Will Iraqi War Tempt China to Invade Taiwan?

Last week during a speech at the Great Hall of the People, Hu Jintao, the newly appointed head of China's Communist Party, claimed that under his leadership China would "contribute to peace and prosperity in the rest of the world."

However, Hu, a conservative hard-liner known for his anti-American rhetoric, supported the Tiannamen Square crackdown, used the military to crush Tibetan protestors in 1989, and authorized anti-U.S. demonstrations in 1999. During a visit to Malaysia last April, Jintao pledged that China would counter American influence in Asia and oppose the "bullying superpower," echoing Chinese Defense Minister Chi Haotian's sentiments that war between China and the United States was "inevitable."

More alarmingly, there are strong indications that China is preparing to capitalize on the growing American military commitments in the Middle East by invading the island nation of Taiwan.

Southeast Asian experts Stephen Young and Arthur Weldon have characterized China's post-9/11 strategy as a "radical departure" from their historical diplomatic pattern and indicative of a "policy of intervention and naval adventurism seeking the subservience of mainland Southeast Asia to Chinese national need."

Pentagon analysts have likewise expressed concern at the apparent refocusing of Chinese military doctrine to a strategy of "pre-emptive and surprise attacks."

For the second consecutive year, China is projected to increase its military expenditures by almost 20 percent. A large portion of China's "phantom" military budget (Pentagon analysts have estimated China's military expenditures are $45 billion higher than its stated spending) is spent on pursuing offensive missile weaponry such as advanced nuclear tipped DF-5, DF-31, DF-41, JL-2 and CSS-5 rockets.

In addition to its nuclear load, the CSS-5 missile is equipped with a half-dozen "penetration aids," dummy warheads, designed to counter U.S. missile defense platforms in Japan and Taiwan.

The DF-31 intercontinental ballistic missile development project is clearly representative of Chinese intelligence deputy Lt. Gen. Xiong Guankai's plan of deterring American military intervention during an invasion of Taiwan by possessing the "will and ability" to launch nuclear strikes against American cities.

In the wake of the September 11th attacks and the subsequent U.S. action in Afghanistan, Chinese interceptor jets have resumed harrying American RC-135 and EP-3 surveillance aircraft flying along the Southeast Asian coastline. The situation is reminiscent of the conditions which lead to an American EP-3 surveillance plane making an emergency landing in Chinese territory after aggressive flying by a Chinese F-8 interceptor caused a mid-air collision on April 1, 2001. For the next eleven days twenty-four American service men and women were, in no uncertain terms, held captive by the Communist Chinese government

Since Sept. 7, 2002, Chinese air and naval forces have continuously violated international law by conducting no less than six intercept operations against the USS Bowditch, a U.S. Navy ship conducting hydrographic surveys in international waters in the Yellow Sea.

China's "Liberation 2" military exercise conducted in the fall of 2001 simulated an invasion of the Taiwan mainland and concerted air, sea, and missile attacks on U.S. aircraft carriers. More recently, in July 2002, the pro-Communist Hong Kong newspaper, Wen Wei Po, reported that top Peoples Liberation Army (PLA) sources confirmed that China has placed the invasion of Taiwan as its paramount strategic focus in the region.

Moreover, despite claims of supporting the international war on terrorism, China continues to export weaponry to rogue "axis of evil" nations Iran, North Korea and Iraq. Intelligence sources additionally believe that China shipped SA-7 surface-to-air missiles to the Taliban regime after the 9/11 attacks, and as recently as August 2002, hosted a Taliban delegation lead by Ustad Khalil, the brother of high-ranking Taliban warlord Jalaluddin Haqqani.

There can be little doubt that North Korea's acknowledgement in October 2002 that it has pursued a covert nuclear development program was designed to gauge American resolve to meet emerging threats while concurrently preparing for war with Iraq. China, North Korea's closest ally, feigned surprise at the announcement, but clearly benefits this ploy to test the United States willingness to potentially engage in Major Theater Warfare on a second front while engaged in hostilities in the Middle East.

One month later, the surprise Chinese support for United Nations Resolution 1441 (China had abstained from Resolution 678 in November 1990, which authorized U.N. action to remove Iraq from Kuwait), removed key political roadblocks to the likely U.S. invasion and occupation of Iraq. In a speech before the Iraqi National Assembly Uday Hussein, Saddam's eldest son, expressed shock and dismay over China's support of the resolution after they had represented to Iraq that "they would use the veto against resolution 1441".

With already substantial, extended military commitments in Afghanistan and potentially Iraq, the geopolitical landscape may necessitate U.S. military intervention in at least three growing flashpoints in the Southwest Asia region.

First, the markedly anti-American, pro-wahhabist Crown Prince Abdullah will likely ascend to the thrown of Saudi Arabia after the passing of King Fahd. However, Prince Abdullah and the more pro-American faction of Sudeiri princes led by Minister of Defense Prince Sultan are all in their mid to late seventies, the average age of mortality for Saudi royalty. It will be foreesably ten to twelve years before the next generation of younger princes, Fahd's grandchildren, ascend to the throne possessing the potential for longer reigns.

In addition to likely short reigns, the future Kings of Saudi Arabia will have to contend with growing radical Islamic factions by led ulamas, religious leaders, such as Salman al-Awda, Safar al-Hawali, 'Ayd al-Qarni and Hamad al-Surayhi. Saudi Arabia will also be faced with the volatile issue of inter-tribal conflicts such as that which exists between the Hijazi and Najdis.

Second, the Syrian Accountability Act, currently before Congress, is the first major American step towards ending the Syrian occupation of Lebanon. Similar to China's apparent plans for Taiwan, Syria invaded Lebanon in October of 1990 while Western military forces were building up in the region to oust Iraq from Kuwait.

In 1990, the pro-Western Lebanese government of Prime Minister General Michel Aoun, a Maronite Christian, was attempting to maintain the delicate balance of a Christian-Muslim coalition government while concurrently battling the vanguard of today's wave of Islamic extremists.

Since the Syrian occupation, Lebanon has become a haven for terrorist entities such as Hezbollah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, al Qaeda, and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command. These groups will likely have to be dealt with militarily if regional stability and a pro-Western democracy in Lebanon are going to be restored.

Third, and most important, there is mounting evidence that growing opposition to the hard-line Iranian leadership's consistent violation of the Islamic Republic's constitution is reaching a fever pitch. Earlier this month over 1000 students in Tehran protested the death sentence levied against reformist professor Hashem Aghajari. It was the largest student protest since 1999, and calls for reformist President Mohammad Khatami's resignation are further indications of mounting frustration at the hard-line Guardians Council's resistance to reforms.

Unemployment in Iran is steadily rising, forty percent of the country's drinking water network is in disrepair, and according to the Iranian Minister of Science, Research, and Technology over 220,000 of Iran's leading academic elites and industrialists permanently emigrated to the West in 2001. Anti-government rioting has recently broken out in Khorasan province and parliamentarian Hussein Ansari-Rad has publicly admitted that Tehran is a "city on the verge of crisis in all respects."

Recent polls conducted by Iranian officials have shown over three-fourths of the population supports increased dialogue and renewed ties with the United States, indicating that calls for American support may be enjoined with a reformist overthrow of the hard-line regime.

This is what I see as the scenario of maximum danger: China will attempt to invade Taiwan at a moment that capitalizes on the United States' growing role in the Middle East and at a juncture when, in the words of Maj. Gen. Huang Bin of China's National Defense University, the replenishing of our expenditures of smart weapons in other theaters of combat becomes "too expensive" to engage in another "protracted war."

Thus, we must be vigilant to avoid a myopic view of the world as we engage in the war on terrorism. The Bush administration must endeavor to judiciously utilize the U.S. military to further foreign policy goals without creating windows of opportunity for nations such as Communist China to engage in military adventurism.

Tom Knowlton writes about military affairs and terrorism. He can be reached at TKnowltonDW@aol.com.

Intelligence sources additionally believe that China shipped SA-7 surface-to-air missiles to the Taliban regime after the 9/11 attacks, and as recently as August 2002, hosted a Taliban delegation lead by Ustad Khalil, the brother of high-ranking Taliban warlord Jalaluddin Haqqani.

If this doesn't prove China knew about 9/11 or authorized it, I don't know what will. The truth behind 9/11 will be found in the ruins of Beijing.

Why invade Taiwan now when they didn't in 1991, you ask. Several reasons:

1. China has built a large force of ballistic missiles that can reach Taiwan. They didn't have it in 1991.

2. The US military was at a peak in 1991. It had been designed to fight one major war against the Soviets and another intermediate size war simultaneously. Today, we are stretched thin in just the middle east. After eight years of Clinton . . .

3. Perhaps most important. China is at a use it or lose it point. In 3-4 years we will deploy ship based anti missle systems that will negate the entire Chinese advantage (ballistic missles) in the coming Taiwan conflict. If they don't take advantage of this window of opportunity, they will not have another for many years.

I think a Chinese invasion of Taiwan is a not unlikely result of an invasion of Iraq. Because of the strategic importance of Taiwan, we must be prepared to fight that war also. We have smart guys running this show. They will do what they can.

Although 'reunification' is mentally important to the ChiComs, the value gained vs. the costs are still not in their favor. There is, however, another place for them to be adventurous: Siberia for its' vast wealth of resources.

Think about it - the ChiComs are already planning for a severe oil flow problem to keep up their growth. Initially they planned on destabilizing the India/Pak trouble with the hope that war would start there and they could march in to help the Paks. Once in Pakistan, they were within sight of the middle eastern oil fields. Well, when they ordered 9-11 to happen, they miscalculated by thinking that we wouldn't actually go into Afghanistan. Now we've got a huge presence in the middle east and Caucasus region. So much for that method of getting their oil. (Now they have to depend on us keeping the Persian Gulf open as well.)

So they look north. Siberia has huge reserves of oil, timber, and minerals. Also, the population density there is minimal. Russia's military is nearly all west of the Urals, with only a token presence in the east. Easy pickings for the ChiComs, and it solves a lot of their troubles (while starting a whole batch of new ones). If everything went well (really BIG if), then China would be in a much stronger position to take on Taiwan later in the year, with some combat experienced troops.

It didn't last time. Why now?

We hadn't just finished suffering through two terms of Clintonian destruction of the military. We had the capability to both deter China and kick Iraq out of Kuwait. It's not clear that we have the capability to that now. We've had major reductions in the size of our military, most especially the number of carriers and fighter wing equivalents.

Certain members of RED China's military may be tempted to make agressive moves against Taiwan, but I doubt if they will because the timing is bad for them. They are going to be preoccupied watching all their exported military hardware get blown to pieces in Iraq, on the road of death. Also, they will be on alert watching U.S. aircraft taking off from some bases located within striking distance of their borders.

A $4 billion military hardware package was recently approved for sale to Taiwan and this changes the dynamics of China's plans for expanionism. They have changed their whole tone since the adults took over in Washington.

reading this excellent post and well informed comments, I wonder if the beginning of a trend is emerging in our war.

Strategic missiles have advantages, and the three to four year window discussed is not just speculation. China will lose that advantage in the future, so this isnt a joke to think they would be exploiting any US commitment in the Middle East to invade Taiwan.
Couple that with tons of prepositioned war stocks and garrisoned troops the Chinese have been staging opposite the Taiwan Straits, and a massive shipbuilding program mostly focused on submarines and the ability to project seapower, and we are beginning to see our next enemy emerge.
Then add the strategic partnerships China has in the middle east, as well as its friendly stance towards the islmists, and the formula is there for some real problems.

Its time our leaders wake up and smell that coffee!

Granted, the things you say are correct - from our point of view. However, the arrogance of the ChiComs is only exceeded by their miscalculations regarding either the US or Russia's reaction to any given scenario. They feel that they are 'the nation of destiny', and hence invincible. Yeah, I know that these moves would be suicidal in our eyes. They aren't in theirs, really - we're just barbarians to them (even though the reverse is the case).

This arrogance is also why they are paying OBL & the rest of the Islamonazis to try their hand at taking us down - so they don't have to do the 'dirty work'. The Chinese know they can't succeed, but they assumed it would take us down a notch or two rather than unite us. They know that we will beat Islam, which will in turn take away one of China's threats to their west in the long run. Two birds with one stone in their estimation. It fits their ways perfectly. Notice, for instance, that the Chinese have had no major attacks while we and Russia have had our share. The Chinese don't give a damn about the 'terrorist threat' because it doesn't even exist there - the employees aren't after their bosses.

I guess my main point is that China is a loose cannon at this time due to their feelings of invincibility. That makes them dangerous out of sheer recklessness if nothing else, while at the same time they are trying everything that they can imagine to use against us in their asymmetrical warfare. They're like rust (or liberals) - they never sleep.

You're smoking crack!

The question isn't "Will China invade Taiwan", but rather, "Will India reclaim Kashmir from China and Pakistan".

China has lost its last two ground wars (to India circa 1961 and to Vietnam in 1979) and has no troop landing craft. Since the Taiwanese Straight is 50 miles of killing fields for shooting up hardened military transport landing craft, an invasion would be pretty stupid. Especially an invasion without air superiority. Chinese jet fighter pilots tend to crash their lousy F-7's and F-8's when they go up against unarmed American propeller aircraft like EP-3's, much less the F-16's that Taiwan fields in its modern air force. So it's pretty safe to say that China isn't going to have air superiority over any invasion force in the Straight.

But if they did try it, while their air force, army, and navy was tied up fighting for an island on one side of the world, on the other side of the world you'd see nuclear-power India's multi-million man army retake Kashmir.

Oh yeah, that'd just be brilliant! < /MOCKING >

I believe it it a possibility, but would not occur unless they used the N. Koreans in a massive invasion of S. Korea first ... to further distract and split our forces. Then the attack on Taiwan would occur as a much larger effort in all of the Pacific Rim.

They will not do that until they feel they are absolutely ready economically and militarily ... but I believe they have plans to do so. It is what my series is all about.

THE DRAGON'S FURY SERIES

... and 11B3, in that tale, Siberia is a critical component of the ChiComm plan.

Regards.

absolutely correct

Business Week, Dec. 8, 2002 issue, article entitled, "Greater China, ---the Mainland is absorbing the economies of HK and Taiwan faster than you think. How will this new superpower affect the World? "

The article said it is about "how leaders from the mainland, HK, and TW are creating an integratd powerhouse"

Described how Taiwanese businesses are rushing to invest mega, mega projects in the ML, and how 500000 TW together with their families had already relocated to live , work and do busness on the ML. Even TW students by the tens of 1000s are studying in Chinese universities.

China has no foreseeable need to invade Taiwan. Based on the experience of Hong Kong, we can soon expect the Aegis cruisers we are selling the Taiwanese to eventually and peacefully become the backbone of the Chicom Navy.

I agree with you. The Chinese understand that time is on their side. Any large military actions could be set backs and are therefore unwise as they are not necessary. Probably with time a lot more than Taiwan will be absorbed or come under their influence too. They are on the rise and perhaps rightly see their rivals taking themselves out through over extension, decadence and fisical irresponsiblity. The pendulum is swinging their way no need to rush it.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.