Tensions between the US and China continue to escalate, with the Taiwan issue at the heart of potential conflict.
The US-based RAND Corp think tank on Wednesday published a report titled Thinking Through Protracted War With China, which analyzed the forms a US-China war could take. The report envisions nine potential scenarios — ranging from proxy wars to direct conflict — two of which directly involve Taiwan.
In the first scenario involving Taiwan, China attempts to seize Taiwan through a naval blockade and launches an amphibious invasion. After the US intervenes, the armed conflict reaches a stalemate; both sides see catastrophic losses and are unable to achieve victory through military means.
As a result, US President Donald Trump orders symbolic attacks against targets on Chinese territory to demonstrate US resolve. China does the same in turn, striking targets in the US. With both sides lacking sufficient conventional power to decisively defeat the other, the war evolves into a “conflict of resolve.”
Washington and Beijing then use reusable missile systems to attack civilian infrastructure and cultural monuments to force concessions. While this scenario does not involve the use of nuclear weapons, it devolves into a protracted war of attrition.
Taiwan faces enormous pressure, its infrastructure damaged by airstrikes, with prolonged conflict posing challenges to its energy and material stores. To survive a protracted war of attrition, Taiwan must strengthen its anti-missile defense systems, enhance self-sufficiency and ensure continued support from allied nations, the report says.
The second scenario involving Taiwan is a Chinese air and maritime blockade aiming to force Taiwan into accepting unification. The US provides Taiwan with supplies via airlift — the scale surpassing that of the 1948 Berlin Airlift — and cooperates with allied nations to pressure China by blockading oil shipments entering the South China Sea, thereby weakening China’s economic and military capabilities. A low-intensity war of attrition begins, testing the military capabilities, economic resilience and strategic patience of all parties.
The report says that the key to Taiwan’s survival in such a scenario lies not only in military defense, but also in long-term resource supply and societal adaptability. If such a war drags on — whether through the weakening of military power or economic pressure — it could alter the strategic landscape of the Taiwan Strait, or even the globe.
Thus, Taiwan must strengthen its wartime supply capabilities and ensure self-sufficiency in order to handle a prolonged blockade, the report says.
The report indicates that, while the US has traditionally assumed that wars would end relatively quickly, the emerging strategic environment and changes in technology might lead to significantly prolonged armed conflicts.
If neither the US nor China holds an advantage in conventional military power, economic competition or strategic patience, the war could evolve into a protracted stalemate.
Neither the US nor China would be able to achieve a decisive victory in the short term, and the conflict’s duration could far exceed initial expectations.
Moreover, decisions made in the early stages of an armed conflict would have a profound impact on subsequent developments. Whether China attempts a blockade, the US chooses to airlift supplies, or both sides launch symbolic strikes on the other, all could cause the war to evolve into a protracted armed confrontation.
Advancements in technology are also changing the nature of warfare. The application of emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence, uncrewed aerial vehicles and cyberwarfare would make future wars very different.
New technology would not only increase the duration of conflicts, but would also make them more difficult to predict. Against this backdrop, Taiwan must prepare by ensuring the adaptability of its defense systems to the challenges of modern warfare.
Through collaboration with allied nations and technological innovation, Taiwan can enhance its strategic resilience in the event of protracted conflict.
Liao Ming-hui is an assistant researcher at the Chung-Hua Institution for Economic Research.
Translated by Kyra Gustavsen
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
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS