The fact that the CCP is relaxed about core Chinese companies running their manufacturing in Taiwan might suggest that the CCP considers that it can make China and Taiwan one country, at a time of the CCP's choosing.
They would lose all of TSMC if they do any military actions. It's not the fact that the CCP thinks that they can make Taiwan and China a country, it's the the fact that most of China does in fact consider them as one country. Taiwan is ready to defend themselves, but are very happy keeping their relationship with China the way it is.
Now that US has already opened the gate to labelling nation head as drug seller, this just eases things for China.
Any period time? US waged war for 20+ years in Afghanistan. Pretty effectively! To what end? Not an end an army can really achieve so… there you are.
But a war that might actually be popular? To save the world from communist dictators and make sure we have chips for our precious devices? I wouldn’t count out the United States. Or nuclear weapons, which still exist and are a thing.
No guerilla warfare, no insurgents, no need for extended beyond-visual-range warfare that depletes missile stockpiles
Was with you until that last one. If you haven't noticed missiles, drones, and interceptors have played a central role in ukraine.
But if you mean in a metaphorical sense, how long until the 7th Fleet could get to Taiwan, the answer is 0 days for first response, 3 days for everything located in Japan, and less than a week for the full mobilization of the 7th Fleet (that's 50+ ships and nearly 30K soldiers). The entire Pacific fleet could be there in a week and a half.
(Granted, we're assuming competent US leadership, which is not the current administration.)
Last time used faced a conventional military that could actually challenge it was in Korea.
It won’t have complete areal superiority or entire division surrendering after running into contact with US forces like they in Iraq. “Shock and awe” of course can be very effective just probably not against China. Even now US is running out of materiel against Iran and can’t really sustain a prolonged intense conflict while being able to protect its gulf allies from ballistic missiles and drones.
Change the leadership (which will happen soon) and when there is actual support from congress to fund and intervene in a conflict in Taiwan, then you will see a vastly different US military response.
That was an occupation and a low intensity “pacification” mission. Waging a prolonged war against a military peer on the other side of the continent is a bit more problematic (considering that US is/was on the brink of running out of advanced weaponry in Iran despite having aerial superiority which they won’t over Taiwan, Japan would have to get involved as well cause otherwise US would have to entirely rely on the fragile carrier fleet).
Using tactical nukes (even regardless of the extreme geopolitical downsides that might bring) wouldn’t necessarily give a great tactical advantage either, unless they are willing to do that over Taiwan itself to destroy the landing forces).
I feel like Russia thought the same of Ukraine, even though it is way bigger
Taiwan? All surface ships are sitting ducks. Troop transport ships would get absolutely decimated, and then the landing troops would get swarmed by drones all over again, and then they have to maintain logistics to the small minority that land (good luck with that). And that's without naval drones.
With naval drones? I have no idea how China gets anything across the strait.
And all the above is true for a competently organized Chinese invasion. Which it won't be.
China have more credible threat of bombing economically relevant building like TSMC, or capturing leaders and protestors like they already are doing in Hong Kong.
The tactical situation in Taiwan is very different though. I think it would come down more to what’s happening in the air since the stalemate in Ukraine is in large because the Russian airforce is almost completely neutralized and can only be used to launch cruise missiles from a safe distance. I doubt China would invade unless they feel they can somehow achieve at least temporary air superiority and achieve their other objectives during that period.
Air defenses are probably much more important than drones overall.
But I agree that pretty much everybody will happily take the status quo over armed invasion.
And a lot of people are sympathetic with the Chinese, just not their government.
I've only visited Taiwan once and I only have one friend there so perhaps what I'm hearing is not accurate.
CCP is not threatening taiwan because it might go for independence. it is _ALL_ about kicking the US out of the west Pacific. because of that, it is never about what people in Taiwan believe/say/do.
It is only about the military balance of the west Pacific.
> And a lot of people are sympathetic with the Chinese, just not their government.
sympathetic of what?
20 years ago, you might be able to play the "CCP regime repressing the people in China" joke, you can't do it anymore especially in such topic of Taiwan. quality of life is significantly better in literally every aspect in China. Taipei in 2026 is getting more and more like a tier-3 Chinese city in 2016.
Even when a country other than the US does something to benefit Taiwan, Beijing is super offended.
And by sympathetic I mean feeling kinship. And the whole concept of bringing everything down to a matter of wealth is so American.
They said "quality of life". Even if they had said wealth that correlates with quality of life so that wouldn't be a very good gotcha by itself, but they didn't say that.
If you like to say what you think, then trust me, Taipei has much better quality of life. If you see people like Naomi Wu being arrested and gagged just for pointing out a vulnerability in software (which we all agree here is a good thing to do for everyone except the bad guys), that is terrible.
Hardly. It is all about Xi having declared that taking Taiwan by... I think it was 2049, but could be misremembering. Anyway, Xi made that a test of the legitimacy of the CCP, in some very public statements.
So, no, it's not about kicking the US out of the west Pacific. It's about Taiwan, and it's because if they don't, the CCP is illegitimate, by Xi's own word.
If Xi had said "the CCP is illegitimate unless it takes Taiwan by 2025", he would be at real risk of being replaced in 2026. Anyone who opposed him (or just wanted power) would have a perfect reason to replace him.
When Xi makes a goal with a "deadline" he won't live to see, he takes no risk of personally failing to meet the goal. If his successor misses the deadline, he can say things changed, Xi failed to consider factors X,Y,Z, etc.
That's not how the CCP operates though.
They are not a country where the puppets matter so much, like in most of the western countries. You would very very rarely see a leader being critical of their predecessor even if they are changing policies (which Xi Jinping definitely did). Because they are the same party and thus they are attacking themselves. The party is really more important than whoever happens to be at the top. The party is always right. Even when the party is wrong. Which it is not because it's always right.
No, if this promise disappears it will be silently. Never to be mentioned again, or else. It just never happened.
But that doesn't mean they plan to invade Taiwan by then. One common reading of it is that it was a plan to build up the military to that state with a definite goal date (in the same way the "600 ship navy" plan had a goal date).
https://www.reuters.com/world/cia-chief-says-chinas-xi-littl...
I think you are underestimating Chinese nationalism here quite dramatically!
Chinese views of sovereignty are quite independent of other concerns. Take for example their actions against Vietnam in the South China Sea, forcing Vietnam closer to the Philippines and even the US: https://digital-commons.usnwc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?articl...
and related to, with all that holds in an Eastern mindset. My adoptive grandmother was born in Shanghai in 1927. To my knowledge she never returned to Mainland China, partially because her relatives wen Telswhere when the communists came in.
edit: fixed one errant `t`
Certainly, somewhat understandable, given the "military exercises" at the doorstep happening every now and then, but also escalatory and idiotically not a good look either. Some of it is just spewed hatred, not taking a high lane when it comes to ethics.
But at the same time everyone understands that the Taiwanese would destroy the facilities before they fall into Chinese hands
The talent is still there, so they could rebuild, or recruit the talent to work for Chinese mainland fabs instead?
maybe easier said than done but still
It's not impossible, but I feel as though if Trump decides that China is friends and Taiwan is enemies (as he seems to have done with North/South Korea lately) then Taiwanese refugees might not be as eager to move to the US as, say, Canada, Australia, or Europe.
Would you voluntarily work in a country that invaded and taken over yours?
Would you ask the same about Russia recruiting Ukrainians?
Some are.
Some people also want to feed their families and not be unemployed.
P.S. A large number of Ukrainians moved to Russia. Including the ones who wanted to reunite with their relatives. Taiwanese have a lot of relatives on the mainland as well.
Citation very much needed.
This means people that have Ukrainian citizenship, which includes lots of families that were on both sides of the border. It does not mean people who were residents of Ukraine before the war, and decided to move to Russia. It does include the kidnapped children, and surviving people in occupied cities.
TSMC is not something you can rebuild with some brains in front of laptops.
Effectively the semantics are like a game of chicken and hostage combined. Might as well be a Prisoner's Dilemma.
As an American, I found the deference to authority very strange.
Are schoolchildren in the US still required to recite the pledge of allegiance...?
The Supreme Court ruled, in 1943, that it is unconstitutional to compel students to salute the flag and recite the Pledge of Allegiance.
https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/us-supreme-court/319/624.h...
Strongly pressured, yes.
How is that?
Is there an action movie style self destruct sequence?
> To render inoperable sure, but invaders would surely be able to suss out some of their secrets from the remains.
Yes, but I have a suspicion the Taiwanese plans are a bit more involved than my sledge hammer idea.
Sounds like you've been fed the US anti-China propaganda for the large part of your life as well.
_China doesn't need to invade Taiwan_
1. 50%+ of Taiwan's workforce are white-collar workers [0].
2. There are 3-4 major underwater internet communication hubs in Taiwan [1].
3. There is a substantial opposition in Taiwan that want reunification (~20% of population support directly Li-Wun) [2].
4. China is close to producing industry-grade EUV [3].
China just can:
* Establish a total naval and air blockade of Taiwan using their fleets stationed in Ningbo and Zhanjiang.
* Cut underwater internet cables in those 3 locations.
* Achieve EUV.
They won't need TSMC soon, and with the blockade they can show the world that TSMC is not a reliable supplier.
Within months the political structure of Taiwan is going to crumble, as white-collar workers lose their jobs.
[0] https://www.cbc.gov.tw/dl-215893-af39cb14b0044d1cb05a60864ec...
[2] https://www.scmp.com/news/china/politics/article/3350271/xi-...
[3] https://asiatimes.com/2025/12/made-in-china-euv-machine-targ...
All your points consider what China can do but not how others would respond. Blocking Taiwan when the whole AI economy is running on it will invoke lots of countries to go up in arms. There was a quote from US military that it'd cost less to fight than watch Taiwan fall (invasion or not).
> 4. China is close to producing industry-grade EUV
No where near close. At least not production grade at massive scale.
> * Establish a total naval and air blockade of Taiwan using their fleets stationed in Ningbo and Zhanjiang.
Doesn't work. If they do that the US, JP and others can also blockade around Shanghai, Hong Kong and the other ports.
> They won't need TSMC soon
Taiwan is not just TSMC. There are thousands to millions of things involving Taiwan you're likely not aware of and they might not even be AI or semi related.
US backed off last year when there were talks about protecting Taiwan. They pulled Patriot missiles from Taiwan and South Korea too.
China and Japan have a beef. Considering the atrocities Japan did in China, the conversation won't be friendly.
None of these are good for Taiwan, during the times when its political system is failing.
> No where near close. At least not production grade at massive scale.
It looks like you have knowledge of the status of that super-secret government project. Can you share some details then?
> Doesn't work. If they do that the US, JP and others can also blockade around Shanghai, Hong Kong and the other ports.
US cannot blockade Hormuz, as we've seen. JP cannot do that with their current constitution unless they change it (the current government is on the road to it, though).
What we've also seen is that Chinese fishing fleet had a military blockade exercise [0].
> Taiwan is not just TSMC. There are thousands to millions of things involving Taiwan you're likely not aware of and they might not even be AI or semi related.
All is around semiconductors.
[0] https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2026/01/16/world/asia/ch...
>US cannot blockade Hormuz, as we've seen. JP cannot do that with their current constitution unless they change it (the current government is on the road to it, though).
If China really wants to fuck with Taiwan, they had better do it soon while the most incompetent US administration ever to hold office is still there. Because there is change coming to the US and the next president isn't likely to be such a complete moron.
All past elections prove you otherwise.
This is not a fact. This is bullshit trolling.
This pointless internet interaction is over.
Even senile Joe Biden was more competent than the current malicious moron in power.
Russia didn't need to invade Ukraine either.
But nonetheless China is clearly preparing itself to be ready to be able to invade, with aircraft carriers, amphibious assault ships, dual purpose roll-on/roll-off carriers. It doesn't mean it will, but that it wants to be able to.
So basically it will depend on a single dictator's whim if they do or don't.
> Establish a total naval and air blockade of Taiwan using their fleets stationed in Ningbo and Zhanjiang
Which would be considered an act of war, so it's the same scenario again.
> There is a substantial opposition in Taiwan that want reunification (~20% of population support directly Li-Wun)
20% is more than the % of people in the Donbass that wanted unification with Russia, and we can see how well that went. And it wasn't a dangerous amphibious assault against an island with shit terrain.
Arguable, they had to after the 2008 Buharest NATO summit and Ukraine's militarization going forward, and eradication of Russian language and Russian-speaking population in the east.
> Which would be considered an act of war, so it's the same scenario again.
China considers Taiwan their territory, who is there to protect Taiwan? US?
>20% is more than the % of people in the Donbass that wanted unification with Russia
20% plus part of those white-collar workers who are a backbone of the Taiwan's economy and politics and can be left jobless after China achieves EUV and puts TSMC out of monopoly.
Let's be real. Trump demanded TSMC to invest 100B into US factories and they complied [0].
[0] https://www.cnbc.com/2025/03/03/tsmc-to-announce-100-billion...
How dare the countries threatened by Russia, who had seen how Russia invaded and brutalised multiple countries - Moldova, Checnya, Georgia twice - seek protection from Russia. This totally excuses Russia invading and brutalising again, of course.
> Ukraine's militarization going forward
The country was literally invaded (Crimea and Donbass), what the hell did you or the idiots in the Kremlin expect? That it will just sit and allow Russia to take more of its territory unopposed? That it will become a pliant vassal state again?
> eradication of Russian language and Russian-speaking population in the east
Such eradication that the country elected a Russian speaker to be president, on a platform of reconciliation with Russia. So much so, that his opposition called him a Russian puppet. That guy is Zelenskyy.
I'm sorry, but you're either out of your mind, or have been completely brainwashed. Russia chose to invade multiple of its neighbours, and did unspeakable atrocities every time. The only one to fault for all of this, and everyone around them seeking protection from this, is them. This imperialist nonsense brutality does not belong in the 21st century, and neither does its apologia. And no, I don't care about the whataboutism you're preparing to "defend" these actions with, it's beyond irrelevant. It's what the Russian state has been about since it came into being out of the ruins of the USSR. We should have never treated them as anything else.
That's literally a copy-paste from propaganda pamphlet. Can you back it up?
> The country was literally invaded
You seem to forget the amount of killings Ukraine did there and why it started in the first place.
Why should I discuss that with a person who seems to be unaware of facts?
Back what up? That Russia invaded and destroyed Chechnya? Or Georgia?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Chechen_War
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Chechen_War
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Grozny_(1999%E2%80%9...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russo-Georgian_War
What exactly do you want backed up? That countries across Eastern Europe saw how the russians operate and decided they don't want to be destroyed?
> You seem to forget the amount of killings Ukraine did there and why it started in the first place.
What killings did Ukraine make that resulted in russia invading Crimea? Or russia starting the invasion of the Donbass? MH17 maybe? Oh no, wait, that was the russians too.
I would not want to be maintaining a long-term naval blockade while constantly looking over my shoulder worrying about surprise attacks. Everyone knows where you are, and it would give plenty of time for a counter offensive to be planned. The US has something like 50 attack submarines, and a surprise attack from all of them at once would be a nightmare scenario for any fleet.
In the era of drones and missiles having your navy tied down in a blockade like that makes it all the more vulnerable.
US had 10,000 miles of power projection, while China prepared for 100 miles of it for the past 20 years, come on. The answer is EUV alternative that would render TSMC useless.
I understand that majority of people here cannot see the bigger picture, by design.
This whole idea of collapsing everything to some single semi-military geo-political concern is naive and not at all how the world works.
Of course there are people in China who would prefer Xiaomi did all their manufacturing inside China, and there are others who prefer to build stronger economic ties between Taiwan and China to make Taiwan economically dependent on China.
There are others who want Xiaomi to dominate world mobile markets by any means necessary. There are others who want Xiaomi to make the most profit possible, and still others who want Chinese firms to race to match US companies technology on every dimension.
These concerns are all interlinked and play out over years in lots of micro decisions.
China isn’t going to invade China until after we get our semiconductors up and running in Arizona for real
(because US won’t have to think about that situation ever again)
removing dependence imperils that island, CCP already has an EUV machine so the inevitable sanctions and export controls on ASML’s in Europe won’t matter either
yeah equity asset values are going to tank but US will get serious about the supply chain immediately (which is already very much in progress), plus all the older nodes to alleviate some pressure off of the active compute demands
I'm not so sure. I would say that perhaps it's an indication that the CCP is ok with the status quo.
The PR Chinese might be able to take Taiwan's land, but they can't conceivable take Taiwan's economy, at least not by force.
How do you make one country into one country? It's already one country and is treated as such by even countries that consider China an adversary
Your link does not say what you think it does. My guess is you read the first sentence and saw "one-China police" and stopped. But the US's one-China policy is not the same thing as China's one-China principle.
The US's one-China policy is that (continental) China is a single China governed by the PRC. It's silent on Taiwan. But, considering the laws we have on the books declaring our commitment to ensuring the sovereignty of Taiwan, it's a hard row to hoe to get to "the US considers Taiwan to be territory the PRC has a right to control."
The US has an unofficial relationship with Taiwan simply to shut the CCP up. It's like when your partner is complaining about something you did, silence doesn't mean you agree that you messed up. Sometimes it just means you don't want a fight right now.
Oh really?
https://2021-2025.state.gov/countries-areas/taiwan/
>The 1979 U.S.-P.R.C. Joint Communique switched diplomatic recognition from Taipei to Beijing. In the Joint Communique, the U.S. recognized the Government of the People’s Republic of China as the sole legal government of China, acknowledging the Chinese position that there is but one China and Taiwan is part of China.
https://2021-2025.state.gov/u-s-relations-with-taiwan/
>The United States approach to Taiwan has remained consistent across decades and administrations. The United States has a longstanding one China policy, which is guided by the Taiwan Relations Act, the three U.S.-China Joint Communiques, and the Six Assurances. We oppose any unilateral changes to the status quo from either side; we do not support Taiwan independence
Doesn't sound like silence to me.
>But, considering the laws we have on the books declaring our commitment to ensuring the sovereignty of Taiwan, it's a hard row to hoe to get to "the US considers Taiwan to be territory the PRC has a right to control."
You're moving the goal posts. Sovereignty isn't the same as being a country. States in the US have some sovereignty and their own governance and international relations too, but it wouldn't be correct to say that the US consists of 50 independent countries.
Also, using the word right sounds a bit like muddying the waters. You could argue the United States government doesn't have the right to control their land, as it has been stolen from the indigenous people. But that doesn't mean United States is not an independent country that controls the area within its borders.