China: Five triggers for a Chinese attack on Taiwan

Asia Times ^ | 08/21/04 | Lawrence E Grinter

[TigerLikesRooster]

SPEAKING FREELY

Five triggers for a Chinese attack on Taiwan

By Lawrence E Grinter

Speaking Freely is an Asia Times Online feature that allows guest writers to have their say. Please

click here if you are interested in contributing.

With the re-election of Chen Shui-bian as president of the Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan, continuing trends toward Taiwan's de jure independence and this summer's military exercises by China, the United States and Taiwan, it seems useful to review China's stated or implied "trigger" events for a People's Liberation Army (PLA) attack against the democratically governed nation of Taiwan.

Beginning with former president Jiang Zemin's Eight Points proposal in December 1995, and amplified in subsequent statements, China's leadership has stated or implied five events that they say would cause them to use force against Taiwan. Throughout these pronouncements, Chinese authorities have continued to publicly treat Taiwan as an internal Chinese province, although the Republic of China has never been ruled by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).

Each of China's five conflict triggers lends itself to Beijing's particular interpretation. However, it is probable that the Chinese leadership's internal definitions of when and how Taiwan might be crossing a "red line" is fluid and under debate within the CCP Standing Committee and Central Military Commission. The five trigger events are:

1) A declaration of independence
Taiwan is de facto independent and has been since the sovereign ROC government took over administration of the island in 1947. The Republic of China government, established by Sun Yat-sen on the mainland in 1912, was a founding member of the United Nations and a formal security treaty ally of the United States between 1954 and 1979. Provided the PRC has no plans to attack Taiwan, President Chen Shui-bian has twice formally promised not to declare de jure independence. So what might constitute for Beijing the threshold of Taiwan's de jure independence? Evidently not the recognition of the Taiwan government by 26 other sovereign governments. Nor Taipei's recent use of referenda or a proposed constitutional revision that speak about sovereignty. I assume President Chen's forthcoming constitutional proposals also will be carefully crafted. So, short of an explicit formal independence declaration by the president of Taiwan, Beijing faces the dilemma of having to live with Taiwanese measures that come right up to, but stop just short of a formal declaration.

2) A military alliance by Taiwan with a foreign power
When the United States dropped its recognition of the Republic of China in January 1979, the US-ROC bilateral Mutual Defense Treaty also ended. In its place came US commitments under the Congressional Taiwan Relations Act of 1979, pledging Washington to make available to Taiwan necessary defensive equipment. Since 1979 Taiwan has purchased billions of dollars of weapons and equipment from the United States and Mirage 2000 jet fighters from France. Evidently, for Beijing, these weapons purchases, related training and resupply pipelines have not constituted a "military alliance". But what if Taipei votes for the money to purchase new theater missile defense or Aegis fire-control systems? There seems to be very little Beijing can do about it. What seems to most disturb Beijing is potential new US-ROC technological cooperation that could deflect or negate China's growing offensive threats against Taiwan.

3) Internal turmoil in Taiwan
Taiwan is a democracy with a robust political system and an essentially wide-open media. Beijing has no choice but to live with this. So, just what might constitute sufficient "turmoil" in the Republic of China for the People's Republic of China to mount an attack? Interestingly, demonstrations last spring in Hong Kong against Beijing's proposed internal security provisions saw nearly 500,000 Hong Kong citizens take to the streets, and Beijing did very little about it. Nor did Beijing intervene following the apparent assassination attempt on President Chen and Vice President Annette Lu one day before the election of March 20 in Taiwan.

So what is Beijing's definition of "turmoil"? Clear examples of that took place in Beijing in May and June 1989, when nearly a million Chinese citizens demonstrated in Tiananmen Square, demanding democracy, and Deng Xiaoping finally ordered in the PLA to drive them back. And in 1999, when Chinese internal security forces squelched 10,000 Chinese citizens (belonging to the Falungong) in Beijing. Given the offshore distances, Beijing would seem to have a high "turmoil" threshold regarding Taiwan. However, one can assume that PRC security services have thousands of agents inside Taiwan, agents trained in instigating "turmoil". Presumably Taiwan authorities are prepared for such actions.

4) Possession of weapons of mass destruction
The Chinese government has operationally deployed about 450 nuclear weapons. By summer 2004, the PLA had pointed nearly 600 short-range ballistic missiles (M-9s and M-11s) at Taiwan. By contrast, Taiwan has never operationalized a weapon of mass destruction (WMD), and threatens no one. Taiwan signed the nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) in 1988, and ROC nuclear reactors are under International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) full safeguard inspections. Since then, no evidence has surfaced from Beijing, Washington or Taipei about any ROC WMD. From Beijing's viewpoint, what would constitute WMD in Taiwan? Biological, chemical, nuclear radiological materials? Unassembled or operationalized? Offensive or defensive? Information warfare capabilities? ROC missiles capable of retaliating against a PRC attack? What if Chinese agents placed WMD materials inside Taiwan, and Beijing announced their "discovery" to the world? How would Taiwan disprove such WMD?

5) Unwillingness to negotiate on the basis of 'one China'
Former president Jiang Zemin stated this war trigger in December 1999. Over the past five years, Taipei has made hundreds of offers to meet with PRC representatives in open or closed discussions on unification matters with no prior conditions. President Chen reiterated his offer after his May 20 re-election. However, Beijing has stonewalled all of Taipei's offers. One wonders what else the ROC can do to appear reasonable in Beijing's eyes, short of capitulation.

Of China's five war "triggers", the three that President Hu Jintao's government is currently emphasizing are a formal independence declaration, emergence of technology to defeat a PRC attack and lack of progress in negotiations. With no Taiwanese WMD in the picture, the Chen government being cautious on independence declaration rhetoric and continuing to make negotiation offers to Beijing, it seems to be the US-ROC defensive arms purchase that is most worrying Beijing. Once again, China faces the dissonance between its stated policies, or "triggers", and the changing power realities across the Taiwan Strait and in Washington.

Lawrence Grinter is professor of Asian Studies, Air War College, United States. The views expressed here are those of the writer and do not necessarily represent the views of the US Air Force or the US government.

[Fishing-guy]

What questions?

Why don't you answer the questions. Republic of China or Republic of Taiwan? What's Taiwan independence and who are behind it?

[tallhappy]

These questions (which I have answered):

Currently the President of RoC not allowed to visit the WhiteHouse. The US says RoC is not a nation. Do you agree with these policies? I do not.

Should the White House host the President of the RoC with State visits as is done for other heads of state? I say yes.

Should the US establish diplomatic relations with the ROC? I say yes.

[tallhappy]

Republic of China or Republic of Taiwan?

Currently there is no Republic of taiwan. I support RoC. If RoC changes its name to RoT I support them.

I support free democratic allies, as is Taiwan.

What's Taiwan independence and who are behind it?

Taiwan indpendence is Taiwan not being taken over by China. Currently it is represented by the Republic of China as far as the formal name of the nation.

It is supported by people who do not want the communists to take over Taiwan.

People who oppose it favor the communists taking over Taiwan.

As far as you questions about favoring the name the people of Taiwan want to call their nation, it is not my place to favor one over the other as I am not a citizen of that country.

Are you a US citizen?

[Fishing-guy]

So you are not going to answer the questions.

If prsident Chen wants to come to US as leader of Republic of China and he belives in upholding the constitution of ROC, then go for it. If he is a two-faced politican who is working on destruction of ROC, then he is on his own.

[snowsislander]

IMHO, the only way we can avoid a major conflict is to act now, like Reagan did with the Soviets, and maginalize, stop funding, and isolate them...so their totalitarian system can bankrupt itself. That will be extremely hard and painful to do at this point...but not as hard or painful as the alternative IMHO.

You are more optimistic than I am; I think that we have passed the point where we can succeed with such marginalization.

Not that I like the status quo. I think that we should go ahead and stop as much trade as we can with the vile Chinese government now.

Not because it will weaken China -- that it might to some extent, since we are still by far their largest marketplace -- but to strengthen ourselves and quit throwing away $120 billion in red ink that we are creating every year with our foolish trade policies, and rebuild our own factories.

The way that we are doing "free" trade is too expensive to carry on. If it were a success and we were making lots of money, that would be a testament to its strength. But the red ink is flowing, our debt is increasing far too quickly, and there is nothing that says suddenly, one bright morning, it will all reverse and we will not be running red ink while free trading away.

Instead, it will either stop when we can borrow no more as a risk-free debtor, which may be sooner than any of us would like, or political action is taken.

[Unknowing]

It seems that all I can do at this point is to boycott Chinese goods, and buy gold. Those are two small steps, but if most Americans did these things, the economic funding of China would start to wind down.

[djf]

I think the question of economics is the most important.
Can they offset any business losses with the United States by business with Europe and/or the mideast?

There is also the question of what effect a rapidly declining dollar would have.

As far as the carrier question, don't they have us totally hornswaggled with which one, is it called the Sunburst missile?

But of course, taking out one of our carrier groups might be the straw that turns the whole thing nuclear. And no matter what the results in America, nuclear conflict with China would utterly destroy their military/manufacturing base. So I am inclined to think they would weigh very heavily the possile results of messing with our carriers.

[tallhappy]

So you are not going to answer the questions.

I answered all your questions directly and specifically. Feel free to ask more or ask for elaboration.

You, though, have not answered any of my questions:

Currently the President of RoC not allowed to visit the WhiteHouse. The US says RoC is not a nation. Do you agree with these policies? I do not.

Should the White House host the President of the RoC with State visits as is done for other heads of state? I say yes.

Should the US establish diplomatic relations with the ROC? I say yes.

You did respond somewhat to one question but it was incoherent gibberish and can't be seen as an answer.

[Fishing-guy]

Other than calling people Chicom lover, are you ever going to answer the questions? Are you for Republic of China and against Taiwan independence or vice versa?

BTW, how do we know you are not a Chicom lover?
If you have problems with the Bush administration, you need to ask them. P.S. don't call them Chicom lovers.

[Jeff Head]

Then you certainly are not in favor of the current trae practices with the PRC...it is anything buyt fair.

Also, we heard the same doom and gloom about the break-up of the Soviets...many nuclear armed rogue nations and such...didn't transpire. There are a LOT less nucs in China than the Soviets had, so excuse me if I discount this arguement.

If there is a revolt...a strong nation will rise out of the rest with our and the ROC's help and we shall work with them, like we did the Soviets, to avoid unchecked proliferation.

[Jeff Head]

Well, I would actually count that one as a part of my number two. That is the type of technology they would use to counter our carriers.

[Fishing-guy]

Of course, the current trade situation is unfair for us.

As to the nuclear weapons, it's hard to predict the future, one can never know who will get their hands on the weapons.

Of all the scenarios, IMO, slowly creating a democratic China, similiar to what happened to ROC on Taiwan, is the best way.

[RightWhale]

China wants Taiwan because of its great wealth.

A good, two week war shouldn't damage any of those advanced factories or injure any of those competent employees. Should it? Everything should be captured intact. Nevermind a couple million people on Taiwan fighting for their lives.

[LonghornFreeper]

>>Nevermind a couple million people on Taiwan fighting for their lives.

The question is how hard would average Taiwanese fight. Many Taiwanese are actually very liberal and I am fairly certain private gun ownership is banned. I know we like to think that people fighting for freedom are invincible, but history has not shown this to be the case. Many free nations fell in the early days of WWII. Saigon fell without massive popular resistance. The Nazis in Berlin fought to the very last, killing thousands of Russians in street battles, fighting far harder than most of the free nations they conquered. China is moving toward fascism similar to that seen in Germany in the 1930's. Falun Gong and Christians are the new Jews. The Chinese may well fight hard to take Taiwan.

To my knowledge there has never been a desperate, all out, last stand type battle in a modern, free city. I would hope that Taiwanese would "defend their Island, whatever the cost may be" but I am not sure this is really the case. Like in the United States, creeping socialism has done major damage in Taiwan. Recent evidence of this includes Taiwan's failure so far to purchase the arms package offered by the US. Their parliament would prefer to spend the money on "social programs" than on defense of their nation.

[sukhoi-30mki]

I think you referred to the 150km SSN-22 Sunburn missile(Ruskies call it the "MOSKIT")-as of now ,only China's Sovremenny class ships carry it-these are more or less in the American Kidd class category & will probably end up getting sunk & the Russians designed them with one purpose-Fire your missiles & sink.Having said that China has ordered 2 more modified Sovremenny class ships from Russia with reduced radar cross section(RCS),vertically launched Shtil SAMs & a improved extended range Sunburn system-these will arrive by 2006 & will easily be the most powerful ships in the region till Taiwan gets Aegis equipped ships(ie if they ever get it).

China is also ordering the 220 km range 3M-54 "Club" anti-ship/land attack missile to be fired from its new generation kilo class subs from Russia which will be delivered by next year.This missile has a subsonic profile (like the Tomahawk & the Harpoon) till it is about 20kms away from the target &then it accelerates to supersonic boost phase,making it supposedly impossible to shoot down.Given that it is smaller than the Sunburn,the PLAN could deploy it on it's new generation of homebuilt surface vessels.India was the 1st country to buy the system,in 2000 & has deployed it on atleast 5 kilo class subs & 3 surface ships(possibly along with the Israeli Turbo Popeye cruise missile).China though may not get the Yakhont cruise missile which has a range of over 300kms & is the most advanced Russian anti-ship missile -it is also the basis for the Indo-Russian PJ-10 Brahmos missile(which may be one of the reasons why Russia has been hesitant to sell the Yakhont to China).


PS-the ranges of many Russian missile systems are guestimates given the contradictory literature available on the net.

[tallhappy]

Are you for Republic of China and against Taiwan independence or vice versa?

I have answered. They are not mutually exclusive. In fact they are the same thing.

ROC is independent Taiwan. I support Taiwan. I support ROC.

I answered the question very clearly before and now have again.

I think your problem is you cannot even specify what you mean with your question.

Are you against Taiwan independence?

[tallhappy]

ROC on Taiwan

Now was that so hard to say, xiao guai guai?

You are learning.

[tallhappy]

slowly creating a democratic China, similiar to what happened to ROC on Taiwan

So Taiwan/ROC is independent from China. Thank you for finally acknowledging what I've been saying this whole time.

taoyan zhu daoyugongfei

[Fishing-guy]

I am for Republic of China and against Taiwan independence, whose aim is to destroy ROC.

No need speaking Mainland Chinese pinyin to me. Don't understand a word of it. It is interesting that you would know communist Chinese.

[tallhappy]

I am for Republic of China and against Taiwan independence

But Taiwan is now independent and its name is Republic of China (although we, the US, and the Olympics and too many others refuse to recognize the name).

Are you saying Taiwan is not independent now? Or that Republic of China is not independent?

You really make no sense.