Article

2005-03-31 China-Japan-Koreas

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Steve 2005-03-31 10:04:21 AM|| E-Mail|| Front Page|| [11138 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 So what happens when Taiwan (ROC) blows the pre-installed bombs in the 3 Gorges Dam and 1/4 of China washes into the ocean?

What does it take for these morons to get real?

Posted by 3dc 2005-03-31 11:41:56 AM|| 2005-03-31 11:41:56 AM|| Front Page Top

#2 I just don't see this happening. If China were to do this - their entire economy would go belly up. I don't think they are willing to risk that.

Posted by Yosemite Sam 2005-03-31 11:42:33 AM|| 2005-03-31 11:42:33 AM|| Front Page Top

#3 Sam, to the contrary. The addition of the Taiwanese currency reserves and its industrial base postpone the Chinese economic collapse, perhaps for as long as a decade or more.

The Chinese will attack. It's only a matter of when. Combined with enough maskirovka, this scenario may be a winner.

And I remain unconvinced that Taiwan would have the will to fight to the bitter end. It's possible that after this conflict it would appear that Saddam put up more of a fight. I don't expect the Taiwanese equivalent of "We shall fight them on the beaches..."

Posted by Chuck Simmins 2005-03-31 1:14:28 PM|| [http://blog.simmins.org] 2005-03-31 1:14:28 PM|| Front Page Top

#4 There is a possibility that this could work, if it all indeed happens "out of the blue", and Taiwan falls fast enough, in a week or so. The disruption to the Chinese economy would then be transient, and the US could do little about a fait accompli.

But there's the rub - its extremely risky.

Posted by buwaya 2005-03-31 1:51:03 PM|| 2005-03-31 1:51:03 PM|| Front Page Top

#5 China will get Taiwans government moolah only if a Taiwan government hands it over willingly, or if China gets the US to agree to take it away from a Taiwan government-in-exile. There will be lots of refugees.

More important are the private assets of Taiwanese. These are mostly going to stay where they are. A lot of this investment is in China already.

Posted by buwaya 2005-03-31 1:54:32 PM|| 2005-03-31 1:54:32 PM|| Front Page Top

#6
The Chinese will attack. It's only a matter of when. Combined with enough maskirovka, this scenario may be a winner.

I have no doubt they're waiting for a Democrat in the White House.

Posted by Robert Crawford 2005-03-31 1:56:11 PM|| [http://www.kloognome.com/] 2005-03-31 1:56:11 PM|| Front Page Top

#7 OOTB = Chineese Fire Drill.

Posted by Shipman 2005-03-31 2:07:11 PM|| 2005-03-31 2:07:11 PM|| Front Page Top

#8 CS: The addition of the Taiwanese currency reserves and its industrial base postpone the Chinese economic collapse, perhaps for as long as a decade or more.

With or without an invasion, I doubt that any Chinese economic collapse is going to happen. The major issues with China's economy occurred after the Communists adopted Marxist collectivist policies. Now that they've switched to relatively free markets, China's economy will grow rapidly, regardless of whether it trades with foreigners. Like the US, China has a relatively self-sufficient continental-sized economy. Whatever happens with respect to the outside world, China's economy is likely to boom for decades - that's the beauty of adopting a (mostly) free market economy - a country's success isn't dependent on outsiders. (There's this myth that Cuba has been impoverished by the US trade embargo. But the reality is that Cuba has been free to trade with the rest of the world for ages. It's Castro's economic policies that have crippled Cuba, not Uncle Sam's trade sanctions).

Posted by Zhang Fei 2005-03-31 2:14:58 PM|| [http://timurileng.blogspot.com] 2005-03-31 2:14:58 PM|| Front Page Top

#9 Nice story, but it doesn't make any sense.

What do the Chinese have to gain by lobbing HE at Taiwan?

It seems to me the smart play in an OOTB attack would be the air companent only, massive amounts of fixed wing air superiorty fighters to suppress the Taiwan air force and to provide cover for an air borne assault attack on airports and seaports, with missiles held in reserve if an airborne insertion fails.

The Chinese are not knuckleheads. They want the island intact, not smoking and smouldering with a pissed off poplace.

It's fun to game these things out, I agree, but the idea of a massive HE or even nuke attack just makes zero sense.

Posted by badanov 2005-03-31 2:33:59 PM|| [http://www.rkka.org] 2005-03-31 2:33:59 PM|| Front Page Top

#10 Chinese trade with who after the attack? We would shut down all trade by moral necessity (sorry AlGore and BillC). Think Japan and SK are going to practice total realpolitik?

Posted by Frank G 2005-03-31 3:02:39 PM|| 2005-03-31 3:02:39 PM|| Front Page Top

#11 The missile-borne HE would presumably be aimed at Taiwans air defenses, airfields, and naval facilities, not the population. Ballistic missiles are harder to intercept than aircraft, and it makes sense to make them the first wave - defense suppression - for this reason.

Posted by buwaya 2005-03-31 3:23:26 PM|| 2005-03-31 3:23:26 PM|| Front Page Top

#12 The Chinese may be counting on realpolitik in fact. With a fait accompli, and so much investment hostage, it would be difficult to sustain an embargo.

Posted by buwaya 2005-03-31 3:24:42 PM|| 2005-03-31 3:24:42 PM|| Front Page Top

#13 FG: Chinese trade with who after the attack? We would shut down all trade by moral necessity (sorry AlGore and BillC). Think Japan and SK are going to practice total realpolitik?

The Chinese, like Uncle Sam, don't *need* to trade with anyone. It's more efficient, but the *need* isn't there. That's a feature of continental-sized economies - they are self-sufficient.

As regards a total trade embargo, even if it were effective - which it isn't - it's unlikely to happen. Note that no one in the region really wants to fight an all-out war with a nuclear-armed China, which is what could follow an embargo. The Japanese conquest of Southeast Asia was initiated after an American embargo of critical resources against Japan was initiated. The Japanese campaign was a pure resource grab - starting with the oil fields of Dutch-held Batavia (now Indonesia). No neighbor of China is going to acquiesce in an embargo - Uncle Sam is far away, whereas China is right next door.

Posted by Zhang Fei 2005-03-31 3:39:14 PM|| [http://timurileng.blogspot.com] 2005-03-31 3:39:14 PM|| Front Page Top

#14 Look at all the nations of the world that have been embargoed in one form or another since, say, 1960. The embargo hasn't hurt any of them.

Posted by Chuck Simmins 2005-03-31 3:41:02 PM|| [http://blog.simmins.org] 2005-03-31 3:41:02 PM|| Front Page Top

#15 they would be wise to wait for another dem president. Taking the Chinese apart would be a bad lesson for the PRC to learn. I think an isolated China would take a big step backwards - where's the capital to pay for things internally? Their economy is a step from the debt brink.

Posted by Frank G 2005-03-31 3:50:04 PM|| 2005-03-31 3:50:04 PM|| Front Page Top

#16 "Saving Face" usually trumpets business opportunities in Asia.

As long as Taiwan stays below the threshold of declaring independence, I don't see an invasion. If they do, I see trouble.

So what if Chinese economy gets seriously hurt? They hurt themselves so much more in the "Culture Revolution". Unless serious destructions occurred on the mainland, they'd be back in a few years.

Embargos? Yeah right. Expect the Security Council to issue a strong "This was not very nice and please don't do it again".

Posted by True German Ally 2005-03-31 4:01:55 PM|| 2005-03-31 4:01:55 PM|| Front Page Top

#17 FG: I think an isolated China would take a big step backwards - where's the capital to pay for things internally?

A free economy doesn't *need* foreign capital. All that does is dilute existing returns and channel it into unproductive investments. Japan is the supreme example of excess capital formation - over a decade later, they are still dealing with the fallout from that bursting of that bubble. Something similar happened in the US in the late '90's with regard to stock prices, and is happening with regard to property prices today.

Posted by Zhang Fei 2005-03-31 4:12:30 PM|| [http://timurileng.blogspot.com] 2005-03-31 4:12:30 PM|| Front Page Top

#18 FG: I think an isolated China would take a big step backwards - where's the capital to pay for things internally?

I think reporters tend to emphasize this angle because it is in accord with their one-world ideology. The reality is that countries are independent economic actors. They can trade or not trade - but what happens to their economies is a function of how they manage their economies, not what outsiders do or do not do. In this respect, countries are no different from individual people - they and they alone, are responsible for their destinies.

Posted by Zhang Fei 2005-03-31 4:22:19 PM|| [http://timurileng.blogspot.com] 2005-03-31 4:22:19 PM|| Front Page Top

#19 Well, you may be right ZF, But the loss of that Panama canal operation concession and the Canadian oil importing Co should be the first actions by the President, by force

Posted by Frank G 2005-03-31 4:32:06 PM|| 2005-03-31 4:32:06 PM|| Front Page Top

#20 I expect a major propoganda campaign first. Jet li's Hero will be played all over the place, the theme being it's heroic not to fight back against the dictator because no matter how bad he is one China is more important.

Posted by rjschwarz 2005-03-31 4:33:09 PM|| [http://rjschwarz.com] 2005-03-31 4:33:09 PM|| Front Page Top

#21 If there is a trade embargo against China they will nationalize foreign assets, thus a lot of western business leaders will fight against such an embargo.

I don't think China would be back in a few years, perhaps a decade or two before they are trusted again and anyone invests. I think you can count on someone else picking up the slack on the crappy plastic toys manufacturing. It's the high tech out of Taiwan we'll all miss. I don't see Tiawan going scorched Earth exactly but I do see a few hi tech plants being blasted out of spite.

Posted by rjschwarz 2005-03-31 4:36:10 PM|| [http://rjschwarz.com] 2005-03-31 4:36:10 PM|| Front Page Top

#22 Trade's one thing, resupply of the posited 3 (LOL) para divisions plus the occupational army is another. Mines. Mo Mines and a few more mines. Plus the odd 688.

Posted by Shipman 2005-03-31 4:53:01 PM|| 2005-03-31 4:53:01 PM|| Front Page Top

#23 Shipman: Trade's one thing, resupply of the posited 3 (LOL) para divisions plus the occupational army is another.

The paras will run out of ammo and get slaughtered. The Germans had great difficulty during the Crete campaign despite sending their elite forces against ill-prepared British and ANZAC forces. The Taiwanese have been preparing for an invasion for decades. I can't believe Chinese troops will fare remotely as well as the Germans.

Posted by Zhang Fei 2005-03-31 5:44:31 PM|| [http://timurileng.blogspot.com] 2005-03-31 5:44:31 PM|| Front Page Top

#24 Total foreign investment in actual use tops $570 bln in China.
China holds about the same amount of U.S. treasuries.

Maybe nationalizing wouldn't be such a good idea.

Posted by True German Ally 2005-03-31 5:57:58 PM|| 2005-03-31 5:57:58 PM|| Front Page Top

#25 Its high-risk. If they think they can take over vs poor Taiwanese morale, maybe they might risk it. The number of troops landed may not matter that much in such a case. The question is whether Taiwan will fight.

Consider how the Germans took Denmark and Norway.

Posted by buwaya 2005-03-31 6:06:19 PM|| 2005-03-31 6:06:19 PM|| Front Page Top

#26 Thr threat from Taiwan is an alibi the Chicoms have used for decades to deny democratic economic civil, and natural rights to the masses. The tactic described here is a key realistic premise as to why the Leftist-Socialist dominated Global anti-American community is harshly, obscenely critical of post-Clinton America and Dubya - 9-11 and the WOT is ultim about COMMUNIST WORLD ORDER, not Radical Islam although we will still have to fight the Islamists and alleged "rogue", PC Commies like NK and CUba, etal.! WE ARE IN A WORLD WAR THREE/FOUR, FOR THE VERY SURVIVAL AND EXISTENCE OF AMERICA AND DEMOCRACY AS WE KNOW IT -WE AMERICANS EITHER ACCEPT UNILATERAL AND UNCONDITIONAL SUBORNMENT TO COMMUNISM AND SOCIALISM AND COMMIE-SOCIALIST OWG, OR WE WILL BE MILITARILY ATTACKED AND DESTROYED BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY! The Failed/Angry Left > a Fascist is still a [hated/criminal]Fascist, but a Communist is a Fascist whose still an [innocent] Communist and for Communism!? IN case of de facto war, the Commies intend for America's volunteer army to overstretched and run out of beans and bullets before they run out of bodies.

Posted by JosephMendiola 2005-03-31 9:55:27 PM|| [http://n/a] 2005-03-31 9:55:27 PM|| Front Page Top

#27 Zhang Fei, you keep railing on about continental scale economies and no need for foreign capital. I call bullshit. China doesn't have truly free internal markets and it certainly doesn't have free capital markets. The freeish parts of the Chinese economy, the ones that are growing rapidly, are heavily bound up in trade with foreigners. Regarding the foreign capital: it's not just (or primarily) the size of the flows that matters. It's the economic discipline that comes from making market based decisions.

Posted by Classical_Liberal 2005-03-31 10:15:04 PM|| 2005-03-31 10:15:04 PM|| Front Page Top

#28 Nobody can recap like you can, JM!

(gotta go lie down now...)

Posted by Darth VAda 2005-03-31 10:17:02 PM|| 2005-03-31 10:17:02 PM|| Front Page Top

#29 Do you think that WalMart would continue to try and sell things with Made in China labels after something a Chinese sneak attack? There are lots of other places with cheap labor: India, Indochina, Caribbean, etc. China's economy is fueled by exports to the US. With no US market, even if they nationalize the factories, to whom do they intend to sell?

On a different note, what happens if the four Taiwanese subs happen to sink an oil tanker or two in a Chinese port? China has lots of subs, but not enough destroyers to keep that from happening.

Posted by RWV 2005-03-31 10:37:51 PM|| 2005-03-31 10:37:51 PM|| Front Page Top

#30 CS: Zhang Fei, you keep railing on about continental scale economies and no need for foreign capital. I call bullshit. China doesn't have truly free internal markets and it certainly doesn't have free capital markets. The freeish parts of the Chinese economy, the ones that are growing rapidly, are heavily bound up in trade with foreigners. Regarding the foreign capital: it's not just (or primarily) the size of the flows that matters. It's the economic discipline that comes from making market based decisions.

What you're missing is the fact that by these criteria, there are no free markets in East Asia, including in Hong Kong, which allows all kinds of price-fixing cartels (in real estate, banking, retail, et al) to function without regulation. At this stage in China's growth, the key factor is relatively clean and efficient government. Compared to the Latin American and many of the East Asian countries, China's government is pretty clean. It isn't an accident, for example, that China has among the cheapest long distance rates to the US in East Asia - it means that government rake-offs are thin or non-existent.

Another important factor is the lack of labor regulation. Labor costs are extremely low in China, not simply because wage costs are low, but because there are very few regulations governing an employer's right to hire and fire. This is very similar to what exists in other East Asian countries that have grown rapidly in the past few decades.

Infrastructure is another important factor. China is building highways, power stations and other critical infrastructure at a rapid clip. This means that investors - domestic or otherwise - don't have to build their own roads or generators to put up a new plant. A lot of developing countries score extremely badly on this score, because of a combination of corruption and rank incompetence. China is the exception.

The reality is that China is awash in domestic capital. This is why China is seeing a supersized version of the real estate boom we are seeing stateside. For example, a three-bedroom apartment in one of China's industrial boomtowns is selling for 450,000 yuan, the equivalent of 40 years' average salary in that city (whose massive expanse resembles LA County rather than New York City).

The reality is this - China doesn't depend on the goodwill of foreign investors any more than Uncle Sam depends on the goodwill of foreign buyers of Treasury bonds. This interdependence garbage is just a load of one-world crap. Note that Japan was Uncle Sam's largest customer for oil and scrap metal before WWII. Didn't exactly prevent Japan from overrunning all of East Asia.

Posted by Zhang Fei 2005-03-31 11:14:51 PM|| [http://timurileng.blogspot.com] 2005-03-31 11:14:51 PM|| Front Page Top

#31 my worry is the instant "Axis". China, NK, Iran, Syria, Cuba, Venesuala all throw tantrums within the same month while our EU buddies stick their heads in the sand. With Carter to thank for China running the canal its a mess.

Posted by 3dc 2005-03-31 11:46:26 PM|| 2005-03-31 11:46:26 PM|| Front Page Top

22:41 CrazyFool
22:41 CrazyFool
23:51 Canuck
23:46 3dc
23:19 Frank G
23:15 CrazyFool
23:14 Zhang Fei
23:07 CrazyFool
23:03 Bobby
22:58 jackal
22:56 Bobby
22:55 anymouse
22:54 Bobby
22:48 Darth VAda
22:43 jackal
22:42 .com
22:37 RWV
22:36 Uleque Hupains4886
22:36 jackal
22:33 jackal
22:29 jackal
22:18 Zpaz
22:17 Asedwich
22:17 Darth VAda
Merry-Go-Blog