China ups ante with Taiwan as EU supplies arms

Sand

I guess most people have heard about the anti-secession law that China is currently considering. Apparently details on its wording are sketchy but it is clearly targeted at Taiwan, apparently setting down "red lines" which provinces may not across without war being declared - a clear threat to Taiwan that war will be declared if they move to independance, and more dangerously it sets a precedent that will be hard for future Chinese leaders to retreat from which can only make resolving the issue all the harder. As the Macedonians and the U.N. discovered a few years ago, the China-Taiwan dispute is not a purely internal matter.

This law has the potential to be very destabilising, as it is generating resentment in Taiwan, which could conceivably lead to moves towards declared independance. Taiwans existence is guaranteed by the United States, and Japan has recently broken with long standing tradition of non-involvement to back Taiwan and the US defence of Taiwan. The balance has been maintained by that alliance and the technological advantage the allies hold over the Chinese airforce and navy which could turn a seabourne invasion into a Bay of Pigs fiasco on a grand scale.

The E.U.s contribution to the situation has been to move to relax restrictions on arms sales to China, which can only help to erode that advanatage and make an invasion more achievable and thus more attractive to the Chinese leadership, especially if internal unrest requires a war to channel it into. We should never underestimate Chinese nationalism, especially regarding Taiwan. A war of unification would be very popular.

There are suggestions that some hardliners in the Chinese leadership believe that with the US distracted and the EU unable/unwilling to intervene that they could get away with taking over some outlying Islands, a blockade or a small missle strike against Taiwan - just to prove a point to Taiwan and to bolster support at home. This is not a welcome turn of events in what is one of the most dangerous powderkegs in the world today. If the US was to respond to such a provocation, by sinking say a Chinese warship then a large scale war would be inevitable. If it did not, then the Chinese would be emboldened, and the American security umbrella would be weakened. All hell could really break loose then.

flogen

Just to raise a point or two in relation to the legislation.
While there is little doubt that it is being used to prevent Taiwanese independence, saying China is preparing for a war is probably a worst case scenario estimate and should be treated as such. The legislation says that if all peaceful attempts at reunification are exhausted, China may use non-peaceful methods. non-peaceful does not always mean military attack, but it could be stockades and embargo's (a la Cuba, coincidently).

I doubt China would test the will of the US by attacking Taiwan head-on, and while the US is ahead of China on a technological field any war between the two would be far from costless for both sides. In that sense I imagine both would like to avoid a war at all costs.
Whatever it is that China decides is an end to peaceful methods, I imagine they will impose sanctions and blockades etc, and see what the US does. IMO the US won't do very much other than condemn the moves, reiterate it's support for Taiwan and encourage others (such as the EU) to condemn the moves also.

If the situation did become more volatile I'd bet on the US to back down before the Chinese. China has more to gain from reunifying with Taiwan than the US has to lose by letting it go. Naturally the enevitable situation will be far more complex than a simple win/lose scenario

flogen

Roisin Dubh

flogen wrote:

Just to raise a point or two in relation to the legislation.
While there is little doubt that it is being used to prevent Taiwanese independence, saying China is preparing for a war is probably a worst case scenario estimate and should be treated as such. The legislation says that if all peaceful attempts at reunification are exhausted, China may use non-peaceful methods. non-peaceful does not always mean military attack, but it could be stockades and embargo's (a la Cuba, coincidently).

The problem is that in the totalitarian minds of the Chinese regime, "exhausting peaceful means" does not include multi-party democracy - the system that pertains in Taiwan. Beijing repeatedly says it favours transplanting the "One Country Two Systems" system from Hong Kong onto Taiwan. That is hardly an acceptable replacement for the multiparty democracy the Taiwanese have now. Beijing is asking the people of Taiwan to settle for a scenario where a maximum of half the parliament of Taiwan would be elected by the people there. That is a complete joke. If Beijing really wants tio "exhaust all peaceful means" then they should implement Taiwanese style democracy on the mainland. Should they do so, then Taiwan would be more receptive to their rants about reunification.

I doubt China would test the will of the US by attacking Taiwan head-on, and while the US is ahead of China on a technological field any war between the two would be far from costless for both sides. In that sense I imagine both would like to avoid a war at all costs.
Whatever it is that China decides is an end to peaceful methods, I imagine they will impose sanctions and blockades etc, and see what the US does. IMO the US won't do very much other than condemn the moves, reiterate it's support for Taiwan and encourage others (such as the EU) to condemn the moves also.

If the situation did become more volatile I'd bet on the US to back down before the Chinese. China has more to gain from reunifying with Taiwan than the US has to lose by letting it go. Naturally the enevitable situation will be far more complex than a simple win/lose scenario

flogen

Well the Taiwan Relations Act in the US requires the US to provide arms to Taiwan and to defend it against China so legally, they have to defend it. The US should carry out military exercises in the Taiwan Strait like President Clinton did in 1996 to show China that the US talk about supporting democracy around the world means anything beyond invading oil-rich countries.

Hobbes

flogen wrote:

The legislation says that if all peaceful attempts at reunification are exhausted, China may use non-peaceful methods. non-peaceful does not always mean military attack, but it could be stockades and embargo's (a la Cuba, coincidently).

Well embargo would be suicide as well for Taiwan, but embargos only work if you can enforce them across other countries (eg. CIA sinking British Leyland ship in UK docks to stop it going to Cuba). Which China could do by hurting itself.

while the US is ahead of China on a technological field any war

China isn't as backwards as everyone makes out. Remember they are a nuclear power and one of the few countries to have thier own space program (That works).

But China wouldn't need to go to war with the US. They already own most of the manufacturiing and suppliers for US goods. China is owned a lot of money by the US (China+Japan+S.Korea = 40% of US debt).

Add to that...
- recently Powell (Bush regime) saying that Taiwan should be part of China. (ref)
- The culling of the arms sales to Taiwan by Bush. (ref)
- US overstretched military (which is finding it hard now to get new recruits. ref)
- Bushes brother getting a huge kickback from China. (ref).

I personally think Bush will be quite happy to sit back and let China take it.

Anyway this rule is just another to other three that already exist which are just as suspect as the new one. The US (and EU) all follow those rules as well.

ionapaul

I think the thorny issue of Taiwanese independence is one that might yet be the cause of a future 'world' war - I feel this outcome is fairly remote as I am certain that behind the scenes, the US administration and allies maintain huge pressure on Taiwanese politicians to keep the status quo and not declare independence.

That being said, I am equally sure that should China actually attack Taiwan following a declaration of independence (or to pre-empt a declaration), the US, Japan and indeed NATO and many other allies would defend Taiwan. Despite a stretched military and the many problems associated with defending Taiwan, it surely is the long-term interests of the US to weaken China's military capabilities and ensure its continuing hegemony. Allowing China to take Taiwan could be likened to the Romans allowing the Germanic tribes to move across the Rhine - as long as the US can prevent it, they should (for their own sake, rather than the grateful Taiwanese).

flogen

Roisin Dubh wrote:

The problem is that in the totalitarian minds of the Chinese regime, "exhausting peaceful means" does not include multi-party democracy - the system that pertains in Taiwan. Beijing repeatedly says it favours transplanting the "One Country Two Systems" system from Hong Kong onto Taiwan. That is hardly an acceptable replacement for the multiparty democracy the Taiwanese have now. Beijing is asking the people of Taiwan to settle for a scenario where a maximum of half the parliament of Taiwan would be elected by the people there. That is a complete joke. If Beijing really wants tio "exhaust all peaceful means" then they should implement Taiwanese style democracy on the mainland. Should they do so, then Taiwan would be more receptive to their rants about reunification.

Well that's what I said, who knows what China deems as a natural end to peaceful means.
You seem to think that I support China in this, I don't. Let Taiwan have what it's people wants, whatever that may be. I agree that they should not be forced into anything, but at the same time it's rediculous to expect China to convert to a multi-party democracy in order to unite with Taiwan. Even if that was the only solution it's not a price China would be willing to pay.

Well the Taiwan Relations Act in the US requires the US to provide arms to Taiwan and to defend it against China so legally, they have to defend it. The US should carry out military exercises in the Taiwan Strait like President Clinton did in 1996 to show China that the US talk about supporting democracy around the world means anything beyond invading oil-rich countries.

I know what US law says, but that should never be taken as gospel. If China attacked Taiwan, the administration of the time would make the call, regardless of what the lawbooks says. Laws can be changed. Look at it like this, if you asked the American people if they prefered a) a costly war with China to b) China taking over Taiwan, what do you think they'd say? No country can afford to get pulled into a huge war (as Hobbes points out, with another Nuclear power) over an island that they don't even own.

As far as the Chinese army goes, I know it is far from backwards, but the US is still ahead of it (by whatever stretch). I think the man-power available, mixed with the technology and weaponry would be the real threat to the US.

flogen

Sand

Whatever it is that China decides is an end to peaceful methods, I imagine they will impose sanctions and blockades etc, and see what the US does. IMO the US won't do very much other than condemn the moves, reiterate it's support for Taiwan and encourage others (such as the EU) to condemn the moves also.

I think that would be a dangerous miscalculation. While the US is maligned as a troublemaker and intefering tyrant, it actually underpins the stability and security of the world, allowing the era of global trade and investment unknown since the 19th century when Britain served a similar role with its navy.

Japan is currently worried by two threats. One is China, the other is North Korea. It is currently fairly pacifist because of A) guilt over its war record, and The guarantee of American military protection. If it is given reason to believe that the US will not support Taiwan with any more than words, then it will look to its own defences and begin steps to remove constitutional restrictions on defence policy, boost defence spending, and probably begin its own WMD program to counter China and North Koreas threat in that area. The sad part result is rising tensions as China and North Korea also have good reason to fear Japan, especially a more militant one. Even in its currently pacifist state, Japan is rich and powerful enough to afford to spend 45 billion dollars on its armed forces, whereas even the Chinese "officialy" only spend a third of that currently.

That will be repeated around the world wherever America either explicitly or implicitly imposes a Pax Americana - like the Korean peninsula. If Taiwan is abandoned by the US, then the North will probably reckon it can get away with overrunning the South, especially seeing as China will probably support it and block any UN security council measures.

If China can see it can get away with blockading Taiwan without more than words with the US, then it will see what else it can get away with - how about a full scale invasion? America is not a superpower because of the size of its economy or its political contacts or even its military power. Its a superpower because it is willing and able to project its might around the world. As such, to retain its superpower status and kudos, and given the realpolitick of what will happen to East Asia without their influence, they will *have* to intervene to maintain American hegemony. All wars come from political brinkmanship and miscalculation - If China ever believes that the US will not seriously stand in its way, then war is inevitable. Afterall, Chinas defence spending is pitiful compared to the US so theyd be mad to tackle the US headon. But if they thought they had a carte blanche...... This legislation might be a rather dangerous piece of brinkmanship, as it is certain to generate a response from the Taiwanese.

lost_lad

I believe China WILL attack Taiwan.

1) To make an example of Taiwan. So no other province decides "we too can have democracy?"

2) To show they are not afraid of US.

3) Because it would be easy and good practice for the millatry.

4) To make the point that they are a military power who have alot more power then many currently believe.

5) They also control interests at either end of the panama canal so could serisouly damage the shipping industry and oil imports to america if america helps.

The only real reason for them not to attack would be that Europe wont lift the arms embargo if they do attack. But a few planes and some technology can be obtained through other means so doubt that its much of a deterrent.

Nato would not help because they are not going to risk bringing war to Europe.

America is stretched way too thin and every one knows it.
Proof that America is streched way to thin is the fact that they've kinda joined up with Europe on the whole talking solves problems front (Iran).
North Korea is untouched and Unthreatened. and Kim is dangerous and stupid enough to test a nuke on/near Japan/South Sorea too see what would happen.
But they also get on pretty well with China, so refer back to my points about Taiwan.

I sincerally hope there is no war but doubt my hopes will do much to stop it.

ionapaul

The new Chinese law authorising force against Taiwan should it declare independance was passed today. For those interested in more:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/4346629.stm

Seen as 'serious provocation' by the Taiwanese. I'm sure the Americans will be leaning heavily on the Taiwanese not to respond in kind and accelerate independance moves. But larger powers have been dragging into war by smaller allies / protectorates since time immemorial...

lost_lad

The Dalai Lama knows China is not making idle Threats....

http://www.breakingnews.ie/2005/03/14/story193538.html

lost_lad

Dont know if anyone still monitoring this thread but

Taiwan is still preparing
http://www.spacewar.com/news/missiles-05w.html

Its still doubtfull about the EU arms embargo being lifted.
http://www.spacewar.com/2005/050415155636.p6xvvfjl.html

And China is preparing for a possible space war by the americans
http://www.spacewar.com/news/cyberwar-05j.html.

Also those anti-japanese protests seem to be getting out of hand.
Are they being allowed to happen do you think?

Sand

Also those anti-japanese protests seem to be getting out of hand.
Are they being allowed to happen do you think?

Theyre definitly allowed to happen. The country is a military dictatorship afterall. Its retained the police state aspect of communism, but is now experimenting with limited capitalism. If the experiences of the former Soviet empire are anything to go by, nationalism is what the leaders will attempt to inflame to retain control when the Chinese Communist party collapses. The Chinese are far, far more nationalistic than people give them credit for. The level of rhetoric against Taiwan for example is only a few steps from declarations of war - as the new law demonstrates.

That said, the Chinese protests are most likely real anger allowed to be demonstrated, rather than stage managed. Up to 30 million Chinese died during the Japanese occupation and the the whitewashing of that in the Japanese view of the war can only be insulting to the families of victims of the occupation. But of course, the Chinese communists would rather concentrate peoples anger on the millions killed by foreign occupiers than the millions killed by the communists murderous famines and "great leaps forward". The Japanese would be best to simply admit they were wrong, to review the education system and be done with it. You wont see the US pushing them on it though, with Hiroshima an easy comeback for the Japanese.

As for the EU arms embargo I dont see the logic in dropping it. The Chinese leadership is much the same as the one that ordered tanks to be deployed against the students ( next time RTS hippies complain about fascist cops they should be sent to China for a long overdue wakeup to reality ) and the threat against Taiwan and US troops protecting Taiwan - and the US is at the very least a nominal ally of the EU, certainly closer to the EU than China - is still real. Sending weapons to them is...mystifying. It seems to me to be one of those teenage rebellion antics the French get up to piss off the US, with the Germans tagging along, more than anything else. Hopefully the impact of the scale of the EU parliment vote against the dropping of the embargo will have some weight with Chirac and Schroeder. I dont think history will remember them fondly if they go down as arming a regime that could swing into dangerous ultra-nationalist conflicts very quickly.