Hacker News Reader

Comment by throwaway2037 | Hacker News Reader

throwaway2037

I think a naval blockade is most likely. If they block all ships in and out (except food), then the Taiwan economy will crumble. Taiwan will be forced to negotiate for a peaceful annexation. Also, they will take the islands very close to Fujian province on Day One. Just like Russia took Crimea. If the US military tries to interfere, China will threaten to nuke the US, so US military will back down. There will be a global depression for many reasons: (1) no chip exports from TSMC, (2) the whole industrialised world will try to decouple from China ASAP -- like Russia but with 100x economic impact.

To be clear: I don't like any of these scenarios, but this is my "real politik" view. None of it would be rational for Mainland China, but it is a dictatorship. Dictators don't play by the rules.

View on HN

Love how you jump from a naval blockade of taiwan to threatening to nuke the US.

The US might not get involved in an all out war over Taiwan but they are likely to support Taiwan in case China attempts a blockade. The US frequently undertakes freedom of navigation drills and would most likely exercise such rights to circumvent China.

Now, will that escalate to a direct conflict is debatable but any genuine threats of nuking US would probably taken as a declaration of war.

Here is my reasoning for China threatening to use a nuclear bomb against the US. Imagine a series of events like this:

  1. Chinese naval blockade of Taiwan
  2. US will send navy + air force from Japan bases.
  3. No shots fired between US and China (too risky due to both nuclear powers).
  4. Optional: China may immediately claim sovereignty over Taiwan without negotiations with Taiwanese gov't.
  5. China will declare that any attack on Chinese military (in the area) or military aid to Taiwan will be viewed as an "invasion" (whatever that term really means).  Thus, China will declare that the use of nuclear weapons is valid to protect against invasion by US military.
  6. This declaration will be interpreted by US as a nuclear threat.
  7. China will refute this US claim.
  8. Conclusion: US-China stalement with words only.  China takes Taiwan.

To refine my earlier post, simply threatening to (nuclear) bomb / torpedo a US navy carrier strike group is enough. No need to threaten US territory. I'm not sure ICMBs from mainland China can reach mainland US, but they can certainly hit Hawai'i and other US posessions. Also, they have nuclear warheads on subs. I doubt they will work on first try, but the threat is great enough to force US to standdown.

Lastly, I don't like or support any of this, but, it is the most likely scenario.

I think what you're saying is that Taiwan should invest in a fleet of submarines that can keep their ports free from blockade.

I did some Google searches. Taiwan has been trying for years to buy more modern subs. All attempts fails. They are now developing a domestic solution. Read more here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indigenous_Defense_Submarine

Taiwan can't, but didn't I hear about one of their neighbours doing such a thing? Oh yeah... Australia. Funnily enough, the contract for the next-gen fleet they were building with France got cancelled and re-made with the US + UK, which is an interesting coincidence considering who the largest non-Chinese force in that region is.

About your last clause: <<which is an interesting coincidence considering who the largest non-Chinese force in that region is>>

I assume you are referring to the United States. Is the US military based in East Asia larger than Japan Self-Defence Forces? Honestly, I'm not sure. JSDF is much larger than most people realize. And to be clear, the UK has almost no presence in East Asia now. Every few years, they have a global tour, but nothing else.

And regarding the Australia submarine deal, France would only build diesel-electric subs. US+UK promised to help Australia build nuclear subs. To me, that is the #1 reason why Australia cancelled the France deal. I am sure they negotiated for months behind the scenes to upgrade to nuclear. When rejected, they announced the Ausuk deal.

In terms of largest number of people, sure the JSDF might be larger, but in terms of raw fire power, I don't think anything comes close to America. And it's not like America has just one or two bases in the region to project from.

I agree with your comment about "power projection". Yes, nothing compares to US in APAC. That said, I do think the technical prowess of JSDF Navy is under-rated. They have some very advanced equipment and have excellent integration with US forces. However, Mainland China is a serious counter-threat to US regional military dominance. Honestly, it is weird that China is investing so much in aircraft carriers. After the 2005 Swedish HSMS Gotland training incidents with a new US carrier, it was demonstrated that the era of _effective_ invicibility for carrier groups is over. It was already true, but less obvious, during the Falklands War with the Agentine carrier that was kept out of action by the mere _threat_ of highly advanced UK subs. Asymmetric warfare is the future. Mainland China should be investing more in asymmetric warfare (crouching tiger / samurai type of stuff: air/ocean/undersea drones, submarines, hypersonic missiles, etc.)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com