Against the backdrop of an intensifying situation in the Taiwan Strait, the latest edition of the US Army journal Military Review features an article titled “Drive them into the sea” by former research analyst and Michigan Army National Guard member Brian Dunn.
Dunn suggests permanently garrisoning up to four US Army armored divisions in Taiwan, so that the US leadership would no longer have to worry about whether it has the ability to assist Taiwan in the event of an invasion by China.
Instead of permanently basing armored divisions in Taiwan, it would be far more practical to leverage the existing superiority of the US forces to counter the threat of a Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) invasion.
First, if the US Army were to garrison divisions in Taiwan, it would certainly increase the overall armor and anti-armor strengths of Taiwan’s land forces, but it would also mean that during the opening stages of a conflict, there would be an undeniable risk that not only the Taiwanese units, but also the US divisions would come under fire from PLA guided missiles — and might possibly even be wiped out.
Second, in the event of an invasion by China, the US Air Force and Navy should be employed to destroy the PLA Navy and Rocket Force’s first and second battle lines.
This would entail the US military conducting an air-sea battle prior to or during the initial stages of a Chinese invasion, using a combination of B-1, B-2 or B-52 bombers, and cruise missiles to carry out long-distance strikes against PLA targets.
US air and naval forces would be supported by Taiwanese anti-ship and cruise missiles, which could be used to carry out “fountainhead strikes” on PLA bases within China’s Fujian, Zhejiang and Guangdong provinces within a 400km to 600km radius.
A joint US-Taiwan air-sea battle would deny PLA forces the ability to break out from the “first island chain” and rout the backbone of the PLA’s invasion force.
The political benefits of garrisons of US Army divisions in Taiwan would outweigh any military gain. This is because the US Air Force and Navy still possess absolute superiority over their PLA counterparts and would need to support US ground forces to achieve a relative advantage during battle.
In other words, US air and naval power, together with the Taiwanese military’s guided missile capabilities — not land forces — would provide the mainstay of the nation’s defense against a Chinese invasion.
Ray Song is a graduate of National Chung Cheng University’s Institute of Strategic and International Affairs.
Translated by Edward Jones
When Panama severed diplomatic relations with Taiwan and recognized China in 2017, Beijing achieved one of its most important diplomatic victories in Central America. However, nearly a decade later, Panama is demonstrating that diplomatic recognition does not necessarily eliminate Taiwan from a country’s political system. Panama and Taiwan had diplomatic relations for more than 100 years and the goodwill between the countries was displayed last week when Panama’s National Assembly established an interparliamentary exchange group with the Legislative Yuan. Forty-five of the assembly’s 71 lawmakers joined the group, representing more than 60 percent of the legislature. Its members include National Assembly President Shirley
If Taiwan falls, the true battle moves from the beaches into the concrete streets. Western analysts fixate on the invasion phase. They end wargames when missiles stop flying and submit policy papers after the fate of a beachhead is decided. This narrow focus ignores the grim reality of “the day after.” To address this blind spot, the Irregular Warfare Center (IWC) published a seminal study on March 5, 2026, titled China’s Way of Occupation: Implications for Taiwan. Authored by Jan K. Gleiman and others, the report analyzes Beijing’s actions in Tibet, Xinjiang (East Turkestan), and Hong Kong to expose a chilling playbook
Ten years ago, when I was an undergraduate at National Chung Hsing University (NCHU), there was a referendum on whether to remove a statue of Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) from the campus. I wrote to the Liberty Times (the Taipei Times’ sister newspaper) urging faculty, staff and students to vote for its removal. Eventually, the statue was removed from the university. Today, I am filled with emotion at seeing students at Soochow University democratically remove their own statue of Chiang, a figure of authoritarian rule, after it was on display for 48 years The timing is noteworthy, with the nine-in-one local elections approaching.
Beijing has for decades insisted that Taiwan is a matter to be settled between China and the US — or, preferably, by China alone. The strategic environment around Taiwan is making that increasingly difficult. The clearest evidence this week came not from Washington or Beijing, but from Tokyo. Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi on Tuesday met with US President Donald Trump before his summit with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平). Taiwan is expected to feature prominently in US-China talks, particularly as Beijing presses Washington over arms sales to Taipei. However, focusing only on what Trump might or might not concede misses the
RSS