China is developing some startling new kit in its quest to invade Taiwan | Hacker News Reader

China is developing some startling new kit in its quest to invade Taiwan

economist.com

38 points_tk_52 comments

Open articleView on HN

weird that the economist uses the word 'reclaim' instead of 'invade'

Yeah technically it would be the Taiwanese reclaiming China.

We’re helping Taiwan reclaim us back. We just built a cool landing craft to help them make it more efficient.

I can see that propaganda line working!

How many countries recognize Taiwan sovereignty?

Even as far back as the 1960s the Pentagon considered it a lost cause hence there are no US bases in the island.

This is a list of countries that have a full diplomatic relationship with Taiwan. Other countries may have varying degrees on recognition of Taiwan

Belize

Eswatini

Guatemala

Haiti

Holy See (Vatican City)

Marshall Islands

Palau

Paraguay

Saint Kitts and Nevis

Saint Lucia

Saint Vincent and the Grenadines

Tuvalu

it's a lost cause in 1960s, but not now

drones and EW have changed that game. maybe not in Taiwan's favor, though.

but Taiwan is a mountainous, forested island. it'll be an ugly, expensive occupation.

nah, china will take over taiwan very easily, the tough part is not occupation, is how to make it quick with least damage, and the further governance

Not even Taiwan claims to be a separate country from China, legally they're the "Republic of China".

The place we commonly refer to as China is not the Republic of China, but the People's Republic of China.

That is like saying that Republic of Congo and the Democratic Republic of Congo are the same country because they both end in Congo.

> The place we commonly refer to as China is not the Republic of China, but the People's Republic of China.

???

No kidding. ROC = Taiwan.

The ROC were the Chinese government, went into exile in Taiwan after they lost the civil war and still claim all of China, which is why they're not claiming to be a separate country from mainland China, which is currently governed by the PRC...

I was confused by what you were saying. I thought you were claiming that Taiwan considered themselves part of the PRC.

did the economist edit the title? it uses "seize"

the last time i check it, it was 'relaim'

you can still see the word in the url

that's why i said 'weird', it's very abnormal for the economist, looks like someone had gone astray in his thinking, fortunately, it has now been corrected

Same for me, after an auto redirect.. (German IP) - maybe there is some shenanigans going on based on visitor location origin.

Cannot edit my post in mobile. This is the link I am getting redirected to: https://www.economist.com/china/2025/03/20/china-is-developi...

I am reading a great book right now.

The Tao of Deception: Unorthodox Warfare in Historic and Modern China by Ralph Sawyer.

I am not sure I would listen to anyone but Ralph Sawyer at this point in English on the subject.

China is not going to invade Taiwan the way the US would invade Hawaii in the same situation.

That is just not how China conducts warfare.

Taiwan is another level with all this. What matters is the PLA views it as reclaiming. They have to win by soft power and not "win" like the US going in and blowing the shit out of Iraq.

Disturb the water and catch a fish.

In that context, something like DeepSeek is a much bigger deal as far as the objectives. 1000X more than this decoy.

nah.

China built several -- several, like 8+ -- landing ships designed to support an amphibious assault. if soft power was their goal and primary method they wouldn't have spent the resources.

while they may not ever do it, a very direct, very violent invasion is absolutely on the table. Taiwan may only even be a secondary objective, since #1 would be sinking the US Navy and shifting the hegemonic balance; they'll get to Taiwan when they can after that.

Having a large military capability and not using it is ... Soft power? Is that fair?

Soft power is economic and cultural levers. Hardware is actual military power.

One term that's specific to this concept of wielding a real but unused military capability is "fleet in being" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fleet_in_being

what you said is how China planed before 2019, reality's development makes it impossible to act as previously planned, now, there's 0 chance that the CCP can take back Taiwan without bombs

however, it really depends on the definitions of 'reclaim' and 'win'

China's purpose is not only to take the land, but also to 'reunite' taiwanese people, so you're right about they are going to need to use soft power to achieve this, so yes, it will not be like what the US did to Hawaii and Iraq

btw, I briefly looked through the book you mentioned and was surprised to find that, compared to other Westerners, the author has a very good understanding of China's war history and philosophy. Although it is somewhat one-sided, Chinese military philosophy is very different before and after the Han Dynasty

The soft power should read here as Uyghur concentration camps.

you are right

this is the real soft power

this is the power makes you believe there're genocide in xinjiang without any solid evidence

this is the power makes every discussion about gaza were flagged here

the real power, it's soft, but it's so strong

wonderful, isn't it?

100 RMB army will be the first to be turned into landfill when China gets a bit more ambitious. Much like what is currently happening to their North Korean counterparts in the north of my country.

funny, because it seems like the president of south korea is more dangerous than DPRK to the country...

It's pretty funny that Westerners are still going on about this largely invented issue after underwriting a brutal genocide in Gaza for almost 18 months. Won't someone please think of the oppressed Muslims!

This seems like quintessential whataboutism. I think expanding on how that concern is "largely invented" would serve your point better. I, at least, would be interested.

It shows up so naturally that one may think it is not whataboutism at work, even though the reasoning is often not well argued. We could choose to see it not as a moral judgement, but as questioning the justification of efforts pushing for conflicts with China.

I feel this to be a balanced headline if we put on an editor’s hat: The subject of the sentence is "China." From China’s standpoint, Taiwan was always theirs. Hence, from this viewpoint, it is a "reclaim."

From the CCP's standpoint. Both ROC and CCP claim to be the legitimate governors of "China".

From the Taiwanese standpoint, mainland China is theirs.

They already can freely travel to and work on the mainland.

111

Timothy Snyder talks about this idea of "Myth of founding," particularly in regards to Ukraine.

You would probably enjoy this lecture titled "the genesis of nations" from his history of Ukraine lecture: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0LaEmaMAkpM&list=PLh9mgdi4rN...

Thinking about this social form of the nation, what makes it particularly tricky, is that the nation once it exists, lays claim to the past.

The nation didn't already exist, but once it comes into existence, it tells a story about the past... This new social form has a story about how it's very old.

This doesn’t seem like a reply to my post?

> If you want to play silly word games, the CCP have never held power in Taiwan, while one of the parties in Taiwan, the KMT, have held power on the Chinese mainland so ‘reclaim’ could only go the other direction.

It's a lecture that explores questions about what a nation is, how that relates to governments, and how governments lay claim to a history, such as the history of China.

Here you point out that part of the KMT's history is rule over China, while CPC/CCP claim that same history yet Taiwan is not a part of CPC history, they never ruled it, only a part of "Chinese" history.

It wasn't a rebuttal or anything, I legitimately thought you might enjoy it since it questions some base assumptions about what a country/nation is and what your history is. Snyder loves word games and frequently references the deeper meanings of words as well as their unstated implications.

Would take the Qing coming back into power to create any legitimate path to Taiwan being ruled by a mainland government.

You seem unaware that both of those countries simultaneously claim to be China. It’s a bit of a thorny problem!

https://archive.ph/latest/https://www.economist.com/china/20...

"...a single Chinese state-owned shipbuilder produced a larger tonnage of commercial vessels in 2024 than America has built since the second world war." Of course, due to the 1920 US "Job's Act" (the irony) there wasn't much ship building left.

Please fix the title to “China is developing some startling new kit in its quest to invade Taiwan”. Thanks.

btw, here's an article about it in Jan

https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2025/01/china-suddenly-...

Surely the D-day is coming

I thought we weren't doing politics on HN?

Folding Tank bridges are technically interesting. eg http://twz.com/former-m60-tanks-fitted-with-folding-bridges-...

Raised? Ship Bridges, with ship feet! These are a whole new thing. Equally interesting. The political implications are incidental.

There is politics and there is events that affect the whole fucking world.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com