We have to be completely honest with ourselves and with each other on the subject of missile defense, North Korea, China and Russia. When North Korea elected to launch several medium and long range ballistic missiles on the US' Independence Day last week, it defied the international community and sent a shock wave through countries in the region, especially South Korea and Japan.
The Taepodong-2 missile built by North Korea can reach targets all over Taiwan, adding to the overall difficulty of defending the country. The greater the range of a ballistic missile, the higher the re-entry velocity. This equates to an increasingly more difficult defense challenge as the range of the aggressor's missile flight increases.
We already know that, as good as they are in theory, the missile defense networks currently being contemplated by the US are imperfect and limited.
US President George W. Bush wisely put the right perspective on the US' missile defense sys-tem at his Chicago news conference on July 7, saying, "Our anti-ballistic systems are modest, they're new, they're new research, we're testing them. And so ... it's hard for me to give you a probability of success [on how they might have performed against North Korea's missiles]."
The US Navy AEGIS-equipped ships, properly positioned, could add some defensive capability to Taiwan. But the capacity to protect the entire country is still lacking, and achieving this will be a monumental task both in terms of time and money.
The US Patriot PAC-3 missiles proposed to defend Taiwan, South Korea and Japan are a step in the right direction but still inadequate to intercept a longer-range ballistic missile.
PAC-3, which is less capable than the Navy systems for ballistic missile defense, was also designed to counter shorter-range ballistic missiles; not a bird with the long-range capability of the Taepodong-2.
After traveling thousands of kilometers from North Korea, the re-entry vehicle, which could carry a nuclear weapon, would be traveling at unbelievable velocities. Intercepting that kind of vehicle fired at that range would be extremely difficult. And a missed intercept in this scenario could mean a vast expanse of destruction and death -- in the target nation's homeland.
The Taiwanese people now live under the shadow of potentially thousands of shorter-range ballistic missiles from China that could come with almost no warning. The nation's defense against this new North Korean threat is also very limited.
Missile defenses on land, like PAC-3 or systems with even less capability, could not defend Taiwan against a large-scale Chinese or North Korean attack.
Taiwan must rethink its missile defense posture, policy, strategy and investment and follow the lead of the US, Japan and South Korea on missile defense.
John Carey is a former president of International Defense Consultants. He served in the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization during his career in the US Navy and also commanded an AEGIS-equipped ship.
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
RSS