Last week’s Han Kuang live-fire drills simulated a People’s Liberation Army (PLA) attempt to land on Penghu and a PLA assault on a Taichung airbase. These drills are important to maintain the most effective military response in case of an invasion by China.
Although the US has committed to defend Taiwan by the Three Joint Communiques, the Taiwan Relations Act (TRA) and the “six assurances,” the nation still needs to be ready to defend itself, certainly in the initial stages of an attack.
According to a 2015 RAND Corp report entitled The US-China Military Scorecard: Forces, Geography and the Evolving Balance of Power, 1996-2017, China’s ability to project its military power and have favorable engagements with the US is rapidly improving, especially closer to home, with an invasion of Taiwan for example.
However, it is also important to consider the costs of an invasion and its aftermath, which might give Beijing considerable pause.
First, landings would be costly for an invading force in terms of life and equipment, much more so than for Taiwan, especially with US assistance factored in.
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) would need to know that an invasion would succeed. Defeat would jeopardize the CCP’s legitimacy and give the US good cause to maintain a much stronger — and long term — military presence in the region, making a repeat attempt much more difficult.
Second, even if Beijing were to succeed, it would unlikely be met with open arms by Taiwanese. It would be different from when Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) forces arrived in 1949.
Taiwanese have an increasingly strong sense of national identity and have had a long time to think about China taking over. They do not want that.
They also have a sophisticated sense of the ins and outs of the historical argument of who has rightful sovereignty over Taiwan. China would not win that argument.
Third, there would be considerable infrastructure damage and destruction to government buildings, utilities, bridges, roads, railway lines and other transportation links. This would require massive reconstruction, which would not endear Taiwanese to the aggressors, to say nothing of the costs.
Fourth, there would be significant loss of life, which would stir up enmity.
Beijing could expect several decades of mollifying and pacifying Taiwanese, and dealing with insurgencies across the nation.
The PLA would have to commit tens of thousands of people to keeping Taiwan under control for decades.
There is also the reaction of the international community to consider. China is trying to present itself as a global power, with all of the responsibilities that entails.
Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) appears to want to establish China as a champion of international free trade and the environment in the potential power vacuum left by US President Donald Trump’s administration.
Instigating an invasion and drawn-out pacification of a people known for their progressive, peace-loving ways and democratic achievement might not be the best way to do that. It could lead to international isolation and condemnation that would retard any efforts China has made to set itself up as a reliable international partner.
Nations such as the Philippines, Vietnam and Japan, which have competing territorial claims in the South China and East China seas, would also have to adjust their approach to China and its military.
The economic disruption would have serious domestic consequences for the CCP’s legitimacy, as Chinese, who are becoming accustomed to prosperity and stability, might turn against the leadership.
China’s supreme objective in a war across the Taiwan Strait is to incorporate Taiwan as a province of the People’s Republic. It follows, therefore, that international recognition of Taiwan’s de jure independence is a consummation that China’s leaders devoutly wish to avoid. By the same token, an American strategy to deny China that objective would complicate Beijing’s calculus and deter large-scale hostilities. For decades, China has cautioned “independence means war.” The opposite is also true: “war means independence.” A comprehensive strategy of denial would guarantee an outcome of de jure independence for Taiwan in the event of Chinese invasion or
A recent Taipei Times editorial (“A targeted bilingual policy,” March 12, page 8) questioned how the Ministry of Education can justify spending NT$151 million (US$4.74 million) when the spotlighted achievements are English speech competitions and campus tours. It is a fair question, but it focuses on the wrong issue. The problem is not last year’s outcomes failing to meet the bilingual education vision; the issue is that the ministry has abandoned the program that originally justified such a large expenditure. In the early years of Bilingual 2030, the ministry’s K-12 Administration promoted the Bilingual Instruction in Select Domains Program (部分領域課程雙語教學實施計畫).
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) earlier this month said it is necessary for her to meet with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) and it would be a “huge boost” to the party’s local election results in November, but many KMT members have expressed different opinions, indicating a struggle between different groups in the party. Since Cheng was elected as party chairwoman in October last year, she has repeatedly expressed support for increased exchanges with China, saying that it would bring peace and prosperity to Taiwan, and that a meeting with Xi in Beijing takes priority over meeting
Philippine Department of Foreign Affairs spokesman for maritime affairs Rogelio Villanueva on Monday said that Manila’s claims in the South China Sea are backed by international law. Villanueva was responding to a social media post by the Chinese embassy alleging that a former Philippine ambassador in 1990 had written a letter to a German radio operator stating that the Scarborough Shoal (Huangyan Island, 黃岩島) did not fall within Manila’s territory. “Sovereignty is not merely claimed, it is exercised,” Villanueva said. The Philippines won a landmark case at the Permanent Court of Arbitration in 2016 that found China’s sweeping claim of sovereignty in
RSS