I don't disagree with your conclusion, but I think the sinking is less likely to come from an aircraft carrier or two and more likely to be from a submarine or 4.

China has her own subs so I think we'd be hesitant to sail carriers anywhere near there in case of an actual war. But our own subs could operate with impunity and sink big pieces of any atacking fleet. (Assuming China could get air superiority over Taiwan to launch such an attack in the first place.)

Doug, I don't know how I managed to forget about the subs -- blame it on only half a pot of coffee this morning.

You're right. Just four advanced Los Angeles-class subs would really ruin China's day. And let's not forget the dozen TLAM vertical launchers on each sub.

Call me crazy, but I don't want 48 Tomahawks coming at MY ports and air bases.

IMO, conflict with China is more likely to occur in the economic arena, and we can probably handle that...sure, their military forces are impressive, but they lack power projection capabilities, as Stephen pointed out...as our relations with India improve, the Chinese gradually lose the ability to militarily influence the Indian Ocean regions...going after Taiwan would be extraordinarily stupid, as pointed out above...what's left? A lunge into Siberia to grab economic resources? We're pals with the Russians and would definitely help put a stop to that. Roll into SE Asia? What for?

No, the only practical (and reasonably safe) way to engage in competition for the Chinese leads back to economics...trade 'n' stuff. It'll be interesting...as in the old Chinese curse, "May you live in interesting times."

Don't forget that China has its own version of a "Military-Industrial Complex" that will put out these reports on a regular basis just so they can keep buying more spiffy new jets and subs from the Russians. The Politburo is never all that happy to be handing over big wads (as in billions) of US dollars (ironic aint it) to the Russians. So the PLA generals need to raise the percieved threat of war with the US.

One must be cautious not to overestimate China's internal stability - the recent EP3 episode hinted at power struggles between factions in the Chinese government.

How the heck does one go from "The PRC does not view itself as a partner but a competitor" to thinking about fighting the PRC (or the PRC is thinking of fighting us)???

The PRC, in its white paper, indicates that it is positing a war w/ the US. Well, I for one would consider that prudent---for the simple reason that we are the baddest boys on the block. For years we molded our armed forces to be prepared to fight the Soviets. Why? Because they were the baddest kid on the block. If there were no US commitment towards helping to defend Taiwan, there would almost certainly be little concern in the PRC/PLA about fighting the US.

More to the point, the idea of countries jumping w/ both feet through "windows of opportunity" is great, until you look at the track record. Despite Korea and Vietnam, frex, darn few states actually exploited the perceived opportunity to, say, grab Taiwan or seize Hamburg or Berlin.

The idea that the Chinese would blithely try and take Taiwan misreads several key considerations:

1. The Chinese are relatively risk-averse. What if they LOSE? The Chinese cannot look at the fate of the Galtieri regime during the Falklands (probably the closest analogy) and be confident that a failed effort would leave their hides intact.
2. The Taiwanese armed forces. Presumably, they are not going to simply welcome the Chinese ashore---and neutralizing them would take no small effort.
3. US responses. Stephen cited CVBGs, and the US sub fleet was mentioned. Keep in mind, as well, that there are a lot of USAF aircraft (F-15s at Kadena, B-2s) that could make an amphibious operation a real nightmare.
4. Chinese politics. The upcoming Chinese Communist Party congress this fall will have to figure out what to do about Jiang Zemin and his most likely successor Hu Jintao. It would be one thing if the Taiwanese pushed for independence while the US was busy (and darn foolhardy for the Taipei leadership). But w/o that impetus, domestic infighting (including whether Jiang will step down or not) will certainly preoccupy a lot of the top leadership. Start a war when the leadership transition is in flux?? That would fly in the face of past Chinese behavior.

Look, the Chinese are NOT our friends, and that's certainly fair to note. Neither, as Putin's little agreement w/ Iraq indicates, are the Russians. But, as w/ Europe post-Congress of Vienna, states that are not our friends need not be our ENEMIES, either. There's nothing wrong w/ rivals, aligning when interests demand it, and opposing when interests demand it. One of the worst things we could do would be to try and push a Manichean view of "w/ us or against us" in areas that do not touch on the vital issue: winning the war on Terror.

One war at a time, folks.

Dean, as usual you make several excellent points. The key here though is whether we have the intestinal fortitude to recognize reality and recognize Taiwan as an independent state. If we can't do this, how the hell can we be expected to commit the navy to intervene in another country's "Civil War". Without our help, Taiwan can put up a hell of a fight, but could eventually sucumb to an amphibious assault if China wants to pay the price (and reap the rewards). It goes without saying that we don't need to be stirring up this dragon while taking on the Islamists, but if this were a game of chess, defeating Islamic terror is the equivalent of capturing a bishop while neutralizing China means taking the queen. Also, Den Beste points out on his site the lack overlap of resources needed in the mideast vs the Taiwan straits.

Forgive my obtuseness, but exactly WHY do we want to support a Taiwanese bid for independence, ESPECIALLY if it would then lead to a war w/ China? Particularly since, if there is anything that would push the old men in Beijing to consider going to war, it would be that?

In particular, I'm missing the part about why we should consider supporting such an effort NOW? I would absolutely disagree w/ your argument that defeating Islamic terror is a bishop, vice a queen regarding China. The Chinese, at a minimum, are fairly rational. They certainly have not been nearly as suicidal (as a group) as the ObL-types, the more radical Wahhabi-types, or the Palestinian "splodey-dopes" have been. (When was the last time you had Chinese suicide bombers, flyers, or sailors attacking the US? Korea in '53??)

I am firmly of the opinion that we can live w/ the Chinese (even as we try to reform them). I am much more doubtful about our ability to live w/ those who are motivated by a messianic vision of the future and who are prepared to commit suicide in its pursuit.

Finally, regarding Chinese ability to take Taiwan---obviously it depends on the precise circumstances, but if you look at the actually available sealift and airlift capabilities of the PLA, it would suggest that the Chinese could, at most, land some two divisions by sea, and MAYBE, a division plus by air. Minus lots of casualties. The comparison would be the German version of Sea Lion, against a live-and-kicking RAF and Royal Navy---NOT Overlord, where there was no German air or sea resistance to speak of. An amphibious invasion is one of the hardest things to pull off, and the Chinese, at present, lack the materiel advantage to do it in an assured fashion.

(The Falklands example, of course, had the Argentines take an essentially undefended island. And the Argentine resistance against the Brits was, to put it bluntly, incompetent and lacklustre. Even then, the British campaign was a "close-run thing." One would expect that the Taiwanese, having planned for this for fifty years, would acquit themselves better, making the Chinese operation quite dicey.)

Technology is changing the equation in that part of the world. Given that Israel has tested both Theater Ballistic Defense misslies and a tactical anti-missile laser, how much longer can the PRC expect to launch an "asymetric" missile attack on Taiwan? Expect a quiet deal on export of both of these systems in the next couple of years. Add the continuing evolution os -sea-based ABM systrems in the USN and you have a scenario of total futility for the PRC in about a decade. All that has to be done is to contain the conflict for that span of time

Despite the cries of the world's navies, PLAN is actually well named. It's an army's navy. Like on land and such. Brown water at best (they're kind of cat-ish... not really all that fond of the water). They're buying russian stuff that was old and not a match when russia went broke. Now add ten years of rust. Now add guys who don't know wtfthey're doing. Now go 100 miles off shore. Now stay there for days. Operating. UNDER FIRE from shore. And air. And so goddamn many invisible subs that can fire from so far away you can't pick em up on sonar. And don't have the equipment to fire at them if you could see them. Now add an airorce that's flying into the teeth of SAM batteries that have been prepared for 50 years. And AAA that makes the air practically solid.

do you want to fight? What if the country you're invading is an undeclared nuclear power? what if they can call on the most powerful armed force on the planet if they really need help? with an almost infinte supply of really big ass nukes? with land forces rigning your country? with the largest navy in the world? who've proven that they can conduct nearly simultaneous million man sea based invasions on opposite sides of the freaking globe?

whose bombers fly from home and hit any body, anywhere, undetectably, on 24 hour missions.

Now ask yourself a question... do i feel locuky... do ya..punk?

that's pretty much whyat the PLAN is facing. i'd focus on internal repression, they don't shoot back, except in xinjiang, and then not much

Bugs,

Nice scenario, but a little bit of a caricature.

The Russian stuff they're buying is NOT obsolete, at least in the Kilo-class boats. And the Sovremennyy's aren't bad either. Both of which, iirc, are new production, not old Russian cast-offs.

Nor does it pay to underestimate Chinese pilots and sailors. They may not be as experienced, but they are learning (one Chinese flotilla recently completed a round-the-world trip).

Certainly, they face daunting tasks, as you point out, and they'd suffer, in all likelihood, high casualties, but as w/ the Argentines, never doubt your opponent's courage until you've actually faced them. Nor should one necessarily assume that the PLA would be the ones calling the shots about going to war, any more than the US military determines WHETHER it goes to war.

Finally, it's important to recognize that, if we intervene, this would probably not be another Gulf War or Kosovo or Afghanistan. The Chinese are many things, but stupid is not one of them. They've been watching and analyzing our tactics and operations for the past several conflicts. Any US-PRC conflict would involve US casualties, to a far larger extent than any of the wars of the last decade.

OK Dean, I'm a little confused. After partially carving me up, you are now taking my side vs Bugs. But you ask- Why do we want to stir things up by supporting a Taiwanese bid for independence? Well, why would we want to take in your words significant casualties vs the PLA 10-20 years from now? to support an internal province about 1/30th the size of the People's Republic. Better to swallow the frog now tho I suppose we could wait 6 mos until decimating Saddam et al. Granted, Red China could not currently take Taiwan, with or without our help, and would never be able to take it with our direct involvement, which is my point. Its a hell of a lot easier to make the case to support an independent nation, aka Kuwait/Independent Taiwan, than it is an internal revolt aka Taiwan province/Kurds.

Lloyd,

Good points.

My take on this is as follows:

Bugs and others seem to have a somewhat caricatured view of the Chinese military. Their equipment is old, they can't shoot straight, their equipment is Soviet, they're just peasants (pissants?), their equipment isn't as good as ours, we'll pull another Iraq on them.

The Chinese military is not us, it's not the Israelis, it ain't the Japanese or the Brits. BUT they're working on improving themselves, they've laid out some impressive THINKING, and seem to be trying to implement it. Sun Tze writes that it is important to know oneself and to know one's enemy, and I worry, very, very much, that we do not know the Chinese very well at all, but instead rely on a combination of stereotyping, out-dated and out-moded impressions (once upon a time, Bugs was probably more accurate in describing the PLA's capabilities), etc.

My disagreement w/ you, Lloyd, is on the political, rather than the military end of things. Is Taiwan actually an independent state? Kuwait was recognized by most of the planet as an independent state, and the attack on it was, FWIW, quite a violation of convention.

But Taiwan's status is far murkier. Most importantly, Taiwan as an independent state is not currently so recognized by ANYONE. What is recognized is a "Republic of China," which is what once governed all of the mainland prior to 1949. What the Taiwanese are claiming is that they should be a "Republic of Taiwan," which is more akin to secession than the Iraq-Kuwait situation.

As important, it is not currently clear just how the PEOPLE ON TAIWAN feel about this. The recent Presidential election results suggest that, in fact, the situation is roughly one-third in favor of independence, one-third opposed, and one-third favoring independence if it were GIVEN, but doubting it can be TAKEN. (Sound familiar?) If the majority of Taiwanese were in favor of independence, then I'd say that the situation was very different, and it would be time to revisit the issue. But they're not.

Worse, the independence issue is being used, in part, for domestic political purposes. Chen Shuibian reopened this can of worms, it seems, w/o reference to some external development (e.g., the Chinese threatening them or somesuch). Rather, it appears to be laying the groundwork for impending Legislative Yuan elections---and while I may support Taiwanese independence, I sure don't support fighting a war w/ China so that some political party has an advantage in their DOMESTIC elections!

Finally, and this goes to both Bugs and your stances, I believe that our intervening on behalf of Taiwan would sink US-Chinese relations for a century. (Don't believe me? Ask yourself: WHY in the world would China insist on reclaiming Hong Kong when it arguably gained trade/access/technology benefits by leaving it putatively separate from the PRC itself?) It would start a Cold War-scale conflict that would not, at present, IMHO, be in our interests.

Again, there may be circumstances where that's worthwhile. Right now, w/ a divided Taiwan, a war w/ Iraq looming, a China that is NOT interested in reclaiming Taiwan right now, that's a dragon I'd rather not awaken.

100 years? Right now we're pretty good buds with the Russkis some 10 years after the breakup of USSR. Seems like we got along pretty good with the Brits after 1812 and their intervention in our Civil War. In any case, who's got more to lose, us or them? True, China is not AlQaeda or even Saudi Arabia, but a little less indiscriminate ass kissing with blinders on would do both sides a lot of good even at the cost of paying a few cents extra at WalMart. I say letem scream all they want.

In any case, agree that initiative for independence needs to come from Taiwanese, but that doesn't mean we can't be sending signals of support. Also, what the hell does it mean for independence to be "given". Its not theirs to give. Unlike our thirteen colonies, I don't recall Nationalists/Taiwanese ever signing on be governed by Peoples Republic. As usual, State dept niceties, not realpolitic, is the problem. Also, seems to me you'd be content to stand by with the seventh fleet and our subs in port while Chinese fleet makes like Argentina multiplied by fifty. I doubt Japanese, Russians, Phillipines, Vietnamese, etc let alone Taiwanese would be much comfort or have much respect for us were that to occur. Im sure Mainland Chinese would feel otherwise.

Well, actually, it depends on what people take away from the Taiwan issue.

You cite the Russians and Filipinos as being discomfited by the Taiwan situation, if the Chinese took over. Mebbe. But they are also facing serious separatist issues (e.g., Chechnya, Mindinao/Muslim separatists). If the US is perceived as blessing separatist movements, e.g., Taiwan, then what is their interpretation, then?

You suggest that we are on good terms w/ Russia. But that is a marriage of convenience, for BOTH sides. I'd compare it to the Second World War, where, in order to topple ol' Adolf, we made nice w/ Stalin, the second greatest murderer of the past century. Russia is not our friend (although at the moment it is not our enemy); it is a competitor and a rival. But, as w/ China, there are things we can work w/ them on (e.g., terrorism) and things we can't or shouldn't work w/ them on (e.g., greater voice in Europe, dominance of its neighbors). And that, of course, is the essence of realpolitik.