By Miguel Miranda
When asked about the likelihood of open warfare between China and the United States I am quick to point out it is Washington DC’s actions that trigger the event rather than Beijing’s arrogance. In my simplistic reasoning, this has played out in the last three weeks after House Speaker Nancy Pelosi visited Taiwan. If the Chinese military’s behavior is any indicator a violent struggle for the island is all the more certain. But allow me to explain in detail.
What is unfolding in Asia are competing narratives fueled by the unfinished business of the 20th century. On one hand is China’s self-awareness about its own rise as a global power and on the other, the United States working to preserve the world it fashioned after 1945. Neither country will adjust its own rationale for exercising influence across the Asia-Pacific, whether it is economic or military. While Nancy Pelosi’s visit was hailed by some as a gesture of defiance in the face of a tyrannical China obsessed with conquering the island nation, the response from Beijing was a PR campaign for its armed forces. Weeks later and the results are startling (or underwhelming, depending on one’s biases) but they prove a few recent assumptions about the People’s Liberation Army and its various branches. Foremost is that the Chinese navy or the PLAN have the capacity to blockade Taiwan and impose what is perhaps the largest siege in human history regardless of how close the United States Navy is.
Aside from warships, there is the equally troubling PLAAF and its new generation of combat aircraft, including the H-6K strategic bomber tailored for delivering cruise missiles at extreme ranges, and the threat these pose to the American carrier strike groups that are supposed to reinforce Taiwan. The H-6K and its upcoming sibling the H-20 (whose introduction is years away) are a bigger threat to the US forces in Asia than Chinese stealth fighters. When loaded with supersonic missiles the carrier strike groups—Washington’s main coercive tool—are reduced to proverbial fish in a barrel.
Even more troubling are the salvos of ballistic missiles that overshot Taipei and landed inside Japanese territory on August 4. It shows how reckless China’s military planners are—they are prepared to escalate the conflict—and the awful fact that Chinese missiles can pummel the island into submission and cause immense loss of life. While it is true Taiwan’s air force can retaliate with strikes on the mainland, they have to contend with a lethal air defense network considered the largest in the world.
What China’s military did not show is a broad mobilization of its ground force and their transports. This is what American commentary tends to focus on—rather on the important ones I mentioned above—in a mental exercise that belittles their rival and soothes the troubling unpreparedness of their own military for a big fight. The argument boils down to China does not have sufficient logistical expertise and transports to carry out a full-scale invasion of Taiwan, hence the war cannot happen.
A strange assertion as multiple analysts found out in 2021 that China can muster an immense fleet of civilian transports, including Ro-Ro vessels, to get the job done. Further evidence was shown by zealous Chinese media although, once again, this was not the emphasis of the provocations from August 4 until 9 and then during the weeks that followed. The large-scale production of heavy lift helicopters and transport aircraft—including a new seaplane—is giving the PLA and PLAN the air bridge to complete an invasion.
What I am driving at is China’s military, regardless of its shortcomings, has grown to a size and shape for waging a “peer-level” conflict over the entire first island chain: Japan, Taiwan and the Philippines. The US military knows this because the antiseptic language of their annual reports on China explain why and how in detail. But the US Navy enjoys clear advantages in aircraft carriers, guided missile destroyers, and nuclear attack submarines, the counter-argument goes. It is true but one can cherry pick details about China’s military. It has better equipped air defenses, coastal defenses, a ridiculous assortment of long-range missiles, and a numerical advantage in ships and unmanned systems. Worse, the PLA and its branches—the navy, air force, rocket force, strategic support force—are a long-term fixture in Asian geopolitics, whether we like it or not. Meanwhile, the US military’s presence across the “Indo-Pacific” is not disappearing either (it has been around since the Commodore Perry expedition against Japan in 1854) but in all likelihood it can ebb and shrink, much like the British and the French in the 20th century. Despite its lofty rhetoric, Washington has abandoned its allies before. We have seen horror unfold in several countries in the last 50 years.
If we revisit the summer of 2020 when the world was in the grip of the pandemic the US Navy and Air Force actually reinforced their presence in the Indo-Pacific as a clear warning to China. But the Air Force then reorganized its deployment. The old B-52’s were pulled back so that the faster and nimble B-1B Lancers took their place. The latter were deemed more survivable versus Chinese SAMs. Here is the key difference between how the US military behaves compared with the Chinese. With few exceptions, such as its illegal garrisons in the South China Sea and outposts in Tajikistan, the PLA and its branches operate well within national territory and even its worst behavior, such as violent brawls with Indian soldiers, are calculated to occur in gray zones it claims as its own.
The US military, on the other hand, deploys over continents and oceans, bringing it right up to China’s doorstep and inviting disaster. When I attempt to explain the precarious situation here in Asia I emphasize how China’s provocations and the end of high level talks with foreign capitals causes the pivotal US reaction that may start the real war.
Indeed, this is what appears to have happened on August 5. As a measure of retaliation China’s foreign ministry announced it was halting multiple dialogues with the US government, especially between theater commanders. This is so dangerous because an innocuous event—like PLAAF J-16’s harassing unarmed aircraft—may lead to catastrophe as formal communications channels are non-existent when an incident does spiral out of control.
So this is how the China-US conflict begins. China’s regional behavior is not changing and the US is going to act as it sees fit either by regular port visits, FONOPs or flights over the South China Sea. When it does, China responds with force and history turns for the worse. What can the rest of us Asian countries do? Well, we can start anticipating this scenario and buy more weapons to defend ourselves with. I am not a think tanker nor do I advocate “policy” for any government but it is prudent if India does the same on an epic scale.
Author is a Philippines based South Asian Defence Industry analyst.
Disclaimer: Views expressed are personal and do not reflect the official position or policy of Financial Express Online. Reproducing this content without permission is prohibited.