Posted tagged ‘China and Taiwan’

« WarSclerotic home page

Expect America’s Tensions with China and Russia to Rise in 2018

December 30, 2017

Expect America’s Tensions with China and Russia to Rise in 2018, Gatestone Institute, John Bolton, December 30, 2017

Yesterday’s 2017 review and forecast for 2018 focused on the most urgent challenges the Trump administration faces: the volatile Middle East, international terrorism and the proliferation of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. Today, we examine the strategic threats posed by China and Russia and one of President Trump’s continuing priorities: preserving and enhancing American sovereignty.

Russia and China will be among the Trump administration’s key strategic challenges in the coming year. Photo: Wikipedia.

China has likely been Trump’s biggest personal disappointment in 2017, one where he thought that major improvements might be possible, especially in international trade. Despite significant investments of time and attention to President Xi Jinping, now empowered in ways unprecedented since Mao Tse Tung, very little has changed in Beijing’s foreign policy, bilaterally or globally. There is no evidence of improved trade relations, or any effort by China to curb its abuses, such as pirating intellectual property, government discrimination against foreign traders and investors, or biased judicial fora.

Even worse, Beijing’s belligerent steps to annex the South China Sea and threaten Japan and Taiwan in the East China Sea continued unabated, or even accelerated in 2017. In all probability, therefore, 2018 will see tensions ratchet up in these critical regions, as America (and hopefully others) defend against thinly veiled Chinese military aggression. Japan in particular has reached its limits as China has increased its capabilities across the full military spectrum, including at sea, in space and cyberwarfare.

Taiwan is not far behind. Even South Korea’s Moon Jae In may be growing disenchanted with Beijing as it seeks to constrain Seoul’s strategic defense options. And make no mistake, what China is doing in its littoral periphery is closely watched in India, where the rise of Chinese economic and military power is increasingly worrying. The Trump administration should closely monitor all these flash points along China’s frontiers, any one of which could provoke a major military confrontation, if not next year, soon thereafter.

North Korea’s nuclear weapons program is where China has most disappointed the White House. Xi Jinping has played the United States just like his predecessors, promising increased pressure on Pyongyang but not delivering nearly enough. The most encouraging news came as 2017 ended, in the revelation that Chinese and American military officers have discussed possible scenarios involving regime collapse or military conflict in North Korea. While unclear how far these talks have progressed, the mere fact that China is engaging in them shows a new level of awareness of how explosive the situation is. So, 2018 will be critical not only regarding North Korea’s nuclear weapons threat but also whether Sino-American relations improve or take a distinct turn for the worse.

On Russia, the president has not given up on Vladimir Putin, at least not yet, but that may well come in 2018. Putin is an old-school, hard-edged, national interest-centered Russian leader, defending the “rodina” (the motherland), not a discredited ideology. Confronted with U.S. strength, Putin knows when to pull back, and he is, when it suits him, even capable of making and keeping deals. But there is no point in romanticizing the Moscow-Washington dynamic. It must be based not on personal relationships but on realpolitik.

No better proof exists than Russia’s reaction to Trump’s recent decision to supply lethal weapons to Ukraine, which is now a war zone entirely because of Russian aggression. To hear Moscow react to Trump’s weapons decision, however, one would think he was responsible for increased hostilities. President Obama should have acted at the first evidence of Russia’s military incursion into Ukraine, and even Trump’s aid is a small step compared to President Bush’s 2008 proposal to move Kiev quickly toward NATO membership. Nonetheless, every independent state that emerged from the Soviet Union, NATO member or not, is obsessed with how America handles Ukraine. They should be, because the Kremlin’s calculus about their futures will almost certainly turn on whether Trump draws a line on Moscow’s adventurism in Ukraine.

Just as troubling as Russia’s menace in Eastern and Central Europe is its reemergence as a great power player in the Middle East. Just weeks ago, the Russian Duma ratified an agreement greatly expanding Russia’s naval station at Tartus, Syria. In 2015, Obama stood dumbfounded as Russia built a significant air base in nearby Latakia, thus cementing the intrusion of Russia’s military presence in the Middle East to an extent not seen since Anwar Sadat expelled Soviet military advisers and brought Egypt into the Western orbit in the 1970s.

This expansion constitutes a significant power projection for the Kremlin. Indeed, it seems clear that Russia’s support (even more than Iran’s) for Syria’s Assad regime has kept the dictatorship in power. Russia’s assertiveness in 2017 also empowered Tehran, even as the ISIS caliphate was destroyed, to create an arc of Shia military power from Iran, through Iraq and Syria, linking up with Hezbollah in Lebanon. This Russian-Iranian axis should rank alongside Iran’s nuclear-weapons program on America’s list of threats emanating from the Middle East.

Finally, the pure folly of both the U.N. Security Council and the General Assembly crossing the United States on the Jerusalem embassy decision was a mistake of potentially devastating consequences for the United Nations. Combined with the International Criminal Court’s November decision to move toward investigating alleged U.S. war crimes in Afghanistan, there is now ample space for the White House to expand on the president’s focus on protecting American sovereignty.

Trump’s first insight into the rage for “global governance” among the high minded came on trade issues, and his concern for the World Trade Organization’s adjudication mechanism. These are substantial and legitimate, but the broader issues of “who governs” and the challenges to constitutional, representative government from international bodies and treaties that expressly seek to advance global governing institutions are real and growing. America has long been an obstacle to these efforts, due to our quaint attachment to our Constitution and the exceptionalist notion that we don’t need international treaties to “improve” it.

No recent president has made the sovereignty point as strongly as Trump, and the United Nations and International Criminal Court actions in 2017 now afford him a chance to make decisive political and financial responses in 2018. If 2017 was a tumultuous year internationally, 2018 could make it seem calm by comparison.

John R. Bolton (@AmbJohnBolton) served as U.S. ambassador to the United Nations and as undersecretary for arms control and international security affairs at the U.S. Department of State under President George W. Bush. He is now a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute.

This article first appeared in The Hill and is reprinted here with the kind permission of the author.

Categories: China - naval power, China - North Korea sanctions evasion, China and North Korea, China and Russia, China and Taiwan, China and world trade, China's expansion of power, China's subversion of forein governments, Russia and America, Russia and China, Russia and Iran, Russia and North Korea, Russia and the Ukraine, Russia and the West, Russia's foreign dominace, Russian Aggression, Trump and China, Trump and Russia, UN and global governance, UN and Trump
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Comments: 3 Comments

Cotton: Trump Should Cooperate Militarily With Taiwan in Spite of Chinese Invasion Threat

December 12, 2017

Cotton: Trump Should Cooperate Militarily With Taiwan in Spite of Chinese Invasion Threat, Washington Free Beacon,  , December 12, 2017

Sen. Tom Cotton / Getty Images

Sen. Tom Cotton (R., Ark.) on Monday said he takes Chinese threats to invade Taiwan seriously, stating that he urged both President Donald Trump and Congress to cooperate militarily with Taipei.

Cotton’s statement came in response to a senior Chinese diplomat’s remark that China would employ its “Anti-Secession Law,” which gives it the ability to use force on the island to prevent secession, if the U.S. sent navy ships there.

“The day that a U.S. Navy vessel arrives in Kaohsiung is the day that our People’s Liberation Army unifies Taiwan with military force,” Chinese media at the weekend quoted Li as saying, referring to Taiwan’s main port, according to Reuters.

“I take Beijing’s threats to use military force against Taiwan seriously,” Cotton said. “That’s why I urge both the president and Congress to accelerate the sale of defensive weapons to Taiwan, as well as to bring Taiwan into joint military exercises with the United States. We can’t afford to take Beijing’s saber-rattling lightly.”

Taiwan’s status as a self-ruled island is disputed by China, which feels it can still use force to keep it under control, Reuters reported:

China considers Taiwan to be a wayward province and has never renounced the use of force to bring it under its control. The United States has no formal ties with Taiwan but is bound by law to help it defend itself and is its main source of arms.

Beijing regularly calls Taiwan the most sensitive and important issue between it and the United States. In September, the U.S. Congress passed the National Defense Authorization Act for the 2018 fiscal year, which authorises mutual visits by navy vessels between Taiwan and the United States.

Categories: China and Taiwan, Senator Tom Cotton, U.S. Military and Taiwan
Tags: , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

China Asks US to Not Allow Taiwan President in Guam, Hawaii

October 28, 2017

China Asks US to Not Allow Taiwan President in Guam, Hawaii, Latin American Herald Tribune, October 28, 2017

(How does one say “mind your own  *!@#^$ business” in Chinese?  Please see also, Chinese Official Says China Might Invade Taiwan If “Peaceful Reunification Takes Too Long.”  — DM)

Beijing’s objection to Tsai’s stopovers is possibly related to China’s concerns that the Taiwan president could use them to meet US officials.

This is the third foreign visit by the Taiwanese president, who recently visited other allies in Latin America, making stopovers in the US mainland.

*****************************************

BEIJING – China’s Foreign Affairs Ministry urged the United States on Friday to not allow Taiwanese President Tsai Ing-wen to make stopovers in the US islands of Hawaii and Guam en route her visit to three ally countries in the South Pacific.

Tsai, who is set to visit the Marshall Islands, the Solomon Islands and Tuvalu between Oct. 28 and Nov. 4, has scheduled stopovers in Hawaii on Saturday and in Guam on Nov. 3.

“I will hope that the US can adhere to the ‘One China’ principle and not allow her to make stopovers,” foreign ministry spokesperson Geng Shuang said in a press conference, adding that Beijing had already lodged a formal complaint with Washington over the visit.

The spokesperson said the US should not send out wrong signals and take concrete steps to maintain stability in Taiwan and China.

Beijing’s objection to Tsai’s stopovers is possibly related to China’s concerns that the Taiwan president could use them to meet US officials.

Taiwan has only 20 diplomatic allies around the world, out of which half are located in Latin America and the Caribbean, although countries like Panama have switched over their loyalties to China recently.

This is the third foreign visit by the Taiwanese president, who recently visited other allies in Latin America, making stopovers in the US mainland.

Categories: China and Taiwan, China vs America, Guam, Hawaii, Taiwanese President Tsai Ing-wen
Tags: , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

China’s Xi Jinping Slams the Door on Taiwanese Appeals for Independence

October 19, 2017

China’s Xi Jinping Slams the Door on Taiwanese Appeals for Independence, Washington Free Beacon, , October 19, 2017

(Please see also, Chinese Official Says China Might Invade Taiwan If “Peaceful Reunification Takes Too Long and China’s Secret Military Plan: Invade Taiwan by 2020. — DM)

Chinese President Xi Jinping delivers a speech during the opening session of the 19th Communist Party Congress / Getty Images

Chinese President Xi Jinping on Wednesday made clear his administration will stifle any attempt by self-governed Taiwan to declare independence from Beijing as appeals for complete autonomy intensify in Taipei.

“We will never allow anyone, any organization, or any political party, at any time or in any form, to separate any part of Chinese territory from China,” Xi said at the opening of the annual Communist Party Congress.

“We have the resolve, the confidence, and the ability to defeat separatist attempts for Taiwan independence in any form,” Xi continued.

Xi’s tough talk on regions creeping toward formal declarations of independence drew the longest applause of his three-hour speech and prompted immediate backlash from officials in Taipei, who said it was “absolutely” the right of the island’s more than 23 million people to vote on independence.

Taiwanese sovereignty is a sensitive issue in China. Beijing views Taiwan as a breakaway province that will eventually reunify with mainland China and has refused to renounce the option of deploying force against the democratic state should it pursue independence.

Chinese officials in June suspended regular diplomatic contact with their Taiwanese counterparts when the island’s new leader refused to publicly embrace the principle of a single Chinese nation that encompasses Taiwan.

Taiwan’s Mainland Affairs Council last week renewed calls on China to reinstate diplomatic contact with the island.

“The Republic of China is a sovereign state and we will protect our sovereignty,” Chiu Chiu-cheng, deputy head of the Mainland Affairs Council, told a group of international reporters in Taipei on Thursday.

“If China wants to have peace and a stable relationship, we need to sit down and talk. China needs to understand Taiwan is a sovereign state and we need to figure out how to cooperate under this condition,” Chiu said.

Tensions between Taiwan and mainland China have escalated over the past year following the presidential election of Tsai Ing-wen, leader of the pro-independence Democratic Progressive Party.

Beijing is wary of Tsai’s open criticism of senior Chinese officials and refusal to denounce calls for Taiwanese independence.

Though she has vowed to maintain the delicate cross-strait status quo based on the historical fact that in 1992 Taiwan and the mainland agreed to consider themselves part of one Chinese nation with respective interpretations, Tsai has stopped short of endorsing the One China policy.

In a bold National Day address in Taipei last week, Tsai reinforced her commitment to upholding Taiwan’s sovereignty and said the island will not bend to pressure from Beijing, such as China’s ongoing efforts to isolate Taipei from the international community.

“Since May 20 last year, we have exerted maximum goodwill in order to safeguard the peaceful and stable development of cross-strait ties,” Tsai said, before adding, “We will continue to safeguard Taiwan’s freedom, democracy, and way of life, as well as assure the Taiwanese people’s right to decide our own future.”

Categories: China and Taiwan
Tags:

Comments: Be the first to comment

China’s War Timing Firming Up

October 18, 2017

China’s War Timing Firming Up, American Thinker, David Archibald, October 18, 2017

(Please see also, China’s Secret Military Plan: Invade Taiwan by 2020. — DM)

Part of Obama’s baleful legacy is that during the Scarborough Shoal Incident of April to June 2012, the Filipino president travelled to Washington to ask Obama for U.S. support. Obama didn’t offer support, no operational support followed and China read that as the signal to seize territory from a U.S. ally. As is the usual pattern, the consequence of not dealing forcefully against a minor aggression will lead to a much bigger war down the track.

The Chinese leader that organised the seizure of Scarborough Shoal, Xi Jinping, became a national hero and that gave him the political momentum to see off rivals to become president of the People’s Republic of China the following year. As retired U.S. Navy captain James Fanell noted, while in the West the Scarborough seizure was treated as a minor fisheries dispute, Chinese scholars recognized the significance of Xi’s template for mooting U.S. alliances by undercutting confidence in defense agreements, calling it the ‘Scarborough Model’.

Emboldened by Obama’s acquiescence, China is preparing for a “short, sharp war” to seize the Senkaku Islands from Japan. They are building specialised equipment to that end. Again from Captain Fanell:

Size matters in confrontations at sea, especially between coast guard vessels. As China has sought more of its neighbors’ maritime sovereignty, it has built ever-larger coast guard ships. These are intended to enable its civil maritime forces to carry out China’s  campaign more aggressively (having the biggest ship on scene), and to conduct them at  increasing distances from China’s coastline. As such, China has demonstrated its commitment to have the largest coast guard vessels in the Asia Pacific region. In 2014, China commissioned the largest coast guard cutter in the world, at 12,000 tons, the Zhongguo Haijing 2901. This cutter first went to sea for the first time in May 2015 and is subordinated to the East China Sea area of responsibility. A second ship of the class, CCG 3901, was completed and made ready for operations in January 2016. The Communist Party’s People’s Daily made the purpose of these ships crystal-clear, stating they were designed to have “the power to smash into a vessel weighing more than 20,000 tons and will not cause any damage to itself when confronting a vessel weighing under 9,000 tons. It can also destroy a 5,000-ton ship and sink it to the sea floor.”

Note carefully the combat assault mission of these Chinese Coast Guard ships.

Sinking ships by ramming is a throwback to how triremes did battle in the Mediterranean. It also tells us how China plans to start its war. The super-sized Chinese coast guard ships will ram and sink Japanese coast guard vessels.

When the Japanese Navy responds by sinking the Chinese coast guard ships, the Chinese PLA Navy will come over the horizon with amphibious assault ships. China will claim to be the aggrieved party and offer to end hostilities, leaving it in possession of what it seized.

The Chinese have been doing some dry runs for the conflict to come. Around midday on August 5th, 2016, some 200 to 300 Chinese fishing boats swarmed into the contiguous zone around the Senkaku Islands of Kuban and Uotsuri, followed by 15 Chinese coast guard vessels by August 9th. Come the actual battle, there will be hundreds of Chinese vessels to be sunk, much like plinking tanks in the deserts of the Middle East.

China’s intent is plain, the next question is the timing. The Communist Party of China has directed the People’s Liberation Army to transform itself into a force that will be ready to take Taiwan by 2020. A Senkaku campaign will be a lot easier than subduing Taiwan, and possession of the Senkakus in turn will make the Taiwan campaign easier to mount by partial envelopment of that island. The PLA Navy is still expanding and China might not start its war until its navy is somewhat larger than it is now. Of particular interest is a new class of amphibious assault ships, the Type 075. Approximately the size of the U.S. Navy’s Wasp-class ships, the Type 075 is projected to carry up to 30 helicopters and have the ability to launch six helicopters simultaneously. The first Type 075 class may be launched in 2019 and in service in 2020. Another four might be built by 2025.

There are a few other considerations which have the potential to bring forward China’s war plans. China’s economic growth is mostly debt-funded construction of unproductive assets, so China’s debt to GDP ratio continues to climb. Everyone knows this is unsustainable, that it will end in tears but nobody knows when. A stalling economy and tens of millions of personal bankruptcies as China’s real estate bubble pops would encourage the regime to distract the public with a foreign military adventure. Then there is the question of China’s energy supply. China’s strategic petroleum reserve is estimated to be about 700 million barrels and still building at one million barrels per day. The Chinese reserve will probably keep building until the day the war starts and U.S. and Japanese submarines begin sinking Chinese tankers.

But the big story in energy, internationally, is the projected peaking of Chinese coal production in 2020 before it starts falling away due to resource exhaustion. Chinese coal production of over four billion tons per annum is about four times the U.S. production level. Coal is the source of two thirds of power generation in China, about the same for chemical feedstocks and is the source of all the nitrogenous fertiliser they use. The energy content of Chinese coal production is equivalent to 58 million barrels of oil per day. The production cost of coal, and thus the cost of doing everything in China, will start rising once production has peaked. It is unlikely that China’s nuclear power sector will expand fast enough to compensate. Thus China’s competitiveness relative to countries that have plenty of coal remaining will fall. This will factor into President Xi’s timing of his war.

Now is the time to ask Lenin’s question “What is to be done?” The important thing is to shun anything made in China because that just funds their aggression. Choose the Samsung offering over the iPhone for no other reason. And be nice to any Japanese or Vietnamese you meet. We need them to have courage.

David Archibald is the author of American Gripen: The Solution to the F-35 Nightmare

 

Categories: China - naval power, China and Taiwan, China vs America, China's expansion of power, Chinese economy, Scarborough Shoal, Senkaku Islands, Xi Jinping
Tags: , , , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

An unhappy birthday for Taiwan

October 10, 2017

An unhappy birthday for Taiwan, Washington Times, Don Feder, October 9, 2017

(Please see also, China’s Secret Military Plan: Invade Taiwan by 2020. — DM)

Illustration on Taiwan’s national day by Linas Garsys/The Washington Times

ANALYSIS/OPINION:

The New York Times, the U.S. equivalent of the People’s Daily, could barely contain its glee: “Panama Establishes Ties with China, Further Isolating Taiwan,” read the headline in the June 13 edition.

But Taiwan isn’t isolated, not where it counts. Bilateral trade with the United States was $65.3 billion in 2016, making the ROC our 10th-largest trading partner. According to the International Monetary Fund, Taiwan has the world’s 15th-largest economy (the seventh-largest in Asia). Not bad for a nation of 23 million. Its trade partners are delighted to do business with a country whose existence they won’t officially recognize.

Liberal media like The New York Times assume that resolving the conflict by grafting the ROC to the PRC would be better for everyone.

It wouldn’t be better for a people whose destiny would be taken out of their hands. It wouldn’t be better for the United States, which would see the end of a government that shares our values. And it would not be better for the world, marking the disappearance of the only Chinese democracy in history.

*****************************************

Tuesday is Taiwan’s national day (known as Double Ten Day), commemorating the Wuchang Uprising, which led to the establishment of the Republic of China (ROC) in 1912. The Republic of China on Taiwan is the true heir to Sun Yat-sen’s revolution.

Like the late Rodney Dangerfield, Taiwan gets no respect — at least in the world of international diplomacy.

In June, Panama severed diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Since 1970, most countries have opted for Beijing over Taipei, due to a combination of pressure and bribes. China refuses to have diplomatic relations with any nation that officially recognizes Taiwan. Most opt for pragmatism over principal.

The New York Times, the U.S. equivalent of the People’s Daily, could barely contain its glee: “Panama Establishes Ties with China, Further Isolating Taiwan,” read the headline in the June 13 edition.

But Taiwan isn’t isolated, not where it counts. Bilateral trade with the United States was $65.3 billion in 2016, making the ROC our 10th-largest trading partner. According to the International Monetary Fund, Taiwan has the world’s 15th-largest economy (the seventh-largest in Asia). Not bad for a nation of 23 million. Its trade partners are delighted to do business with a country whose existence they won’t officially recognize.

Besides its vibrant economy, Taiwan is one of the few genuine democracies in Asia. Despite its huge economy, the People’s Republic of China (PRC) remains what it was at the end of the civil war in 1949 — a brutal dictatorship ruled by a self-perpetuating oligarchy.

For Taiwan, trying to get along with the people’s republic is like living with a belligerent, bully of a neighbor, never knowing what will set him off.

In her inaugural address last year, Taiwan’s President Tsai Ing-wen infuriated Beijing by not paying lip service to the myth that both the ROC and PRC both are part of something called One China.

On Dec. 5, President-elect Donald Trump took a phone call from President Tsai. It was the first time since we withdrew recognition of the ROC in 1979 (under that foreign policy genius, President Jimmy Carter) that a U.S. president or president-elect spoke directly with the leader of Taiwan.

On one of his famous Twitter forays, Mr. Trump said he didn’t understand the fuss. (“Interesting how the U.S. sells Taiwan billions of dollars of military equipment but I should not accept a congratulatory call.”)

For the president, that 10-minute conversation may have been a calculated move to elicit Chinese cooperation on North Korea and bilateral trade, or it might have been a recognition of Taiwan’s strategic importance. Always friendly to America, the ROC was our ally from World War II until Nixon betrayed it in 1971, and Mr. Carter completed the process in 1979. Still, the United States has far more in common with the island democracy than with the totalitarian mainland.

Whoever controls both sides of the Taiwan Straits can restrict access to one of the busiest energy trade routes in the world. Do we want that control in the hands of an aggressive, highly volatile regime?

Only 15 nations have diplomatic relations with Taiwan. While few in number, they are steadfast in their support.

Risking Beijing’s displeasure, its 15 allies sent a joint letter to United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres urging that Taipei be included in the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and allowed to participate in the U.N. system, including subsidiary bodies like the World Health Organization. They also noted the absurdity of requiring Taiwanese to have a travel permit issued by China to enter U.N. premises.

Beijing believes that time is on its side — that sooner or later, Taiwan must succumb to pressure to reach a settlement that surrenders its sovereignty — and that it will eventually accept something like the deal Hong Kong got in 1997 (One Nation, Two Systems), on which China has repeatedly reneged.

But since the end of martial law and the transition to democracy, the Taiwanese have forged their own identity, one which makes their merger with the mainland impossible.

Liberal media like The New York Times assume that resolving the conflict by grafting the ROC to the PRC would be better for everyone.

It wouldn’t be better for a people whose destiny would be taken out of their hands. It wouldn’t be better for the United States, which would see the end of a government that shares our values. And it would not be better for the world, marking the disappearance of the only Chinese democracy in history.

The course of history often turns on the fate of small countries — Belgium in 1914 and Czechoslovakia in 1938.

And so, let us wish the Republic of China on Taiwan a happy 105th birthday — and many more.

• Don Feder, a former columnist for the Boston Herald, is a freelance writer.

Categories: China and Taiwan, Chinese "democracy", Taiwan, Taiwan democracy, Taiwan economy
Tags: , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

China’s Secret Military Plan: Invade Taiwan by 2020

October 3, 2017

China’s Secret Military Plan: Invade Taiwan by 2020, Washington Free Beacon, , October 3, 2017

Chinese President Xi Jinping / Getty Images

Democratic-ruled Taiwan poses an existential threat to China’s communist leaders because the island, located some 90 miles off the southeast coast “serves as a beacon of freedom for ethnically Chinese people everywhere,” the book states.

“Consequently, the PLA considers the invasion of Taiwan to be its most critical mission, and it is this envisioned future war that drives China’s military buildup.”

For the Pentagon, China’s plan to seize Taiwan has worried those in the Air Force who expect Chinese missile and other attacks on nearby U.S. bases, notably Japan’s Kadena air base, a central U.S. military hub in the Pacific.

American Navy officials fear Chinese submarines will sink U.S. aircraft carriers or the USS Blue Ridge, the region’s only command ship.

“No one seemed clear on exactly what might happen, but all were sure a future Chinese surprise attack would be worse than Pearl Harbor and 9/11 combined,” the book says.

Others note that a Taiwan conflict could rapidly escalate to a U.S.-China nuclear war.

*********************************

China has drawn up secret military plans to take over the island of Taiwan by 2020, an action that would likely lead to a larger U.S.-China conventional or nuclear war, according to newly-disclosed internal Chinese military documents.

The secret war plan drawn up by the People’s Liberation Army (PLA), the Chinese Communist Party’s armed forces, calls for massive missile attacks on the island, along with a naval and air blockade that is followed by amphibious beach landing assaults using up to 400,000 troops.

The plans and operations are outlined in a new book published this week, The Chinese Invasion Threat by Ian Easton, a China affairs analyst with the Project 2049 Institute, a think tank.

The danger of a Taiwan conflict has grown in recent years even as current tensions between Washington and Beijing are mainly the result of U.S. opposition to Chinese militarization in the South China Sea and China’s covert support of North Korea’s nuclear and missile programs.

“Of all the powder kegs out there, the potential for a war over Taiwan is by far the largest and most explosive,” the 290-page book states, adding that the growing likelihood of a war over Taiwan will dominate worries within the Pentagon for years to come.

“China has made clear that its primary external objective is attaining the ability to apply overwhelming force against Taiwan during a conflict, and if necessary destroy American-led coalition forces,” the books says.

Democratic-ruled Taiwan poses an existential threat to China’s communist leaders because the island, located some 90 miles off the southeast coast “serves as a beacon of freedom for ethnically Chinese people everywhere,” the book states.

“Consequently, the PLA considers the invasion of Taiwan to be its most critical mission, and it is this envisioned future war that drives China’s military buildup.”

Parts of the PLA invasion scheme were first revealed publicly by the Taiwan Defense Ministry in late 2013. The plan calls for military operations against the island to be carried out by 2020.

The invasion program was confirmed by Chinese leader Xi Jinping during the major Communist Party meeting five years ago when Xi committed to “continue the 2020 Plan, whereby we build and deploy a complete operational capability to use force against Taiwan by that year.”

Other internal PLA writings that surfaced recently indicate China is ready to use force when it believes non-military means are not successful in forcing the capitulation to Beijing’s demands, and if the United States can be kept out of the battle.

Current U.S. law under the 1979 Taiwan Relations Act requires the United States to provide defensive weaponry to Taiwan to prevent the use of force against the island.

China currently is using non-lethal means—psychological, diplomatic, propaganda, and informational warfare—against Taiwan. Once these are exhausted, the plan for large-scale amphibious assault will be carried out.

Any attempt by the Chinese military to take the island will be difficult and costly, the book says. The island has rough, mountainous terrain that has created a wind tunnel effect in the strait that produces very difficult weather for carrying troop and weapons transports, both air and sea.

Taiwan is around 230 miles long and 90 miles wide. Taiwanese military forces have been preparing for an invasion since Chinese nationalist forces first took refuge on the island at the end of the civil war with the communists in 1949.

However, since the 1980s, China has been rapidly building up its military capabilities for a battle to forcibly unify the island with the mainland. Over 1,000 ballistic and cruise missiles currently are stationed within range of the Taiwan.

According to the book, China’s invasion plan is known as the Joint Island Attack Campaign.

“Only by militarily occupying The Island can we fundamentally conquer the ‘separatist’ force’s natural living space, and totally end the long military standoff across the Strait,” one PLA field manual states.

The war plan calls for rapidly capturing the capital Taipei and destroying the government; seizing other major cities and clearing out surviving defenders; and occupying the entire country.

Military operations will emphasize speed and surprise to overwhelm coastal defenses and create so much destruction in the early phase that Taiwan would surrender before the U.S. military can deploy forces to the area.

“The conceptual plan, which is referred to in internal PLA writings as the Joint Island Attack Campaign, appears to be highly centralized and updated regularly based on the latest intelligence, weapons production, and lessons learned from exercises and training,” the book says.

The campaign is one of China’s most closely held secrets but has been discussed in internal military manuals and technical writings that recently leaked from within the PLA.

“These provide an extraordinarily detailed look into Chinese thinking on this campaign,” the book says.

The step-by-step invasion process will involve three phases: blockade and bombing, amphibious landing, and combat operations on the island.

Several layers of a naval and air blockade and massive missile strikes on 1,000 targets will be used in the first phase. China then plans to launch sea-borne assaults with an armada of warships against 14 possible beach sites.

“Before the invaders began landing along Taiwan’s coast, the PLA would launch wave after wave of missiles, rockets, bombs, and artillery shells, pounding shoreline defenses, while electronic jammers scrambled communications,” the book says.

The PLA believes a future invasion of Taiwan is inevitable, although the exact time is uncertain.

China regards Taiwan as a “renegade province” and considers reuniting the island with the mainland part of larger Chinese strategic goals of achieving global dominance.

“In the end, only by directly conquering and controlling the island can we realize national unification … otherwise ‘separatist’ forces, even if they momentarily compromise under pressure, can reignite like dormant ashes under the right conditions,” one PLA document states.

A PLA field manual warns that Taiwan’s geography and defenses will require massive and masterful military campaigns that will be extremely challenging, requiring great sacrifices.

A restricted PLA manual, “Course Book on the Taiwan Strait’s Military Geography” warned military officers that external militaries could use Taiwan to cut off China’s trade lines and for use as a U.S. military base to blockade China.

Also, many of China’s seaborne oil imports, pass through the Taiwan Strait and are highly vulnerable to military interdiction. “So protecting the security of this strategic maritime passageway is not just a military activity alone, but rather an act of national strategy,” the manual says.

China also regards Taiwan as a critical chokepoint for Japan and could be used by China to choke its rival.

On the information warfare front, China plans to use the internet and other media outlets to wage psychological warfare aimed at weakening Taiwan’s resistance prior to a main attack.

Psychological warfare actions will be combined with legal and media warfare and other political warfare tools.

An internal Chinese military report outlines the use of information operations:

Utilize legal warfare and public opinion warfare together with psychological warfare to divide and erode the island’s solid willpower and lower the island’s combat strength. Of these, utilize legal warfare against the enemy’s political groups and their so-called ‘allies’ as a form of psychological attack. Clearly make the case that a joint attack campaign against the main island is legally justifiable and based on a continued, and internal, war of liberation…utilize public opinion warfare against the enemy’s military groups as a form of psychological attack. Point out the benefits of giving up their support for ‘independence’ with effective messaging themes…Use the Internet media heavily against non-governmental groups on the island and the masses as a form of psychological attack. Proactively spread propaganda regarding the benefits of unification for the nation and the people, and erode the social foundation of the ‘separatist’ forces on the island.

Taiwan’s leaders also will be targeted in bombing strikes, including the presidential office in Taipei and other government leadership headquarters.

A PLA document tells military leaders to find leadership organizations and their defenses.

“Then you should use high tech weapons that have a strong capability to penetrate their airspace with precision and destructiveness to execute fierce strikes against their head person(s),” the document says. “Assure they are successfully knocked out with one punch.”

Chinese commandos also will be used to abduct or kill Taiwan’s key political and military leaders, weapons experts, and scientists using clandestine means and direct attacks.

China, according to the book, would “almost certainly” fail in its full-scale invasion of Taiwan but its military appears driven to prepare and carry out such an attack.

“China’s leaders recognize the roadblocks in their path and will continue to invest heavily in strategic deception, intelligence collection, psychological warfare, joint training, and advanced weapons,” the book says.

“Barring countervailing efforts, their investments could result in a world-shaking conflict and an immense human tragedy.”

For the Pentagon, China’s plan to seize Taiwan has worried those in the Air Force who expect Chinese missile and other attacks on nearby U.S. bases, notably Japan’s Kadena air base, a central U.S. military hub in the Pacific.

American Navy officials fear Chinese submarines will sink U.S. aircraft carriers or the USS Blue Ridge, the region’s only command ship.

“No one seemed clear on exactly what might happen, but all were sure a future Chinese surprise attack would be worse than Pearl Harbor and 9/11 combined,” the book says.

Others note that a Taiwan conflict could rapidly escalate to a U.S.-China nuclear war.

“The trigger could very well be an accident or innocent act, something calculated as benign but perceived as hostile,” the book says. “It may go down in history as an infamous event, or it may not be understood what exactly happened. Like the case of World War I, the true cause may be debated for a century and still undecided.”

Rick Fisher, a senior fellow at the International Assessment and Strategy Center, said the book presents important policy prescriptions for deterring war. The use of restricted Chinese military writings also provides new clues to Chinese intentions, plans and its ambitions to conquer Taiwan.

“What Easton has done is provide a vital warning to America and its allies, China could try to invade Taiwan as early as the first half of the next decade,” Fisher said. “That means we are right now in a Taiwan Straits crisis and we need to react like we are in a crisis or we risk falling into a war we have successfully avoided since 1950.”

Categories: China - war?, China and Taiwan, China vs America, China's expansion of power, Chinese "democracy", Chinese military, U.S. Military
Tags: , , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

Fat Kim threatens Trump (again)

September 5, 2017

Fat Kim threatens Trump (again), American Thinker, Gary Gindler, September 5, 2017

(This is the most fascinating, and best, suggestion on dealing with North Korean nukes I have read thus far –  force China to take care of the problem. Please see also, Chinese Official Says China Might Invade Taiwan If “Peaceful Reunification Takes Too Long.” — DM)

It’s time for Trump to make an unconventional move – a move no one expects.

It is better not to increase the U.S. military potential in the region.  On the contrary, it is better to completely withdraw all American troops from both South Korea and Japan.

In fact, American troops need to be relocated not into the continental U.S., but to Taiwan.

This move by Trump will make China stop playing the role of an outside observer.  China will be faced with a choice – either China joins Trump on this issue, or she will never get back Taiwan, where the headquarters of the 7th U.S. Navy Fleet will now be located.

Of course, America’s allies in the region, Japan and South Korea, in the face of the withdrawal of U.S. troops, will quite justifiably demand new guarantees of protection from the U.S. government.  America should renew its lend-lease program from the Second World War and lease over to Japan and South Korea, for a term of 99 years, all the nuclear weapons they will ask for.  The military budgets of these countries will skyrocket.  China’s inaction toward the Fat Kim regime will lead to the fact that in addition, China will get two unfriendly nuclear powers armed to the teeth at her own border.

***********************

After Kim Jong-un tested his hydrogen bomb, everything in the world went just as we could expect.  Someone started saber-rattling, and someone insisted that the problem of nuclear North Korea cannot be solved by military means under any circumstances.

Both use very serious arguments.  Those who support appeasement of Kim quite reasonably note that the capital of South Korea, with its 25 million-strong population, is at an artillery salvo distance from the border with North Korea.  Even a limited volley from the north will lead to hundreds of thousands of civilian casualties.  Supporters of a massive blow to North Korea argue that it is better to have thousands of casualties among Koreans than to wait until the hydrogen bomb explodes over San Francisco and Americans become the victims.

Both sides have numerous supporters in the highest echelons of power in Washington.

Meanwhile, Fat Kim does not present a threat to the United States at present.  Fat Kim is a threat to President Trump.

Fat Kim is not a dumb bump.  He’s just one of the players in the next political show of the Axis countries.  The North Korean crisis allows others hostile to America – countries such as Iran, Russia, and Syria (i.e., Axis countries) – to check Trump’s resolve.  China is not a member of this Axis, but it watches Trump with great pleasure as he tries to get out of this entrapment.

All the Axis countries are linked by longstanding nuclear technology ties.  Of all the Axis countries, only Syria lacks this technology (the Syrian nuclear reactor, which was built by North Korean engineers, was bombed by Israel in 2007).

The Axis countries are waiting for Trump’s move.  A standard geopolitical analysis shows that there are many options for Trump, but they all range from bad to very bad.

It’s time for Trump to make an unconventional move – a move no one expects.

It is better not to increase the U.S. military potential in the region.  On the contrary, it is better to completely withdraw all American troops from both South Korea and Japan.

In fact, American troops need to be relocated not into the continental U.S., but to Taiwan.

This move by Trump will make China stop playing the role of an outside observer.  China will be faced with a choice – either China joins Trump on this issue, or she will never get back Taiwan, where the headquarters of the 7th U.S. Navy Fleet will now be located.

Of course, America’s allies in the region, Japan and South Korea, in the face of the withdrawal of U.S. troops, will quite justifiably demand new guarantees of protection from the U.S. government.  America should renew its lend-lease program from the Second World War and lease over to Japan and South Korea, for a term of 99 years, all the nuclear weapons they will ask for.  The military budgets of these countries will skyrocket.  China’s inaction toward the Fat Kim regime will lead to the fact that in addition, China will get two unfriendly nuclear powers armed to the teeth at her own border.

If Trump adds to this the ban on trade with all countries that have trade relations with North Korea, then China, with four fifths of its economy dependent on the U.S. market, will suffer the most.

There is every reason to believe that China will make a reasonable choice.  Most likely, she will do this much earlier than the first transport from Japan with the U.S. Marine Corps docks in Taipei.  It is unreasonable to assume that China does not have a well conceived plan for rapid regime change in North Korea.

If wisdom escapes the Chinese communists, then as the icing on the cake, they will get a united Korea at their side.  Capitalistic.  And nuclear.

 

Categories: America and Taiwan, China and North Korea, China and Taiwan, North Korea - new option, North Korean H Bomb test, North Korean missiles, U.S. Military
Tags: , , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

Chinese Official Says China Might Invade Taiwan If “Peaceful Reunification Takes Too Long”

September 3, 2017

Chinese Official Says China Might Invade Taiwan If “Peaceful Reunification Takes Too Long”, Synglobe, September 3, 2017

(Please see also, Taiwan Receives U.S. Navy Frigates, Plans Purchase of American Fighter Jets. — DM)

Image by DrRandomFactor via Wikimedia Commons

With regard to Taiwan’s internal politics, Wang implicitly admitted that the majority of Taiwanese voters had rejected cross-strait unification.

“There is no longer a balance of power between the pan-blue and the pan-green coalition,” he said, adding that “the Guomindang cannot effectively counter the DDP anymore” and that “Taiwanese public opinion is increasingly opposed to reunification”. The probability of peaceful reunification “has not been completely lost”, but it is “gradually being lost”, he said.

Due to concerns over China’s growing military might, the Taiwanese government will increase its defence budget by 50% in 2018 and focus on developing its domestic defence industry.

*********************************

In a recent interview Wang Zaixi (王在希), a former vice-chairman of China’s Taiwan Affairs Office of the State Council, said that Beijing might resort to the use of force if “peaceful re-unification” between China and Taiwan “takes too long”.

Wang’s statements echo the increasingly assertive stance of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) towards the island since Xi Jinping took office in 2012.

In the interview Wang Zaixi stated that although the Taiwan question is a complex issue that must be resolved in the long term, there “must be a sense of urgency towards cross-strait reunification.”

Wang blamed Taiwan‘s democratic process for slowing down the prospect of a peaceful solution of the cross-strait issue, arguing that because of the transfer of power from the pro-unification to the pro-independence coalition the possibility of peaceful unification “is gradually being lost.”

In 2014 and 2015 the Guomindang, Taiwan’s pro-unification party, suffered major electoral setbacks, losing the parliamentary majority to the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), which rejects rapprochement with China.

Read: China-Taiwan Tensions and the Guomindang’s Existential Crisis

Wang stated that the DPP administration is slowly promoting “Taiwanese independence”. He warned that the path towards Taiwan’s de jure independence “is unfeasible and would be catastrophic for our Taiwanese compatriots”.

Wang signalled that although no timetable for unification can at present be set, the CCP will not tolerate the resolution of the issue to drag on for too long. He cited Article 8 of China’s Anti-Secession Law, which states that “[i]n the event that … possibilities for a peaceful reunification should be completely exhausted, the state shall employ non-peaceful means and other necessary measures to protect China’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.”

Calling unification “an irresistible trend that cannot be avoided” Wang said that “the Taiwan issue has been evolving for 68 years already, it cannot be allowed to drag on for a 100 years, 1.3 billion compatriots cannot accept [this issue] to continue indefinitely”.

As to how the Taiwan issue could be solved peacefully, Wang argued that a cross-strait agreement laying out gradual steps towards unification could be reached between the two sides.

He added that mainland China hopes for “peaceful reunification”, but that the option of “reunification by force”  (武統) cannot be ruled out. “Although peace might not bring about reunification, reunification will certainly bring about cross-strait peace,” he concluded.

In recent years China has been pushing more aggressively towards cross-strait unification. At a meeting with a Taiwanese envoy in October 2013, Chinese President Xi Jinping said that the solution of the Taiwan issue “cannot wait forever”.

Since at that time Taiwan was still ruled by the Guomindang, Xi’s statement was not a reaction to Taipei’s hostility, but a sign that the Chinese leader is determined to pursue a more assertive Taiwan policy than his predecessors.

Due to concerns over China’s growing military might, the Taiwanese government will increase its defence budget by 50% in 2018 and focus on developing its domestic defence industry.

Categories: "Reunification" by force, China and Taiwan
Tags: ,

Comments: Be the first to comment