Why Beijing will not attack Taiwan

Brookes News ^ | Peter Zhang

[Dr. Marten]

Why Beijing will not attack Taiwan

Peter Zhang
BrookesNews.Com
Monday 9 February 2004

Beijing's continued sabre rattling should be seen for what it is — sabre rattling. Beijing has no intention of launching an attack on Taiwan, at least not for some considerable time. The name of one almost forgotten island tells it all — Iwo Jima.

That battle will never be forgotten by the United States Marine Corps. In 1945 the US launched a force of 110,000 personnel against a tiny island defended by 21,000 Japanese troops. Thirty-six days later it was over and 20,000 Japanese soldiers were dead. These defenders inflicted 25,000 casualties on the American forces.

What went wrong? It was supposed to be a pushover. The US gave the island the most sustained aerial bombardment of the war. As Admiral Nimitz said: "No other island received as much preliminary pounding as did Iwo Jima."

The problem was that the Japanese had dug themselves so far into the mountain and underground that the bombing scarcely touched them. Moreover, the troops were incredibly fanatical and almost fought to the last man forcing the Americans to take the island inch-by-inch.

Jump nearly 60 years into the present and we find not tiny Iwo Jima but Taiwan, an island of 20 million people with a highly advanced economy. This brings us to vital facts that journalists have overlooked.

No matter how many missiles the mainland launches at Taiwan it still won't be able to breach its underground defences nor destroy its military communications systems. Even if Beijing eventually controlled the air the PLA has still to cross the straits where there is no doubt it would suffer enormous losses.

The PLA’s troubles would really start once it reached Taiwan. Facing it would be a highly trained patriotic army of 400,000 troops equipped with the latest gear, backed by cutting-edge technology and supported by a colossal reserve army of about 800,000 men. The PLA would be running up against something like 1000,000 heavily armed troops in heavily fortified positions.

Imagine how it would have been on Iwo Jima if there had been 50,000 Japanese troops, all of them as well equipped, if not better, than the Americans and backed up with the latest in heavy ordinance, etc., and entrenched in impregnable positions? This is what an invading PLA force would be facing if it tried to invade Taiwan.

One needs to recall that though China has about 2.5 million troops, much of their equipment is still largely obsolete. Furthermore, analysts believe that not even this many troops could take Taiwan.

Beijing fully understands that the longer such an attacked continued the more likely it would be that public opinion in America would swing behind government action to help Taiwan. And of course there is still the United States 1979 Taiwan Relations Act which would allow America to supply the island with the necessary assistance to defend if attacked. This is something that Beijing has not forgotten.

Any assault on Taiwan would involve losses so massive that no government could survive the public reaction, especially if the war was lost. And that's the one point that Beijing clearly understands, even though Western journalists can't seem to grasp it. It has to be stressed that this is no longer Mao's China where the leadership can throw away 1000,000 troops as if they were rag dolls and get away with it.

So if an attack on Taiwan would be political suicide, why the threats and posturing? The regime uses the Taiwan card very much the way America's Democratic Party uses the race card: to mobilise its supporters and demonise its enemies. It's also a means to not only test a new administration's mettle but the political temperament of the Democrats and the media.

Both have responded in ways that pleased Beijing, blaming not the bullying actions of the regime for the situation but President Bush's measured response. If patriotism is not yet dead in the Democratic Party it's only because it's still in a terminal state. (No wonder Beijing was desperate for the Democrats to control both Houses and the White House).

Finally, militaristic strutting is a crude attempt to intimidate the Taiwanese and any others who would be rash enough to support their right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Sadly, this squalid tactic has worked with respect to Australia.

Several years ago, Malcolm Fraser, a former 'conservative' Australian prime minister, supported Beijing’s demands and argued that Australia should not support America over Taiwan whatever the situation. I have been told, however, that Fraser would still expect America to help defend Australia if attacked by any Asian country.

The Australian Labour Party also weighed in on Beijing's side, as one would expect from a party with a powerful anti-American faction. By and large, the Australian media also blamed Bush, as did America’s mainstream media. Beijing puts great faith in the Western media, which should tell us a great deal about most so-called Western journalists.

I'm referred to Australia because Chinese officials were particularly pleased that powerful Australian influences sided with Beijing by blaming Bush. They think that if the Australian Labour Party wins the next election, which my editor thinks is a distinct possibility, they will be able to intimidate it into supporting a more influential role for China in the region.

This, in the regime's view, would be specially important because of Australia's close ties with the US. It would also signal to the rest of Asia with whom its future really lies.

It seems impossible to underestimate the short-sightedness and stupidity of some Australian politicians (American politicians like Senator Kerry are even worse). Asian politicians are under no illusions regarding Beijing’s integrity or long-term political ambitions so what's the problem with the Australian Labour Party? Doesn’t it realise that Beijing's warlords have only contempt for those who kowtow to them?

 

[Dr. Marten]

"If they use neutron weapons on Taiwan, they better have enough for the rest of the class, because the use of the weapon would invite an immediate and massive response in kind from us."

I think it would be foolish to believe that the United States would respond with a nuclear retalliation against China for using it's nuclear arsenal on Taiwan.

The President of the United States can not simply just push the button at his own descretion and such a response from us would not be in our best interests.

[Dr. Marten]

"the Chinese have NEVER had a democracy or a republic in their history"

That is not an entirely true statement. I suggest you do more reading into the revolution of 1911.

[AppyPappy]

Actually, he could launch nuke cruise missiles at Chinese installations on their coast from the east coast of Taiwan and Taiwan could claim THEY launched the missiles.

[Quix]

How much shielding as in earth, rock would it take to neutralize a neutron bomb?

[Quix]

Oh, I can imagine scenarios in which Taiwan would hide such from the USA and at a strategic moment assert to Beijing convincingly that they had the capability.

[Quix]

I think you are quite right.

Add to that what I consider the high probability if not certainty that the puppet masters have concocted a plan very much along those lines with which to scare the world's citizens into a global world government of the World Leader much smoother and much more evil than even Billdo and Shrillery.

[Quix]

Ooooops, I goofed and had in mind my last post was somehow to this msg.

Please refer to it.

I believe the puppet masters are playing with terror as just another puppet string. They are arrogant enough to believe that they can treat the masses of world citizens accordingly.

Some of them are arrogant enough to believe that they can escape unscathed and end up on top of the dog pile.

Others are sold out to satan sufficiently that they are honored to sacrifice themselves to the grand plan. I suspect Shrillery is somewhere in between. I think she sees herself as ending up amongst the leadership circle. I believe the puppet masters who've been using her see her as just another piece of fodder.

But they see the Beijing leadership that way, too. And key members of the Beijing leadership probably assume, like Shrillery, that they will be among the top dogs when the dust settles.

None of these characters really cares a twit about how many millions of their own country or of the world die in the process.

Satan's BUSINESS is to rob, kill and destroy. The complicit idiots are deluded into thinking they will be the surviving top dogs after the killing stops. They don't realize it will not stop until satan is bound. They don't realize that God is bigger. They don't realize they will fall with many very resounding thuds on their own sharp spikes in their own deep holes.

I wish I could believe the above was just my own opinion from an unpleasant pizza.

[Quix]

I have a fair amount of respect for that perspective and agree with it . . .

TO A POINT.

Every Mainlander I've talked to in recent years has justified an attack on Taiwan to some greater or lesser degree--whether they were still in Mainland China at the time or not. To the best of my memory, EVERY one.

I have seen Chinese more than a few times paint themselves into a corner by their words and very defensively, with great fire and self-justification strike out however devastatingly--feeling very righteous and thoroughly justified regardless of the horror in their wake.

I think the puppet masters think THEY have Bejing under fine tuned control. And Beijing thinks THEY are playing the ART OF WAR *MOST* SKILLFULLY.

Room for miscalculations abound.

Yes, I think by the time the dust EVENTUALLY settled, it would be the end of the Communist Party's Control in Beijing. But that process could take longer than many think.

[Destructor]

"The PLA’s troubles would really start once it reached Taiwan. Facing it would be a highly trained patriotic army of 400,000 troops equipped with the latest gear, backed by cutting-edge technology and supported by a colossal reserve army of about 800,000 men. The PLA would be running up against something like 1000,000 heavily armed troops in heavily fortified positions."

If America got thrown into that equation, then you would get an ass kickin' for the Chinese.

[risk]

.....it's taking the Neville Chamberlains a while to show up on this thread, isn't it?

[Quix]

I do NOT think it would be as easy nor as much of a walk in the park for US as many seem to think.

And, probably prayer and God's will in the world at the time would decide the outcome much more than our military might.

Our political might is alsmost a contradiction in terms.

[chilepepper]

The changes in China in the past 20 years have been mindboggling... don't underestimate the imagination of the average Chinese -- these folks are natural born capitalists and are starting to chafe under the rule of the "progressive" Maoist leadership.

For a real eyeopener, check out this web site...

[RinaseaofDs]

How the actual scenarios would play out is for people above my paygrade, but I can't imagine the scenario that we actually stand by while China occupies Taiwan after killing off its population with a neutron device.

Maybe if Kerry were elected.

What would be in our best interest in that case?

[Quix]

I think this is a point which is still underestimated by our side.

[Quix]

Well said, IMHO.

[Quix]

As usual, you are incredibly astute and perceptive as well as knowledgeable.

Nevertheless, somehow, methinks even the great Poohbah does not have ALL the factors flawlessly considered.

Xiamen and locale alone is a very complex component. Add in very complex Beijing's leadership dance. Add in Taiwan's very complex leadership dance. Add in PLA and Taiwan military's respective idiocies, blindnesses; glowing reports on top of rotten training, maintanence, follow-through; Add in the USA being spread thin with various political winds and desperate home situations aplenty; . . .

One does assume and hope that Taiwan has with usual Chinese cleverness planted plenty of spies and sabateurs on the Mainland. But then, Beijing certainly has been busy doing the same in a much more open society on Taiwan.

[Quix]

I love it when your great wisdom is comforting to some of my own assumptions.

[Quix]

I could easily imagine you being right

and perhaps more easily imagine you being wrong.

[risk]

Add in China's lunge toward fascism, as per Ledeen. I.e., world's oldest culture deserves another chance at global dominance.

[Quix]

If Shrillery gets in and they buy her as well as they bought Billdo, they could be right.