Mass mining of the strait IS is probably one of the best asymmetric answers available to the ROC. It would also be a potent asymmetric response to a blockade by the PLAN.
What is needed, among many things, is a agreement with Taiwan to pre-position ammo stocks (if we had stocks) on the island during peace, similar to our storage agreements with Korea and Israel.
Cuz after the war stats, getting things into Taiwan will make resupply of Corregidor look easy.
You'd write them off? Or resupply to East coast harbors after hostilities start?
Spread them around, like the Swiss model. All the Javelins need not be in the same bunker.
Example: A prime invasion target will be the ports needed by the PRC to secure the country. They need to capture them intact. Lots of shipping containers there. Some with Stingers or javelins. Which?
The picture at the top of this article reminds me of a time when I walked all over Manhattan looking for Rommel's "The Tank in Attack." "Do you want 'Infantry Attacks?'" asked the helpful librarian. "No thanks," said I, "I'm looking for his book on tanks."
There isn't going to be enough prozac to go around as to what follows. There is little to suggest that the ROC's defenses are anything other than an annoying speed bump. So once again the burden falls on the U.S. (because the experts say it must) and where the evidence tilts towards catastrophic consequences. But at least we have chutzpah going for us... that's something. And besides, "success" post-Afghan pull out clearly demonstrates that what constitutes success is a moving target defined by our best and brightest.
Xi and his inner circle would love if Taiwan became part of the PRC without having to invade. The million dollar question is: whether the leadership of the CCP thinks that peaceful reunification of Taiwan will happen before the PRC's demographic and economic problems eat the country alive by mid-century (or earlier, how much can we really trust CCP's own numbers). If the answer to that question is "NO", then buckle-up, because the PRC will invade and the invasion will come in the short-term (before 2030) or medium-term (2030s). The CCP leadership has already stated their willingness to use force if necessary to ensure reunification. The CCP leadership has already declared it a strategic goal to achieve re-unification with Taiwan by 2049. And if the CCP leadership now sees their window of being able to force re-unification closing because of China's long-term demographic and economic problems, then they be more willing to use force in the short or medium term. Xi advancing the PLA's readiness plan to be able to invade Taiwan from 2035 to 2027 is not an encouraging sign if one is hoping that the CCP is willing to bide their time for a peaceful reunification.
You place too much weight on demographics, seems like a popular cope in the west. Isn't JPN/SK also experiencing demo decline, yet still a powerful economic force?
To me, the interesting thing is that the PLAN was able to put their CVBG, led by the Shandong, into the Northern Philippine Sea and conducted a joint exercise on relatively short notice. (Assuming that they didn't have months of intelligence predicting the date of the Speaker's visit, and that the exercise was not preplanned and that this is all coincidence.) Yes, it is in their backyard, but could we pull the same thing off with the USS Reagan sitting pier-side in Yokosuka?
It’s more a case of Congress establishing and refusing to cede any meaningful control for changes to the defense procurement bureaucracy.
You saw it vividly when Chaillan left because he couldn’t effect any meaningful change with all the rules in place. He had big plans but after about the fifteenth rake hitting him in the face he quit with an epic LinkedIn rant that basically said “Later bitches. So long, and thanks for all the fish.” And he’s not wrong. It’s too profitable for Lockheed and Northrop to let things continue as they are. Slow and predictable. I mean, why are we still funding the Space Launch Alliance for five launches a year when Space X can do 50? Because it’s part and parcel about shareholders profits instead of efficiency or effectiveness.
I'm way out of my league here, but that won't stop me from throwing out some thoughts. How many tens of millions would die if the Three Gorges Dam went boom? We could hire the yacht guys the Ukes used. Since we clearly are in no position to stop the thrust (just like in the famous Fulda Gap) we need to signal the "flexible response" that will be chained together culminating in tactical nukes then strategic nukes. Doesn't take a poker genius to see that we are probably bluffing with a low pocket pair but let's face it we are in a poor situation strategically, tactically and economically. The One China fairytale farce is probably going to have go. Brandon already has signaled what we and everybody else thinks anyway. If the Taiwanese signal that a burnt crisp is all Xi will get then that will help. But this is more about CCP Weltanschauung than chip fabricators.
Also maybe going full submarine and anti satellite is the way to go. First Island chain is not defensible as much as our friends would like to think it is. Sucks to be a friend of us. Thanks Sullivan, Nuland and Blinken.
Oh about as many if China nuked NYC, Boulder Dam, San Francisco, Tokyo, Guam Etc.
Taiwan is indefensible against a Peer Power. a simple in your face Blockade by air and sea would suffice, nothing in or out.
Would the current administration actually try to force such a blockade? If so would they retreat after losing a Carrier Battle group or just one warship?
My guess is China will 1. Start hostilities between NorK and ROK, 2. initiate some kind of drama with Japan, and the Philippines.
Then wait till the world realizes a working functional Taiwan under any rule is better than not.
Great stuff, but what Sal would you like to see done with the 80's bureaucracy in order to change the same old same old? There is a huge list of stupid things done, like R&D being so large it hurts procurement, not enough combat soldiers, tooth to tail stinks, maintenance horrifying, but what of the 80's acts that you'd like to see done? Very interested to know.
Taiwan was a battle in a war almost 100 years ago, contested by Japan, Communist's China, Nationalist China until Chang retreated there at the end of the China/Taiwan civil war it was solely Chinese property.
This one of those last battles of World War Two, the Communists as we have seen here in the US have long memories and will go after their political enemies long after they are out of any power.
Unable to take the Island at the end of WW2 they bided their time until they have the power.
The fact Taiwan is a lucrative and highly valuable Island makes this more so.
Taiwan did not want US bases, China was an ally at one time of the US and the nation had other problems, (Soviet Union, Europe, Berlin) so it was left as it is now.
What, exactly, can the United States do? The political leadership is hopelessly compromised, corrupt and incompetent. The military is poisoned by wokism. What, given current and expected resources, could the US do that would not be suicidal?
1. Strenghen Taiwan as much as possible with whatever munitions have not been sent to the Ukraine to be wasted.
2. Provide the Taiwanese airforce with F 35's, instead of F 16's so they will at least be able to do some damage.
3. Equip nuclear attack submarines to act as mobile stealth minelayers to put as many Chinese ports as possible out of action and/or mine likely invasion routes. Mines are the only weapon I am aware of which will not cause the submarine to give its location away when used.
4. Rearm as fast as possible.
5. Encourage nations under threat by China (Japan, South Korea) to develop their own nuclear weapons.
6. Decouple the US from China economically.
7. Shut down Chinas influence operations in universities, schools, etc.
8. Rush development of long range hypersonic missiles.
Well, there is a lot more, but this might be a useful start.
nice start, how about adding stopping retiring LA class subs in a haste to rip out the fuel and insides and instead build a naval reserve so the Naval reserves have power, or, actually just keep them until they are 45 years old and use in an effective manner?
While at it, we could give them to the Canadians/Aussies/Taiwanese too. If Taiwan can operate a WWII class sub, I'd think giving them 3 LA class subs that we'd just scrap since they are "too old", maybe refuel them for them, would be a great start, and an asset that the Reds would need to take seriously on their way across the strait.
It is already written, this admin is wanting an end to American power around the world.
They see us as the bad guys and all we have to do is sit back, reset, build the Nation into their version of reality and allow other people to run things.
The American people are not willing to sacrifice their comfort and Tik Toks for Taiwan.
While I could name a few cities and an entire state I would trade, others won't.
I agree with your first two sentences. The jury is still out on the third. Just one state? I can't count them on one hand (although to be fair, without the wholly lost cities, most of the territory in even those states is still decent citizens).
They are not screwed if they make the correct investments. Naval mines offer a huge potential ROI. If launched further out towards the demarcation line between the PRC and the ROC, maintaining a blockade becomes a risky proposition for the PLAN because minesweeping is not a task easily accomplished... especially if one is able to reseed those mines. If I were Taiwan, I would want to consider how I might deploy a variant of sea mine using mobile ground launchers rather than relying on mine layers and aircraft. "SCUD hunting" is not an easy task and ground terrain and vegetation cover favor concealment. The ability to reseed and sustain a minefield would not a pleasant proposition to the PLAN.
China is using “peoples war” against the United States and has been for decades. Their Elite Capture has done more damage than 20 Pearl Harbors. They have planted the seeds of Marxism under the guise of “inclusiveness” and wokeism. Our policy makers were quick to spread the seeds and make a harvest.
China has indeed prepped the battlefield. It will be the United States and the pacific.
Mass mining of the strait IS is probably one of the best asymmetric answers available to the ROC. It would also be a potent asymmetric response to a blockade by the PLAN.
What is needed, among many things, is a agreement with Taiwan to pre-position ammo stocks (if we had stocks) on the island during peace, similar to our storage agreements with Korea and Israel.
Cuz after the war stats, getting things into Taiwan will make resupply of Corregidor look easy.
Time to rebuild a couple of the ammo plants we have torn down.
Prepositioned ammo stocks on Taiwan are static sitting ducks.
First order of business will be the PRC hitting them with Precision guide deep diving warheads.
You'd write them off? Or resupply to East coast harbors after hostilities start?
Spread them around, like the Swiss model. All the Javelins need not be in the same bunker.
Example: A prime invasion target will be the ports needed by the PRC to secure the country. They need to capture them intact. Lots of shipping containers there. Some with Stingers or javelins. Which?
100% Correct. If its not on wheels, its gone after D+1.
Great Article. But we are led by pretenders in Congress, White House with poor and at best misleading advice from JSOC.
Sir, I am aghast at your bold assertion that calls into question the infallibility of our SOF community.
LOL
The picture at the top of this article reminds me of a time when I walked all over Manhattan looking for Rommel's "The Tank in Attack." "Do you want 'Infantry Attacks?'" asked the helpful librarian. "No thanks," said I, "I'm looking for his book on tanks."
Infantry attacks is pretty great. I'd love to read anything anyone wrote that actually studied the history of his accounts in the book.
There isn't going to be enough prozac to go around as to what follows. There is little to suggest that the ROC's defenses are anything other than an annoying speed bump. So once again the burden falls on the U.S. (because the experts say it must) and where the evidence tilts towards catastrophic consequences. But at least we have chutzpah going for us... that's something. And besides, "success" post-Afghan pull out clearly demonstrates that what constitutes success is a moving target defined by our best and brightest.
You seem too sure they will use force to reunify/invade TW, when they didn't need to do that in SCS.
The PLA of course must be *able* to invade, but CPC would like to do it use minimum force.
Xi and his inner circle would love if Taiwan became part of the PRC without having to invade. The million dollar question is: whether the leadership of the CCP thinks that peaceful reunification of Taiwan will happen before the PRC's demographic and economic problems eat the country alive by mid-century (or earlier, how much can we really trust CCP's own numbers). If the answer to that question is "NO", then buckle-up, because the PRC will invade and the invasion will come in the short-term (before 2030) or medium-term (2030s). The CCP leadership has already stated their willingness to use force if necessary to ensure reunification. The CCP leadership has already declared it a strategic goal to achieve re-unification with Taiwan by 2049. And if the CCP leadership now sees their window of being able to force re-unification closing because of China's long-term demographic and economic problems, then they be more willing to use force in the short or medium term. Xi advancing the PLA's readiness plan to be able to invade Taiwan from 2035 to 2027 is not an encouraging sign if one is hoping that the CCP is willing to bide their time for a peaceful reunification.
You place too much weight on demographics, seems like a popular cope in the west. Isn't JPN/SK also experiencing demo decline, yet still a powerful economic force?
rest of your comment is obv.
To me, the interesting thing is that the PLAN was able to put their CVBG, led by the Shandong, into the Northern Philippine Sea and conducted a joint exercise on relatively short notice. (Assuming that they didn't have months of intelligence predicting the date of the Speaker's visit, and that the exercise was not preplanned and that this is all coincidence.) Yes, it is in their backyard, but could we pull the same thing off with the USS Reagan sitting pier-side in Yokosuka?
It’s more a case of Congress establishing and refusing to cede any meaningful control for changes to the defense procurement bureaucracy.
You saw it vividly when Chaillan left because he couldn’t effect any meaningful change with all the rules in place. He had big plans but after about the fifteenth rake hitting him in the face he quit with an epic LinkedIn rant that basically said “Later bitches. So long, and thanks for all the fish.” And he’s not wrong. It’s too profitable for Lockheed and Northrop to let things continue as they are. Slow and predictable. I mean, why are we still funding the Space Launch Alliance for five launches a year when Space X can do 50? Because it’s part and parcel about shareholders profits instead of efficiency or effectiveness.
I'm way out of my league here, but that won't stop me from throwing out some thoughts. How many tens of millions would die if the Three Gorges Dam went boom? We could hire the yacht guys the Ukes used. Since we clearly are in no position to stop the thrust (just like in the famous Fulda Gap) we need to signal the "flexible response" that will be chained together culminating in tactical nukes then strategic nukes. Doesn't take a poker genius to see that we are probably bluffing with a low pocket pair but let's face it we are in a poor situation strategically, tactically and economically. The One China fairytale farce is probably going to have go. Brandon already has signaled what we and everybody else thinks anyway. If the Taiwanese signal that a burnt crisp is all Xi will get then that will help. But this is more about CCP Weltanschauung than chip fabricators.
Also maybe going full submarine and anti satellite is the way to go. First Island chain is not defensible as much as our friends would like to think it is. Sucks to be a friend of us. Thanks Sullivan, Nuland and Blinken.
A couple dams, a couple of pipelines..... our B-2s and subs are going to be busy D+1.
Oh about as many if China nuked NYC, Boulder Dam, San Francisco, Tokyo, Guam Etc.
Taiwan is indefensible against a Peer Power. a simple in your face Blockade by air and sea would suffice, nothing in or out.
Would the current administration actually try to force such a blockade? If so would they retreat after losing a Carrier Battle group or just one warship?
My guess is China will 1. Start hostilities between NorK and ROK, 2. initiate some kind of drama with Japan, and the Philippines.
Then wait till the world realizes a working functional Taiwan under any rule is better than not.
Great stuff, but what Sal would you like to see done with the 80's bureaucracy in order to change the same old same old? There is a huge list of stupid things done, like R&D being so large it hurts procurement, not enough combat soldiers, tooth to tail stinks, maintenance horrifying, but what of the 80's acts that you'd like to see done? Very interested to know.
I'm curious- why didn't the US set up a base in Taiwan just like Jpn and SK?
One China Policy; before that, stretched kind of thin. Western Taiwan wouldn't like it, in other words.
Taiwan was a battle in a war almost 100 years ago, contested by Japan, Communist's China, Nationalist China until Chang retreated there at the end of the China/Taiwan civil war it was solely Chinese property.
This one of those last battles of World War Two, the Communists as we have seen here in the US have long memories and will go after their political enemies long after they are out of any power.
Unable to take the Island at the end of WW2 they bided their time until they have the power.
The fact Taiwan is a lucrative and highly valuable Island makes this more so.
Taiwan did not want US bases, China was an ally at one time of the US and the nation had other problems, (Soviet Union, Europe, Berlin) so it was left as it is now.
What, exactly, can the United States do? The political leadership is hopelessly compromised, corrupt and incompetent. The military is poisoned by wokism. What, given current and expected resources, could the US do that would not be suicidal?
1. Strenghen Taiwan as much as possible with whatever munitions have not been sent to the Ukraine to be wasted.
2. Provide the Taiwanese airforce with F 35's, instead of F 16's so they will at least be able to do some damage.
3. Equip nuclear attack submarines to act as mobile stealth minelayers to put as many Chinese ports as possible out of action and/or mine likely invasion routes. Mines are the only weapon I am aware of which will not cause the submarine to give its location away when used.
4. Rearm as fast as possible.
5. Encourage nations under threat by China (Japan, South Korea) to develop their own nuclear weapons.
6. Decouple the US from China economically.
7. Shut down Chinas influence operations in universities, schools, etc.
8. Rush development of long range hypersonic missiles.
Well, there is a lot more, but this might be a useful start.
I agree. This is a good plan.
nice start, how about adding stopping retiring LA class subs in a haste to rip out the fuel and insides and instead build a naval reserve so the Naval reserves have power, or, actually just keep them until they are 45 years old and use in an effective manner?
While at it, we could give them to the Canadians/Aussies/Taiwanese too. If Taiwan can operate a WWII class sub, I'd think giving them 3 LA class subs that we'd just scrap since they are "too old", maybe refuel them for them, would be a great start, and an asset that the Reds would need to take seriously on their way across the strait.
It is already written, this admin is wanting an end to American power around the world.
They see us as the bad guys and all we have to do is sit back, reset, build the Nation into their version of reality and allow other people to run things.
The American people are not willing to sacrifice their comfort and Tik Toks for Taiwan.
While I could name a few cities and an entire state I would trade, others won't.
I agree with your first two sentences. The jury is still out on the third. Just one state? I can't count them on one hand (although to be fair, without the wholly lost cities, most of the territory in even those states is still decent citizens).
The Taiwanese are screwed. We have no ammo stock to share as it was all used against that other Commie nation.
They are not screwed if they make the correct investments. Naval mines offer a huge potential ROI. If launched further out towards the demarcation line between the PRC and the ROC, maintaining a blockade becomes a risky proposition for the PLAN because minesweeping is not a task easily accomplished... especially if one is able to reseed those mines. If I were Taiwan, I would want to consider how I might deploy a variant of sea mine using mobile ground launchers rather than relying on mine layers and aircraft. "SCUD hunting" is not an easy task and ground terrain and vegetation cover favor concealment. The ability to reseed and sustain a minefield would not a pleasant proposition to the PLAN.
The only response is for Taiwan to suddenly develop Nuclear weapons and delivery systems.
Initiate a MAD policy.
Is this really possible (MAD) for Taiwan? They are a fairly small island, and likely won't have that many weapons. Mutual seems ambitious
Mutual obliteration if understood to mean the leadership of the CCP and other elite in affluent cities might have a quality of its own.
That's a fair point
China is using “peoples war” against the United States and has been for decades. Their Elite Capture has done more damage than 20 Pearl Harbors. They have planted the seeds of Marxism under the guise of “inclusiveness” and wokeism. Our policy makers were quick to spread the seeds and make a harvest.
China has indeed prepped the battlefield. It will be the United States and the pacific.