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.
US President Donald Trump last week told reporters that he had signed about 12 letters to US trading partners, which were set to be sent out yesterday, levying unilateral tariff rates of up to 70 percent from Aug. 1. However, Trump did not say which countries the letters would be sent to, nor did he discuss the specific tariff rates, reports said. The news of the tariff letters came as Washington and Hanoi reached a trade deal earlier last week to cut tariffs on Vietnamese exports to the US to 20 percent from 46 percent, making it the first Asian country
As things heated up in the Middle East in early June, some in the Pentagon resisted American involvement in the Israel-Iran war because it would divert American attention and resources from the real challenge: China. This was exactly wrong. Rather, bombing Iran was the best thing that could have happened for America’s Asia policy. When it came to dealing with the Iranian nuclear program, “all options are on the table” had become an American mantra over the past two decades. But the more often US administration officials insisted that military force was in the cards, the less anyone believed it. After
On Monday, Minister of Foreign Affairs Lin Chia-lung (林佳龍) delivered a welcome speech at the ILA-ASIL Asia-Pacific Research Forum, addressing more than 50 international law experts from more than 20 countries. With an aim to refute the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) claim to be the successor to the 1945 Chinese government and its assertion that China acquired sovereignty over Taiwan, Lin articulated three key legal positions in his speech: First, the Cairo Declaration and Potsdam Declaration were not legally binding instruments and thus had no legal effect for territorial disposition. All determinations must be based on the San Francisco Peace
During an impromptu Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) rally on Tuesday last week to protest what the party called the unfairness of the judicial system, a young TPP supporter said that if Taiwan goes to war, he would “surrender to the [Chinese] People’s Liberation Army [PLA] with unyielding determination.” The rally was held after former Taipei deputy mayor Pong Cheng-sheng’s (彭振聲) wife took her life prior to Pong’s appearance in court to testify in the Core Pacific corruption case involving former Taipei mayor and TPP chairman Ko Wen-je (柯文哲). The TPP supporter said President William Lai (賴清德) was leading them to die on
RSS