eastern part of Taiwan is cliffs rather than beaches. This leaves less than 20% of the coastline as viable for invasion and this is before you factor in that only a portion of these remaining beaches are going to be suitable for an amphibious landing. The Island of Taiwan itself has around 1,100 kilometers of coastline (its a little difficult to calculate exactly since the statistics I found included the outlying islands.) Since less than 20% of this coastline is usable for an invasion beachhead, this means that Taiwan's standing army of 200,000 could be deployed with over 910 soldier per every kilometer of Taiwan. If Taiwan's reserves are all mobilized, (which actually are 1.5 million troops) you are looking at more than 7730 soldier per every kilometer of usable invasion coastline.

This number gets alot higher when you consider that the Taiwanese army is aware that the most viable invasion targets are the parts of Taiwan closest to Mainland China and the defense of the most attractive invasion beaches are prioritized. The small size of Taiwan as an island means that it doesn't take defensive forces that long to react to amphibious landings and move to reinforce other units.

As the following source notes ""China would take at least 48 hours, contingent on good weather, to make a round trip to fetch reinforcements, within which Taiwan would have successfully marshalled her troops to the battlefield."
http://www.mindef.gov.sg/safti/pointer/ ... 29_2/7.htm

This delay before reinforcements arrive means that in order to hold a beachhead, China would realisticly need at least 100,000 troops to sucessfully land on the invasion target on Taiwan, (this is assuming a surprise attack with most of Taiwan's reserves not mobilized yet) and getting them there safely is not that easy.

Taiwan's significantly sized navy and air force should certainly be able to launch some anti-shipping missiles and sink some transports early in the conflict. This is double whammy for China as not only are the troops and supplies on board lost, but that transport can't be used to provide future reinforcements.

Besides its airforce and navy, Taiwan can also launch anti-shipping missiles from land bases, and since missiles such as the Hsiung-Feng II has roughly an 80 kilometer range (I've seen more recent evidence suggesting this range may have been extended even for the ordinary missiles of this type), they can start attacking the invading armada from quite a distance. Taiwan also has the M110A2 Self-Propelled Howitzer which has a range of more than 18 miles, as well as the LT-2000 Rocket lauched artillerly system which has a range of 28 miles and can be very lethal against the sort of tighly concentrated armada necessary to overwhelm a beach's defenses. Taiwan can also stick sea minefields in front of the possible invasion beaches as well as have its helicopter use their Hellfire anti-tank missiles to lethal effect against the invasion forces. The mines are a particular problem as they will either delay the invasion while Chinese forces clear them, leaving the transports exposed at sea and giving Taiwan more time to react, or China will lose a huge number of ships with the "Russian penal battalion method" of clearing mines. When the force get close, Taiwan plans to utilize their tank's main gun to target landing craft before they get too close to the beach, and anti-tank missiles such as the Javelin could be used in this role as well.

The additional problem for China is that even if they accomplish the task of landing 100,000 men with the initial force, the transport force would have taken substancial attrition from Taiwan's defenses and many of the transports will need to carry additional supplies for the existing troops that had already landed. If China can't supply the beachhead with enough reinforcement, the invasion force would be overwhelmed by Taiwan's superior numbers that could be quickly deployed by this spot. If the invasion beachhead was destroyed, another fullscale invasion of Taiwan would not be a viable option for China for years untill all of the transport losses have been replaced. These are the sorts of problems China faces invading Taiwan.

The ballistic missiles can do some damage, but several hundred conventional warheads can only do so much damage, especially when they don't have pinpoint accuracy. Against 1.7 million troops dispersed in various locations, the ballistic missile attacks can't impair the military enough to prevent it from being able to repel attacks.

It actually going to be 2 years at a mimimum before China might be capable of taking out Taiwan even if the US does not intervene. It would take China time to react and mobilize forces and transports for an invasion, which the US can easily spot on spy satellites. This gives the US time to move naval forces into position, including nuclear submarines. Just a few US nuclear submarines in the right position could severely complicate China's ability to transport enough men across to defeat Taiwan.

Omega18 · Post by **Omega18** » 2004-12-02 05:18am

Stofsk wrote:[EDIT] And though I would be against any action taken on China, since war sucks in general, I would still feel we should help the US (though there likely isn't much we COULD do, what with out piss poor military). Not to sound like a dutiful sidekick or anything, but I'm happy for my country to follow the US' lead in such a matter.

Actually Australia's Collin's Class Submarines could be useful in sinking Chinese military transports, especially since the Chinese ASW capabilities are really poor right now.

Stuart Mackey · Post by **Stuart Mackey** » 2004-12-02 05:25pm

Stofsk wrote:
Lusankya wrote:
Maybe Australia could help?
I doubt it. From what I've gathered, John Howard wants to keep his nose out of China's internal policies, and I think he'd probably do whatever it took to avoid a China-US war from happening - no matter whose side we take, we're screwed.
The ANZUS Treaty was signed and would obligate us to come to the US' aid if indeed there is some kind of conflict. That said, I believe there IS room to maneuver in the treaty stipulations. But if it's a choice between China and the US, I would think the nation would choose the US... unless we have a Labor government in power. *shudders*

Actually, ANZUS only obligaes the signatories to consult each other in such a circumstance. It's not like NATO in regards to 'an attack on one is an attack on the other'.

Stofsk · Post by **Stofsk** » 2004-12-02 08:23pm

Stuart Mackey wrote:Actually, ANZUS only obligaes the signatories to consult each other in such a circumstance. It's not like NATO in regards to 'an attack on one is an attack on the other'.

When I said "there is room to maneuver" that is what meant. Thanks for reminding me.

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2004-12-02 08:33pm

Omega18 wrote: Actually Australia's Collin's Class Submarines could be useful in sinking Chinese military transports, especially since the Chinese ASW capabilities are really poor right now.

The Chinese amphibious fleet is so small its unlikely any targets would be left by the time they arrived. All hail the SSN.

Stuart Mackey · Post by **Stuart Mackey** » 2004-12-03 01:14am

Stofsk wrote:
Stuart Mackey wrote:Actually, ANZUS only obligaes the signatories to consult each other in such a circumstance. It's not like NATO in regards to 'an attack on one is an attack on the other'.
When I said "there is room to maneuver" that is what meant. Thanks for reminding me.

As I understand it, that 'room to manovour' is one of the reasons the US was never asked to join the fun in Indonesia during the confrontation, there was concern that they probably say no due to it not being in their interest to do so.

Stuart Mackey · Post by **Stuart Mackey** » 2004-12-03 01:15am

Sea Skimmer wrote:
Omega18 wrote: Actually Australia's Collin's Class Submarines could be useful in sinking Chinese military transports, especially since the Chinese ASW capabilities are really poor right now.
The Chinese amphibious fleet is so small its unlikely any targets would be left by the time they arrived. All hail the SSN.

SSN's..always hogging the fun, meanies.

Stofsk · Post by **Stofsk** » 2004-12-03 01:17am

Stuart Mackey wrote:
Stofsk wrote:
Stuart Mackey wrote:Actually, ANZUS only obligaes the signatories to consult each other in such a circumstance. It's not like NATO in regards to 'an attack on one is an attack on the other'.
When I said "there is room to maneuver" that is what meant. Thanks for reminding me.
As I understand it, that 'room to manovour' is one of the reasons the US was never asked to join the fun in Indonesia during the confrontation, there was concern that they probably say no due to it not being in their interest to do so.

What are you talking about? Indonesian confrontation?

Stuart Mackey · Post by **Stuart Mackey** » 2004-12-03 01:37am

Stofsk wrote:
Stuart Mackey wrote:
Stofsk wrote: When I said "there is room to maneuver" that is what meant. Thanks for reminding me.
As I understand it, that 'room to manovour' is one of the reasons the US was never asked to join the fun in Indonesia during the confrontation, there was concern that they probably say no due to it not being in their interest to do so.
What are you talking about? Indonesian confrontation?

yep

Stofsk · Post by **Stofsk** » 2004-12-03 01:43am

Stuart Mackey wrote:
Stofsk wrote:
Stuart Mackey wrote: As I understand it, that 'room to manovour' is one of the reasons the US was never asked to join the fun in Indonesia during the confrontation, there was concern that they probably say no due to it not being in their interest to do so.
What are you talking about? Indonesian confrontation?
yep

You're talking about East Timor, right? You do know that not only did the Americans provide us with logistics and intelligence support, but also political influence too, right? Indeed, I understand that our involvement in East Timor would have been impossible without American help. That came straight from a LT. COL in the Army btw. There's also a book which should be out that I intend on getting, which delves into this matter quite substantially. ATM I can't for the life of me remember what it's called...

Stuart Mackey · Post by **Stuart Mackey** » 2004-12-03 01:59am

Stofsk wrote:
Stuart Mackey wrote:
yep

You're talking about East Timor, right? You do know that not only did the Americans provide us with logistics and intelligence support, but also political influence too, right? Indeed, I understand that our involvement in East Timor would have been impossible without American help. That came straight from a LT. COL in the Army btw. There's also a book which should be out that I intend on getting, which delves into this matter quite substantially. ATM I can't for the life of me remember what it's called...

No no, not Timor..athough you are right about that and US support. I was talking about the confrontation with Indonesia in the early 6t0's. Apparently the US would not have involved itself if asked to under ANZUS due to politics at the time.

Stofsk · Post by **Stofsk** » 2004-12-03 02:05am

Stuart Mackey wrote:No no, not Timor..athough you are right about that and US support. I was talking about the confrontation with Indonesia in the early 6t0's. Apparently the US would not have involved itself if asked to under ANZUS due to politics at the time.

There is so much I don't know. I haven't even heard about this on Indonesia.

Stuart Mackey · Post by **Stuart Mackey** » 2004-12-03 02:12am

Stofsk wrote:
Stuart Mackey wrote:No no, not Timor..athough you are right about that and US support. I was talking about the confrontation with Indonesia in the early 6t0's. Apparently the US would not have involved itself if asked to under ANZUS due to politics at the time.
There is so much I don't know. I haven't even heard about this on Indonesia.

Here is a bit of information page 3
There is a comment from the Aussie Forign Minister about 'not asking for support because if that support did not come, then ANZUS would be shown up to the world as hollow'. However, I will be buggred if I can find it

frigidmagi · Post by **frigidmagi** » 2004-12-03 02:28am

To be honest I'm not sure that the US would even request Australian involment. Wouldn't it be a risk of expanding the conflict for no real gain to anyone? No offense to the Aussies but from what I've seen of your military... You're underfunded and undersupplied and Howard ain't helping.

Has it stands the USN is capable of containing and destorying Chinese lift assets to Taiwan without any aid and I'm told this is not likey to change in the near future.

Stuart Mackey · Post by **Stuart Mackey** » 2004-12-03 02:43am

frigidmagi wrote:To be honest I'm not sure that the US would even request Australian involment. Wouldn't it be a risk of expanding the conflict for no real gain to anyone? No offense to the Aussies but from what I've seen of your military... You're underfunded and undersupplied and Howard ain't helping.

Has it stands the USN is capable of containing and destorying Chinese lift assets to Taiwan without any aid and I'm told this is not likey to change in the near future.

Oh, I think that most people with access to a library know that the USN can handle China, and other nations are redundant to that for practical purposes. But it is also important to remember that other nations being involved has political remifications that are more important than what practical assistance their forces can provide.

frigidmagi · Post by **frigidmagi** » 2004-12-03 03:02am

Still why bring in the Australians? They're not needed. The UN will not be able to take action against the US or the PRC, has both nations have vetos. And has for PR, well I'd bet it be interesting to watch both sides spinning their actions. But at the end of the day, S Korea, Japan and the other local nations would be, I think, in favor of containing China.

StarDestroyer.Net BBS

A Taiwan Hypothetical

A Taiwan Hypothetical

Re: A Taiwan Hypothetical

Re: A Taiwan Hypothetical