March 30, 2004
LET'S GET IT ON:
Upsetting But Powerful Logic Behind Outbreak of War Over Taiwan (Tom Plate, 3/30/04, Korea Times)
It’s unimaginable that China would ever go to war against Taiwan, right? Until recently, that’s what I thought.Why would the government of China alter strategic course, veer away from its sane game plan of prioritizing economic development for 1.3 billion people and launch some kind of military attack on Taiwan, a major investor on the mainland and the democratic darling of people in the West?
The international implications for Beijing would be staggering. It would shock an on-looking world every bit as much as last century’s horrific Cultural Revolution, not to mention Tiananmen Square. China again would become, for some years at least, a pariah on the international stage.
Die-hard anti-Communist Republicans in America would say “I told you so”; anti-free trade Democrats now blaming China for aggravating U.S. joblessness would say “There the Bad Guys go again.” Even the worshipful French would have to duck for political cover. Thus China, assuming the success of invasion, would gain Taiwan but lose the world.
And so I used to laugh when learned scholars such as UCLA’s Richard Baum would refuse to rule out the possibility of such military action. How could they be so oblivious to the primacy of economics over politics in our globalized world?
But now I have come to accept the Baum possibility: that significant forces inside China marching to a drumbeat different from that of rational economists may wind up calling the shots over Taiwan, where pro-independence party President Chen Shui-bian has apparently been reelected (subject to the recount) and unleash the first shot.
We should have settled their hash during Tiananmen, but it's never too late to get rid of the last three Communist regimes. Posted by Orrin Judd at March 30, 2004 2:33 PM
How does the president pronounce "nuclear" again ? The Chinese may soon find out.
Posted by: Peter at March 30, 2004 2:46 PMthere's only one problem -- they can't succeed ..
US / Taiwanese military power in the region is more than sufficient to repel an invasion without going nuclear ..
Tom Plate should have done his homework. LBJ offered Ho Chi Minh a torrent of dollars, construction projects, you name it, to back off the war effort. LBJ then said to one of his aides (it may have been Bill Moyers), "Old Ho can't refuse this. He just can't refuse this." Old Ho did indeed refuse. LBJ's effort clearly seemed shaped by his experience in the Senate, and he treated Ho Chi Minh like an opposition party politician to be placated by an especially juicy highway pork bill. Some people are driven by a different vision, though.....
Posted by: Bruce Cleaver at March 30, 2004 3:13 PMSteven Den Beste discussed this several months ago: Invasion of Taiwan .
Absent initial attack with nuclear weapons, a Chinese invasion is not militarily credible. There are at least six problems they cannot solve each of which would be sufficient to make such an invasion fail. And even if there were such an attempt, and even if the US got involved, we would not rely on ground forces to do so.So I don't take threats of invasion seriously. The PRC is rattling its sabers because it would be political suicide inside the PRC for any leader there to do otherwise. But they won't make the attempt, because it would lead to disaster.
And even if they successfully invaded Taiwan and incorporated it into China by force, their trade with the US (and probably with Japan and South Korea) would collapse, and the economic consequences of that to China would be tremendous.
The status quo for the last thirty years, since Nixon's visit, is that Taiwan is in practice already independent, and China pretty much accepts that as fait accompli. But the leaders in China insist on being able to keep pretending that it isn't, for domestic political reasons. Everyone else (including the leaders in Taipei) put up with that as long as the Chinese don't do anything other than growl.
One submarine in the Straits with cruise missles could pretty much stop any invasion fleet. China does not have air ransport of that magnitude. (Nobody but the US does!) A carrier off the coast to show we mean business and a few words of warning are all that is needed.
By the way, there are 5 Communist states if you count Laos and Cuba.
Posted by: D. Woolwine at March 30, 2004 3:39 PMTim:
When has certain failure ever stopped our enemies before?
Posted by: oj at March 30, 2004 3:40 PMCan a country that enforces a one child policy tolerate casualties from an offensive war?
Posted by: Carter at March 30, 2004 4:01 PMOJ
"let's get in on"
Oh pleeeze. I think Big John will explain all of the nuances to you as the campaign get under way.
Posted by: h-man at March 30, 2004 4:19 PMWe should sell or give Taiwan a few nukes already. Just enough for deterrence. Hell, just bringing it up for discussion in Congress would make the Chicoms crap their pants.
Posted by: ralph phelan at March 30, 2004 5:19 PMCarter;
Actually, given the gender imbalances currently plaguing China, it might well desire massive casualities among its young male population. Not this year, but in 5 or 10? Not to mention that I have never heard of any government in China that has ever been concerned about the collateral damage of its policies.
All;
I don't see any need to give nukes to Taiwan. As pointed out, a nice set of submarines and airplanes would render an invasion effectively impossible. They wouldn't even have to be nuclear powered subs - diesel subs are actually superior for coastal defense.
In terms of whether China would invade, why rule out the possibility of a North Korea style foreign policy? Even a failed invasion would likely decimate the Taiwanese economy and cause massive collateral economic damage in the West. Who would blink first?
AOG:
You don't see the point of giving nukes to Taiwan, but India might...
Posted by: mike earl at March 30, 2004 9:59 PMThese Chineese are not believers like Ho. They are bottom line guys. There is no upside in this one for them. forget it.
Posted by: Robert Schwartz at March 31, 2004 12:05 AMAOG:
Unfortunatly, we dont make non-nukes subs right now........
Of course if we could license the non-improved LA class subs...
Wouldn't need subs with the missiles available.
And the Chinese would have a hell of a time towing the French aircraft carrier out there.
Greenpeace would be out there to stop any pollution from sinking Chinese ships, planes and human detritus.
Posted by: genecis at March 31, 2004 11:09 AMRobert--
These Chineese are not believers like Ho. They are bottom line guys. There is no upside in this one for them
You'd be amazed by the younger Chinese generation. Compared to them, the current government is restraint itself. My company has an engineer over there. His parents were refugees from Shenzhen, he lives in HK, was educated in Taiwan and the UK, despises the Party. He can't wait for them to fall so China can get on with the business of bombing Taiwan. Rebuilding can come later, according to him. To listen to him it's not at all a matter of business but of Chineseness.
Posted by: Brian (MN) at March 31, 2004 11:22 AMRoboDruid;
No, but Russia has a lot of surplus ones. We could finance Taiwan buying them, thereby boosting two allies at once and demonstrating to China that it's not in the winning position.