i dont think ScS tension is relate to current taiwan tension though. taiwan also claim those island.
Defence of Taiwan
- Thread starter OPSSG
- Start date
dpp win election in 2016, the result was dramatic cooldown between the two after the current taiwness president decide against 92 consensus. taiwan tourist industry hurt badly after that.
whenever pro-independence party win, the relation between china-taiwan cool down, 96, 2001 ish . the surge of flyover is difference of capability between current china vs china in 96/2001. if china had the military capability back in 96 as right now, they gonna use it back then.
as for japan, its the same, china military/economy grows, they gonna train their pilots/sailor, given flash point is in the region. Heck i fully expect china to start doing regular exercise over ScS in the near future as their military continue to grow. As long they are not fly into territory airspace, not much can be done with it. Just like we have right to do FON, we can't prevent them from fly over international space. beside, china is japan largest trading partner, so i doubt things will go too far. Japan/SK also been quite over HK/xinjian issue too. historically, i haven't seen any rising power not exercise their new grow power.
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #143
@weaponwh and @Musashi_kenshin, despite the fact that both of you have an in-depth understanding of the issues, both of you are talking past each other deliberately.
1. One of you is supportive of China, without being critical of the CCP’s choices — which in my view is harmful to China’s long term interests — different choices might yield better results that address China’s geo-political concerns. Some of China’s choices are seen as a real threat to her regional neighbours, which will lead to poorer outcomes as China’s power and influence grows; in this regard how Xi’s team manages Beijing’s relationship with Manila, Jakarta and Taipei bears watching (viz a viz the contest for influence against Tokyo and Washington).
2. The other of you is supportive of Taiwan, without being critical of the DPP’s choices — which in my view is harmful to Taiwan’s long term interests — different choices might yield better results.
3. Biden’s foreign policy team are professionals and there are hard limits to their engagement with Taiwan — despite the bipartisan support to be more firm in meeting the State Department’s obligations under the Taiwan Relations Act. They are not going to rush in to judgment like Trump or make the same diplomatic mistakes of Bush II.
4. The Taiwanese need to help themselves by being consistent, instead of stirring tensions and crying wolf. Unlike Taiwan, Japan is doing well in managing her tensions with China and developing geo-political options along with a naval force structure that serves as an effective counter to these growing PLA(N) naval and grey zone threats as represented by China’s People’s Armed Forces Maritime Militia (PAFMM), unlike Taiwan’s belated and incoherent defence planning.
5. Can we all please engage in some reflexivity, so that we can learn from each other? Many thanks.
1. One of you is supportive of China, without being critical of the CCP’s choices — which in my view is harmful to China’s long term interests — different choices might yield better results that address China’s geo-political concerns. Some of China’s choices are seen as a real threat to her regional neighbours, which will lead to poorer outcomes as China’s power and influence grows; in this regard how Xi’s team manages Beijing’s relationship with Manila, Jakarta and Taipei bears watching (viz a viz the contest for influence against Tokyo and Washington).
(a) As Collin states: “Clearly, the PLA Navy is staging aggressive patrols from those outposts located within the Philippine EEZ, primarily Mischief Reef where the Houbei missile craft were spotted during air patrol by AFP late last month. This is nothing short of worrisome.” I agree with him that as the PLA(N) actively involved in the patrols, there are higher chances of it being called upon by CCG to respond if the latter is confronted by any ASEAN naval vessel. PLA(N) surface combatants are often superior other local navies they confront.
(b) To use one example to illustrate, the US Navy’s P-8 aircraft already operate from Japan, Brunei, Malaysia and Singapore. Does China want to force Indonesia’s hands (when it is nominally non-aligned)?
(c) Beijing issued new threats against Taiwan at a time of near unprecedented tensions around the island nation, saying its military "won't stand a chance" if China chose to invade. See : China Issues New Threats to Taiwan: ‘The Island’s Military Won’t Stand a Chance’
2. The other of you is supportive of Taiwan, without being critical of the DPP’s choices — which in my view is harmful to Taiwan’s long term interests — different choices might yield better results.
(a) Turns out that it’s not only China that’s supposedly unhappy over Singapore’s military training in Taiwan — some Taiwanese aren’t that happy with it either. Specifically, Taiwanese villagers who have been protesting against the SAF, and even throwing “missiles” at the Singapore flag, when they have an issue with the Taiwanese authorities — typical political BS of blaming others when it is a purely local Taiwanese issue. I would like to thank the DPP for forcing a choice — of continuing to train in Taiwan but to re-focus it on specific areas that can’t be easily replicated in Australia.
(b) As I see it, DPP likes to force choices on others, such that even friendly Singapore has had spend billions to redeploy to new training locations like Guam and scale up exercises in Australia, instead of keeping to the status quo. Taiwanese behaviour is driving the Singapore Army to scale down and re-focus its military exercises in Taiwan. It is easy to understand that Singapore’s unilateral military training in Taiwan enhances Taiwanese security — but this relationship that Singapore maintains is seemly not appreciated by some politicians in Taiwan.
(c) In contrast to Taiwan, the welcome mat is put out by the Australians for Singaporean troops in Shoalwater Bay and this is done under the glare of the media in both countries — in a manner that affirms that both countries are best mates, no matter who is in power in Australia.
3. Biden’s foreign policy team are professionals and there are hard limits to their engagement with Taiwan — despite the bipartisan support to be more firm in meeting the State Department’s obligations under the Taiwan Relations Act. They are not going to rush in to judgment like Trump or make the same diplomatic mistakes of Bush II.
4. The Taiwanese need to help themselves by being consistent, instead of stirring tensions and crying wolf. Unlike Taiwan, Japan is doing well in managing her tensions with China and developing geo-political options along with a naval force structure that serves as an effective counter to these growing PLA(N) naval and grey zone threats as represented by China’s People’s Armed Forces Maritime Militia (PAFMM), unlike Taiwan’s belated and incoherent defence planning.
5. Can we all please engage in some reflexivity, so that we can learn from each other? Many thanks.
Last edited:
Musashi_kenshin
Well-Known Member
OPSSG, you've made some fair points about Taiwanese domestic politics in the past. My comments were merely to address the suggestion that the PLA's now routine incursions are consistent with previous behaviour.
However, I have little sympathy with the US being forced to make decisions, because for a long time Taiwan (and even East Asia) was a neglected policy area, with former presidents making concessions to Beijing for no reason other than they appeared to be following the Chamberlain appeasement strategy - and I used to hear cynical comments about State Department officials retiring to quickly take up positions with consultancy firms that had lucrative contracts with Chinese businesses/organisations.
Taiwan is obviously important to the global economy due to its chip production. When supplies were good, countries took that for granted and spurned attempts for high-level talks. Then recently there was a supply problem, and suddenly even countries like Germany that are relatively pro-China were falling over themselves to get in touch with Taipei to discuss the situation. That doesn't really teach Taiwanese political parties how to interact in a positive way on the international stage, because it implies you need to cause problems to get attention.
Sort of on that note, it looks like the Trump administration's last minute changes to rules on direct links have been codified with a modifications.
www.ft.com
Also a paywall free link here.
Hopefully more meetings between key personnel will lead to less risky behaviour and a more coordinated approach to regional issues.
No comment on ties with Singapore, as I know so little about them. It may be well that Singapore should be welcomed more warmly.
However, I have little sympathy with the US being forced to make decisions, because for a long time Taiwan (and even East Asia) was a neglected policy area, with former presidents making concessions to Beijing for no reason other than they appeared to be following the Chamberlain appeasement strategy - and I used to hear cynical comments about State Department officials retiring to quickly take up positions with consultancy firms that had lucrative contracts with Chinese businesses/organisations.
Taiwan is obviously important to the global economy due to its chip production. When supplies were good, countries took that for granted and spurned attempts for high-level talks. Then recently there was a supply problem, and suddenly even countries like Germany that are relatively pro-China were falling over themselves to get in touch with Taipei to discuss the situation. That doesn't really teach Taiwanese political parties how to interact in a positive way on the international stage, because it implies you need to cause problems to get attention.
Sort of on that note, it looks like the Trump administration's last minute changes to rules on direct links have been codified with a modifications.
Subscribe to read
www.ft.com
Also a paywall free link here.
Although this is being spun (presumably by the State Department) as making both China and Taiwan happy, I don't think that Beijing will be pleased that there are now formal rules to allow for more high-profile meetings between US and Taiwanese officials. Granted they probably knew it was coming in some way, but I expect they still hoped it might not happen.
Hopefully more meetings between key personnel will lead to less risky behaviour and a more coordinated approach to regional issues.
i dont think i'm support of mainland, there are many issue with its government. such as their claim over SCS is overreaching. But i also think both mainland taiwan has its own issue. many mainland chinese are overly nationalistic, and the ccp has no issue to use that. i also think China overreacting whenever some parliament member from some country x criticizing them. They also use their "wolf warrior" tactic abit too much.
as for taiwan, sometime watching their party dispute between each other is like watching amateur MMA.
as for taiwan, sometime watching their party dispute between each other is like watching amateur MMA.
Any country and government is open to criticism. Your statement, however, blends the population and the government. The population of mainland China cannot be conflated with the CCP, just as we cannot say every Russian is a supporter of Putin. Just as many mainland Chinese are nationalistic, the opposite is equally true. Many are not at all. I've met right-wing Japanese nuts who claim nothing wrong happened in China. Likewise with Malaysians vis-a-vis Singapore. Some might say I am nationalistic about Singapore, though I don't think so. I just tend not to voice my criticism in public or amongst the many friends who work for the Singapore government.
For all the various faults in the regional governments, however, the PRC is one of two which are causing the most instability and insecurity in the region. The other being N. Korea, for obvious reasons. Since the PRC is a cause of rising tensions, blame is rightly placed on them. They are making themselves look like the villain to many countries and people.
For all the various faults in the regional governments, however, the PRC is one of two which are causing the most instability and insecurity in the region. The other being N. Korea, for obvious reasons. Since the PRC is a cause of rising tensions, blame is rightly placed on them. They are making themselves look like the villain to many countries and people.
You know watching robust Taiwanese Parliamentary debate can be quite entertaining. Shame we can't run a betting book on it.
Musashi_kenshin
Well-Known Member
Largest Chinese breach of Taiwan air zone in a year after US warning
China sends 25 military jets a day after US secretary of state’s comments about Beijing’s aggression
www.theguardian.com
Sometimes I worry that China will take action that leads to war not because it intends to, but because it's being ignored.
There are zero prospects of the Taiwanese government making concessions that lead to direct talks whilst such obvious threats of violence are being made. So what is China actually expecting from all of this? If over the course of President Tsai's last term Beijing doesn't get its way on anything, will it accept that?
More messaging in Australia about Taiwan.
www.abc.net.au
www.abc.net.au
It seems most planning around this seems to think that the conflict is likely to timeframe within the next 5 years. I think that is optimistically long. Planning it seems is going beyond what Australia would contribute to such a conflict, as we are quite distant from it, but more about what happens after it.
Its pretty universal in Australia and all the think tanks are saying basically the same thing. War is now a real possibility, prepare for the conflict, prepare for post conflict situations. While not inevitable, its certainly a very real situation developing. In terms of preparation, COVID19 has probably helped in that regard, and recent Chinese trade actions have made it a clear priority that Australian businesses need to diversify away from China, and more importantly, develop local supply chains.
In such situations, misunderstandings, and miscommunications can easily cause conflicts. Even when carefully crafted by competent people and both sides genuinely don't want to fight. As an Australian, East Timor is a classic recent example.
I don't think China is being ignored, but regular dialog isn't occurring, and small issues, over time can cause calamities.
Former defence minister warns of potential Indo-Pacific war with China
The chances of a war in the Indo-Pacific region involving China are rising sharply, according to former defence minister Christopher Pyne, who warns Taiwan is the most likely next flashpoint.
www.abc.net.au
'Contingency' plans discussed with United States over possible Taiwan conflict
A senior American diplomat says Australia and the United States are discussing contingency plans in case a military conflict erupts over Taiwan.
www.abc.net.au
It seems most planning around this seems to think that the conflict is likely to timeframe within the next 5 years. I think that is optimistically long. Planning it seems is going beyond what Australia would contribute to such a conflict, as we are quite distant from it, but more about what happens after it.
Its pretty universal in Australia and all the think tanks are saying basically the same thing. War is now a real possibility, prepare for the conflict, prepare for post conflict situations. While not inevitable, its certainly a very real situation developing. In terms of preparation, COVID19 has probably helped in that regard, and recent Chinese trade actions have made it a clear priority that Australian businesses need to diversify away from China, and more importantly, develop local supply chains.
Communication is extremely strained currently. When you have diplomats asking media if they have heard anything recently, its very bad. It appears all that effort into soft diplomacy and relationship building have not developed the side communication links we had all hoped would develop.
In such situations, misunderstandings, and miscommunications can easily cause conflicts. Even when carefully crafted by competent people and both sides genuinely don't want to fight. As an Australian, East Timor is a classic recent example.
I don't think China is being ignored, but regular dialog isn't occurring, and small issues, over time can cause calamities.
Sandhi Yudha
Well-Known Member
Somaliland and Taiwan have recently opened diplomatic missions in each other countries.
As expected china is not pleased with this. I wonder what the next step of china will be. Maybe they will actively support Somalia in the conflict with Somaliland, or they want to destabilize or punish Somaliland in another way.
www.bbc.com
|"But more needs to be done," Mr Lou says. "I was on the beach in Berbera when a young girl, no more than five, came up to me. She only spoke Somali, but then she pointed at me and shouted 'Covid-19!'. Once again, I said: 'No, I am from Taiwan', but I am not sure she understood."|
I can imagine this situation.... :-D
As expected china is not pleased with this. I wonder what the next step of china will be. Maybe they will actively support Somalia in the conflict with Somaliland, or they want to destabilize or punish Somaliland in another way.
Somaliland and Taiwan: Two territories with few friends but each other
Taiwan and Somaliland are basically fully functioning territories but neither is recognised internationally.
www.bbc.com
I can imagine this situation.... :-D
not sure where Australia can diverse its business, its not like there is an economy that can just buy up all the products left out due to China-Australia trade issue. Also New Zealand just made a free trade deal with china, some the overlapping export products between the two could shift favor for New Zealand.
Last edited by a moderator:
NZ has had a FTA with the PRC for 12 years. It was recently upgraded. Both Australia and NZ can diversify their markets to ensure less reliance upon the PRC and both are in the process of doing so. Both our nations had to diversify our markets quickly in the early 1970s after our main trading partner shat on us, so it's something we have done before and successfully completed.
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #153
1. But I don’t think that both Australia and Singapore are really trying, to prepare for a ‘high-end conventional war;’ if we were, there would be a much stronger focus:
(a) on air defence units in our air forces; and/or
(b) counter battery fires for the army.
Our increased but limited investments in air and naval power are more suited to a troubled peace scenario for the Indo-Pacific; with our air forces too being thin in bench strength to fight for air superiority against a future peer threat, without extensive allied support.
2. In this regard, I see this 2020 to May 2024 period of tension between China and Taiwan through the lens of the 1991 period of tension between Malaysia and Singapore (where escalation control was important as the trouble peace evolved through various moves from Feb 1991 to Aug 1991).
(a) There may be limited applicability of past tensions between Malaysia and Singapore due to differences in size of forces and threat matrix but the operational planning mindset remains a North Star to guide this Taiwanese discussion. The PLA’s decision to send 25 fighter jets and bombers into Taiwan’s ADIZ, as a show of force, in Apr 2021, is the logical outcome of DPP-CCP hostility.
(b) If Singapore believes war is likely, the SAF will have to consider withdrawing from our military bases in Taiwan, to get our conscripts out from the ongoing dispute between the DPP and CCP. In Jan 2020, it was reported that a Singaporean Commando trainee was taking part in a night static line parachute jump as part of his Basic Airborne Course in Taiwan when he faced a "static line interference", which saw the line sweep across his neck. This is a known risk for such jumps and occurs when the line is too slack, interfering with the jumper's exit and indicates that the SAF has no intention to withdraw from its bases there.
3. Australia and Singapore have capable air forces that don’t have enough fighters for a hot war — the force structure is too small to take combat induced attrition (over a period of 30 days). But we can inject a man with a gun in most troubled peace scenarios but our capabilities, even when combined under the FPDA are limited, when compared to the JSDF. Therefore, I see the Australian and Singaporean desire for our air forces and navies to be more capable as a desire to secure a troubled peace.
4. Singapore for example, cut its fighter force from 7 squadrons to 5 today (i.e. 3 F-16 squadrons and 2 understrength F-15SG squadrons). Our total air force size is less than 1 fighter wing of the USAF; IMHO, we can’t decide to fight alone against a real peer threat.
Last edited:
I'm still trying to wear my naïve hat and view Chinas actions as a long term series of provoking measures to achieve an end.Largest Chinese breach of Taiwan air zone in a year after US warning
China sends 25 military jets a day after US secretary of state’s comments about Beijing’s aggression
Sometimes I worry that China will take action that leads to war not because it intends to, but because it's being ignored.
There are zero prospects of the Taiwanese government making concessions that lead to direct talks whilst such obvious threats of violence are being made. So what is China actually expecting from all of this? If over the course of President Tsai's last term Beijing doesn't get its way on anything, will it accept that?
That being the reunification of Taiwan with mainland China.
That being said, 25 aircraft provoking Taiwanese airspace is certainly an escalation in the art of pressure diplomacy.
The odd incursion by a flight of four aircraft is bad enough, but with this sort of force one has to reconsider what is going on.
This is a serious statement of intent.
This is a squadron plus sized force of which 18 are multirole fights.
So what's happens next week?
Two Squadrons?
How do you respond to such a force.
Either you have superior aircraft of superior numbers.
Taiwan's Airforce is just not that big.
So what would and should Taiwanese allies do if assistance is called for and does Taiwan actually have any true allies.
Its all too confusing and made worse by a provocative PRC.
I'd like to stay under the naïve hat and think Chin's PLAN is currently not up to the task of forcing the issue, but like their Chinese Air force they too are placing pressure by exercising a carrier battle group in the Taiwanese Strait.
Too much happening too quickly.
Time for the interested party's to have a cup of tea and a chat.
Things can get out of hand quickly when intensions are misunderstood.
Concerned S
And yet, wine aside, virtually all of the sectors affected by the Chinese bastardry are now exporting as much or more than at this time last year
I expect that NZ will bend over and bare its collective backside when Xi requires it rather than give him the finger as would have been done 30 years ago. There are many individual spines in NZ but none in government or the media, and the forces have been reduced to a barely credible rump trying hard to maintain relevance. The current PM won't do a thing that doesn't require sympathetic expressions.
oldsig
Musashi_kenshin
Well-Known Member
Joe Biden set to make his first arms sale to Taiwan
The Biden administration plans to make its first arms sale to Taiwan as tensions between the island and China grow.The deal, which includes 40 self-propelled ho
www.thetimes.co.uk
Archive link here. Presumably these are M109A6 Paladins.
It's interesting if Biden is preparing DSCA notifications for Taiwan so soon into his term of office. Would be another clear sign that the US isn't for turning on better Washington-Taipei relations.
Last edited:
This seems to be around what planning is occurring.
If war breaks out over Taiwan with China and the US, both Singapore and Australia will be too far away and too small in number to make a significant contribution.
AFR has been regularly publishing about war planning.
Diplomacy and resolve can defuse Taiwan tension
Australia must do nothing to make China think that there is a military solution to its frustrations with Taiwan.
Australian military prepares for worst-case scenario in Taiwan clash
Sources say the Australian Defence Force is planning for a potential worst-case scenario if tensions over Taiwan spill into military conflict between the US and China.
IMO E7, P8 and air to air re-fuelers are probably the sort of assets that would be very valuable and in short supply, particularly if there was a need for high operational rates. Anything in terms of fighters would probably be around protection and escort for that kind of deployment.
Navy wise, a single aegis ship is unlikely to make a difference. We can however, help patrol our area, make a safe corridor, provide ship maintenance, rearm, and repair capabilities. Provide strategic depth, which is short in this type of conflict. We would be surging our subs however, that kind of capability will be in huge demand. I could see us possibly operating some of them out of Japan or Guam.
Both Australia and Singapore are small countries in the scheme of things. Unless the fight comes to us, we are only going to be making small niche contributions. Doesn't mean they aren't valuable. Probably our most important contributions will come post conflict.
That is the problem with Taiwan, taking Taiwan, will not solve China's problems. I'm not really sure what winning is in that scenario. But that may not be the point. Having a distracting conflict which clearly identifies other nations as enemies gives the CCP all the excuse it needs to have harsh enforcement internally. Things like a shrinking population, shrinking economy, failing centrally planned economy, failing ecosystem, etc will be very much secondary.
Sandhi Yudha
Well-Known Member
Again some agressive capitalistic activities near DIAOYU-islands!
Remarkable that Japan haven't built any lighthouse/beacon on these islands.
The Senkaku islands have a unique shape, actually enough for a small airstrip or helicopter-platform, at least for the V-22.
Remarkable that Japan haven't built any lighthouse/beacon on these islands.
The Senkaku islands have a unique shape, actually enough for a small airstrip or helicopter-platform, at least for the V-22.
aviation_enthus
Member
I tend to agree with this statement. Extra P-8, E-7 and KC-30’s would provide an invaluable boost even to almost any ASEAN state Australia wants to support, let alone Singapore.
In addition to this, the other thing I think the RAAF would consider, is some form of “active reserve” on these types. Given they are all based on current civil airframes, it would be relatively easy to have current, trained pilots and engineering support ready to go. The “backseaters” in the E-7 and P-8 would be harder to fill with reserve crew, but even some sort of mixed units (50/50 active VS reserves) would help with surge capacity and provide a reasonable standard of crew ability.
This sort of capability would be a massive boost and useful contribution to security in SE Asia.
While possible, there doesn't look to have been much movement in this space. Existing numbers and platforms were long planned for and lead items and crews were already in existing planning. Maybe something looked at going forward. If the fleet size or tempo increases.
Some civil technicians were hired for F-35/Hawk programs at the start of COVID19.
Ex-Jetstar technicians welcomed to BAE Systems Williamtown
Twenty five aviation technicians, including apprentices, who lost their jobs due to the impact of COVID-19 on the...