Should the US go to war to prevent the assimilation of Taiwan into the PRC?

[MillCreek]

I don't intend this to become a political partisanship discussion over which future President of any party has more intestinal fortitude over the opposing party and is more likely to start launching nukes.  I have been doing some reading lately about past, current and future mainland China politics and how it impacts the future of Taiwan.  Other than treaty obligations (if any, which I have not researched), does the US have pressing political, economic, military or strategic interests in keeping Taiwan independent, up to and including another SE Asian war? 

I have been thinking about SE Asia a lot recently, especially with the posturing of various SE Asian nations over the ownership of various unoccupied islands between China, Japan, the Philippines and Vietnam, which are significant only insofar as they offer the possibility of oil and natural gas.  If push comes to shove, China is really the only power there with sufficient naval and airpower assets to assert its interests.

[Hawkmoon]

I always believed that we were committed by treaty to defend Taiwan against mainland China, and I have always believed (and continue to believe) that Taiwan is the legitimate government of China. Regardless of how one regards the legitimacy of the Communist government on the mainland (after all, I don't advocate that the descendents of Louis XIV are the rightful rulers of France), I don't recognize mainland China's claim to Taiwan any more than I recognize Argentina's claim to the Falkland Islands.

So I think that, morally and ethically, we should defend Taiwan. I am now not as certain as I once was that we have a written obligation to do so. And at this point in time/history, I seriously doubt that we have the resources to take on mainland China if they should decide to invade Taiwan.

[SADShooter]

Morally, we should exert influence in defense of freedom wherever feasible. Politically, if Taiwan is subsumed by PRC, the entire region can presume the same fate. So, not defending Taiwan is a(nother) tacit admission that we're willing to let PRC become regional hegemon. Pretty sure we do have treaty obligations to support Taiwan.

Hawkmoon hit it, though. "Should" is a less critical issue than "can". If PRC strikes preemptively, do we have power projection sufficient to stop them before Taiwan is obliterated? I don't know.

[Ron]

What is this assimilation?

Is that what you call waging war and conquering your neighbor?

The question should be worded "Should the USA go to war in defense of of an ally who has been attacked by China?"

If that happened it would probably be one of the few truly unambiguously legitimate uses of our war making ability in decades.

[Jamisjockey]

What is this assimilation?

Is that what you call waging war and conquering your neighbor?

The question should be worded "Should the USA go to war in defense of of an ally who has been attacked by China?"

If that happened it would probably be one of the few truly unambiguously legitimate uses of our war making ability in decades.

This.  Much like the defense of Kuwait it would be legitimate and proper.
If china executes a non military takeover of Taiwan, we'd better not do *expletive deleted*it.

[Blakenzy]

This is interesting.

Can the military buffs give a little insight on the PRC's current Naval, more importantly 'anti'Naval capabilities?

Also, what air power projection capabilities do they have over Taiwan? IIRC Argentina had a tough time keeping aircraft in the combat area due to lack of fuel resupply and a very distant airbase, that may have tipped the scales.

Are we ready and willing to take out strategic point targets inside mainland China? If so, how would the Chinese respond? How itchy is the Chinese nuclear trigger finger? How far would neocon types be willing to go if a couple of carrier fleets get beaten up?

[kgbsquirrel]

Another take on it: The Republic of China did help us out in WW2 with Japan to an extent, and then we left them swinging in the wind when the communists decided to finish their take over of the main land in 1948. That came back to haunt us in 1950 during the Korean war when the PRC intervened on behalf of the DPRK (NorK's). It'd be a pretty dick move if we left the Republic of China (Taiwan) to get bludgeoned by the communists a second time.  

ETA:

This is interesting.

Can the military buffs give a little insight on the PRC's current Naval, more importantly 'anti'Naval capabilities?

Also, what air power projection capabilities do they have over Taiwan? IIRC Argentina had a tough time keeping aircraft in the combat area due to lack of fuel resupply and a very distant airbase, that may have tipped the scales.

Are we ready and willing to take out strategic point targets inside mainland China? If so, how would the Chinese respond? How itchy is the Chinese nuclear trigger finger? How far would neocon types be willing to go if a couple of carrier fleets get beaten up?

Their submarines are getting there, but they're not quite there yet. The nuke boats are relatively young in regards to technological maturity and most of their diesel sub fleet is, or is based on, Russian export material which I'd list as about a generation behind the current state of the art. Victor: U.S.

Surface combatants. Well, they've got plenty of em. Mostly smaller craft, destroyers/frigates/corvettes and a mess of coastal patrol craft. Lack of carriers is a non-issue for them since they're not operating away from their own turf and subsequent air bases. They managed to steal the entire collection electrical schematics for the Arleigh-Burke class destroyers a while back, so I'd consider the efficacy of the SPY-1 radars suspect in relation to jamming systems and the like. A massive barrage of anti-ship cruise missiles though, from say our four SSGN's, would still play merry hell with their surface fleet. Victor: Probably the U.S.

Their amphib capability is pretty bare and undeveloped (but again, they're working on it) compared to ours but could probably jump the straight if they weren't substantially opposed. A mess of infantry deployed ATGM's on the beaches could probably put a rather serious dent in any surface landings, friendly surface/air/sub combatants would stall it entirely. Victor: Taiwan/U.S.

Air assets are coming along at an accelerated pace courtesy stealing other peoples (ours mostly) tech. I'd give even odds on air superiority unless we committed our active F-22 squadrons to the issue. And then you have to ask: Where will we operate those from? Additionally they do have a few copies of the F-22 ripoff (J-20) up and flying and are planning to build more. They've also already successfully copied and produced large numbers of Russian Gen 4/5 jet fighters. The  Para drops or helicopter insertion of troops is well within their capability. Victor: Eh, could go either way.

[Hutch]

Leaving the US interests/obligations, the PRC would get bloodied in a fight with Taiwan.  They have the means and might to prevail.  The PRC will do the political calculus, using their own national interest as the sole basis for any such decision.  Let us hope they choose a peaceful course.

On the "should we/could we" intervene question... I don't know.  We could operate several CVBG's in the area.  We could make it ruinously expensive for the PRC, but could we stop it?  Dunno.  Does anyone think we could intervene at the cost of only a few planes and aircrew?  I don't.  I have no insight into the PRC's military capability, but my hunch is that they have formed and purposed the PLAN for this mission above any other, and that, if we trade punches with the PRC in the straits of Formosa, we will see ships stricken from the rolls of the USN.  Is that cost worth it?  Can anyone envision a post-war world in which the PRC and the US have fought such an engagement?

ETA:  Damn, Blakenzy, great minds in parallel tracks, huh?

[MillCreek]

^^^ I would be pretty darn concerned about watching the USS Nimitz and escorts sinking while on fire.  I know that the PRC has been making strides on submarine and anti-ship missile warfare, and even with the Aegis destroyers, wonder how a carrier battle group would do with a saturation attack.  There are only so many Standard and RAM missiles in the magazines.

[kgbsquirrel]

^^^ I would be pretty darn concerned about watching the USS Nimitz and escorts sinking while on fire.  I know that the PRC has been making strides on submarine and anti-ship missile warfare, and even with the Aegis destroyers, wonder how a carrier battle group would do with a saturation attack.  There are only so many Standard and RAM missiles in the magazines.

True. I wonder how well they'd fair if they bunched them together like back in WW2. Instead of lone carriers and their escorts roving about, you band 5-6 carriers together, and their associated escorts. Could probably also detail more small-boys than usual to each CVN.

[MicroBalrog]

^^^ I would be pretty darn concerned about watching the USS Nimitz and escorts sinking while on fire.  I know that the PRC has been making strides on submarine and anti-ship missile warfare, and even with the Aegis destroyers, wonder how a carrier battle group would do with a saturation attack.  There are only so many Standard and RAM missiles in the magazines.

From what I know, the main defense of aircraft carriers is not so much literally shooting down the other guy's missiles, but things like electronic warfare, jamming, countermeasures, and so forth.

[Jamisjockey]

From what I know, the main defense of aircraft carriers is not so much literally shooting down the other guy's missiles, but things like electronic warfare, jamming, countermeasures, and so forth.

Which is a big part of the duties of the support fleet.

[MicroBalrog]

Which is a big part of the duties of the support fleet.

Yes, exactly this.

In the Cold War, Soviet naval bombers - and the tech gap between the US and the Soviets was not as large then - were entirely unable to get a weapons lock on US carriers due to the functioning of the American ECM.

The Soviet plan was, in event of actual WW3 erupting, to strike a US carrier battle-group with eight (8) 110-kiloton nuclear warheads. They hoped this would weaken the escorts' ECM capability enough so they could follow up with attacks on the carrier.

[MillCreek]

From what I know, the main defense of aircraft carriers is not so much literally shooting down the other guy's missiles, but things like electronic warfare, jamming, countermeasures, and so forth.

And with contemporary anti-ship missiles in a saturation attack, I have not the faintest idea as to how effective ECM is.  Certainly, our Navy has put a bunch of money into close-in ship defense, so they must be counting on some leakage.

[MillCreek]

This.  Much like the defense of Kuwait it would be legitimate and proper.
If china executes a non military takeover of Taiwan, we'd better not do *expletive deleted*.

If the PRC is smart, this is what they would do.  Taiwan has a tremendous amount of economic and scientific resources, and it would be hard to exploit them if most of Taiwan is smoking rubble.  If the PRC offered generous terms for Taiwan to become part of the PRC, but as a special economic and governance zone, akin to Hong Kong, I wonder what the reaction of the Taiwanese people would be.  And let us not forget that there was an indigenous Formosa population before the Nationalists came and set up shop.  The Nationalists don't have entirely clean hands either.

[kgbsquirrel]

And let us not forget that there was an indigenous Formosa population before the Nationalists came and set up shop.  The Nationalists don't have entirely clean hands either.

The same could be said of us.

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

Wow. I believe folk in Taiwan would go Alamo if the Chinese try it.
but its a real scary deal
The Chinese are very firm in their belief that Taiwan is a runaway province.
the hong Kong scenario offers advantages to both sides
The best thing Taiwan can hope for is internal dissent in mainland China keeping the focus off them for as long as possible
as soon as China thinks it can act it will but so far they chose not to rock the international boat.
that will change sooner or later

We need remember there are other players in the region as well

[MechAg94]

How vulnerable is China to external embargo?  If effective, we wouldn't have to get in real close. 

I agree that we would take some losses which would hurt badly.  I think that would be a given in any serious war we got into.  I would also be curious how it would effect satellites, GPS, and ICBMs in general.

[kgbsquirrel]

I would also be curious how it would effect satellites, GPS, and ICBMs in general.

ICBM's typically use inertial guidance with optional star-tracker updating of it's location mid-flight, so the answer would be "not-a-whit." 

GPS, eh, when it was the only thing of it's kind we could switch it off at will or insert errors into its transmissions that only we could decode. With the completion and activation of GLONASS (Globalnaya Navigatsionnaya Sputnikovaya Sistema) though, it really doesn't mean much. Hell, my Garmin can pick up either GPS or GLONASS signals to figure out where it is at.

[Tallpine]

How vulnerable is China to external embargo?  If effective, we wouldn't have to get in real close. 

I agree that we would take some losses which would hurt badly.  I think that would be a given in any serious war we got into.  I would also be curious how it would effect satellites, GPS, and ICBMs in general.

Can you imagine Walmart shelves being empty ?   

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

can you imagine them calling all that debt in?

[Perd Hapley]

If the Chinese employed either measure, wouldn't that be pretty hard on them, too?

[MillCreek]

can you imagine them calling all that debt in?

And I still wonder about cyber and economic warfare between China and the US having more of a negative economic impact on us than a localized shooting war.

[kgbsquirrel]

can you imagine them calling all that debt in?

Actually....  "If you invade Taiwan we will void any U.S. debt instruments you hold."

How's that for grabbing short-n-curlies?

[MillCreek]

Actually....  "If you invade Taiwan we will void any U.S. debt instruments you hold."

How's that for grabbing short-n-curlies?

And then the full faith and credit of the US on the world financial markets disappears.  And we cannot survive in isolation of the world markets.