Last week, Taiwan stepped up pressure on the Obama administration to sell the country new, upgraded F-16s, something this administration, like the Bush administration before it, refuses to do to avoid antagonizing China. The latest Taiwanese move came from its defense ministry, which released a report saying that China’s continued modernization of its fighter fleet has shifted the cross-strait military balance decidedly in China’s favor.
The report says Taiwan’s ageing fleet of some 400 locally built fighters, French made Mirage 2000s, and 146 F-16A/Bs, are outmatched by China’s massive fighter fleet, particularly with China’s growing numbers of Russian built Su-30s. Only Taiwan’s F-16A/Bs have an edge over Chinese fighter aircraft, the report says. Taiwan requested some 66 F16C aircraft from the U.S. in 2006.
Over at right-leaning think tank AEI’s defense blog, Michael Mazza raises the alarm:
“Are policymakers considering the implications of this? The smaller and more antiquated the Taiwan air force is, the greater the number of American pilots in harm’s way should the U.S. ever need to go to the island’s defense. It’s not clear that anybody is doing this math, as simple as it is.”
Actually, RAND did the math on this one in a report last year, in typical RAND style, using sophisticated modeling to simulate a Chinese invasion of Taiwan in the 2010–2015 timeframe. RAND’s conclusion was that the addition of a few dozen upgraded F-16s would have little to no impact on the cross-strait balance. In fact, RAND found that in the event of a Chinese attack, “the air war for Taiwan could essentially be over before much of the Blue air force has even fired a shot.”
It’s not the Chinese air fleet that would deliver the knock out blow to Taiwanese air power. Rather, its China’s massive arsenal of ballistic missiles that in an opening salvo would destroy most Taiwanese aircraft, even those in hardened shelters, and wreck its runways before Taiwan was able to launch its fighters.
Adding new F-16s to China’s inventory does little to change the ultimate outcome. Well, more Taiwanese aircraft would make a small contribution RAND found: “Taiwan’s air power can at least contribute to the anti-invasion defense by absorbing as much of China’s air effort as possible in the process of being put out of action.” In other words, parking more fighters on Taiwan’s ramps would make the Chinese deplete more of its missile magazines.
The answer to the cross-strait military balance will not come in the form of more short range tactical fighters sat on ramps within range of China’s massive missile force. As the RAND study conclusively shows, selling Taiwan more capable F-16s does nothing to change the military balance.
– Greg
{ 95 comments… read them below or add one }
Hong Kong
Does Taiwan have any hope if they add a bunch more BMD?
They do, but imagine the political repercussions.
- Hsinchu, Taiwan
No. Any ABM that Taiwan could field would be overwhelmed by the quantity of missiles that China would throw at it.
Exactly. ABM will not ever be able to catch every missile. It would simply just piss off China, who would in turn make more and better missiles.
Perhaps Taiwan needs to buy a bunch of these inflatable F16's for the Chinese to waste their missiles on: http://nbnl.globalwhelming.com/wp-content/uploads...
Taiwan should enrich uranium. Lots and lots of good ole uranium. If China thinks it is a good idea in Iran then I’m sure they will not mind if Taiwan does it also.
And they wonder why countires want the bomb, One day your protected by us then the next your on your own casue we are now in bed with china,
So again they really expect Iran or NK to not develope there own means?
not only that, if war breaks out wouldn't it be nice if our ally had there own hardware ready to go to compliment ours and vice versa?
They need it sell it to them!
They cant stop China, they only Hope to contain them.
The timing for the F-16 sale was best in 2006 and 2007.
Within a few years, the F-16s will be meager and the discussion would be much better suited to the sale of F-35s, which the US almost certainly wouldn't release to Taiwan. The timing of this sale has been delayed until it is no longer optimal at this moment.
- Hsinchu, Taiwan
You may be thinking too far ahead.
Quote (Greg): " China’s massive arsenal of ballistic missiles that in an opening salvo would destroy most Taiwanese aircraft, even those in hardened shelters, and wreck its runways before Taiwan was able to launch its fighters."
This analysis does not take into account the fact that Taiwan has air bases carved into mountain sides on its east coast (at Hualien and Taitung, named Jiashan and Chihhang AFBs, respectively.) These air bases can house over 150 fighters that fly out of tunnel runways. The slope of the mountain cliffs make it impossible for a ballistic missile trajectory to strike the base itself (although such missiles could target the landing runways.)
Thus, it is conceivable that over 150 Taiwanese fighters could survive an opening salvo.
- Hsinchu, Taiwan
"This analysis does not take into account the fact that Taiwan has air bases carved into mountain sides on its east coast (at Hualien and Taitung, named Jiashan and Chihhang AFBs, respectively.) These air bases can house over 150 fighters that fly out of tunnel runways. The slope of the mountain cliffs make it impossible for a ballistic missile trajectory to strike the base itself (although such missiles could target the landing runways.)"
And then do what ?. The runways are toast. How good are the bomb damage /runway repair teams in Taiwan ?, 'cause they are going to need to be very good, with very good gear and supplies as well as being very busy.
Bottom line is there are only a few runways to hit and keep hitting and that's a problem.
Couple issues going on.
- Little likelihood the PLAAF/PLAN is going to be able to ramp up for an invasion without the Taiwanese getting a couple of days warning, which gets passed on to the US, if we haven't already picked up on it. Thus the warning time may well give both the Taiwanese and US some time to ramp up some measures to counter the first initial strikes, or at least to take our thumbs out of our butts.
- Taiwan needs to invest in local production of ABM and cruise missile defenses if they have a hope of doing any counter-air. They meed to blunt the ballistic and cruise missile hits. Even with mediocre accuracy, a lot of missiles constantly incoming makes operations difficult.
- They need to do counter-air if they are going to put at risk the PLN amphib's. Being able to do that, as well as having a robust and survivable air defense missile system, also puts at risk the PLAAF as well as any potential PLA/PLAAF attempt at airborne operations.
- Does China really want to escalate by hitting Okinawa or Guam ?. That;s a bit of a game changer and opens up the Chinese mainland to retaliatory hits from the US via sub and airborne cruise missiles. First targets are the space communications stations, the space launch facilities *take out their anti-satellite systems), the long range radar system OTH-B, etc… that allow them to target the carriers, etc… hit back at the systems that allow them to put at risk our response.
- If the Chinese choose to not hit US fixed bases, they can then take the so-called moral high ground and claim there are not escalating or letting a local action spread, thus no need for Japan to get involved and it then limits US actions to simply providing additional defense to Taiwan, without taking it to the Chinese directly and where it hurts.
You can bet the farm that those 150 survivors would be the best and most advanced aircraft like F16 Cs and Ds if we sell them.
If that's so then They should buy the Gripen NG, it's a 4.5 gen fighter with super cruise, that can land and refuel and rearm on a 800 meter stretch of highway and be back in the air in ten minutes. That's what the plane was designed for.
To be able to be serviced by trucks and a five man crew from any 2 lane road with a 800 meter straight away. So with 100 or so Gripen NG's they could keep in the fight as long as there were roads. And wait for help.
That assumes Sweden will sell the Gripen to Taiwan. Mainland China has Europe by the nose. No European country will sell military equipment to Taiwan for fear China will say "BOO". Taiwan's recent buy of Super Puma helicopters was loudly broadcast as for "civilian search and rescue" to avoid China's wrath.
I don't think the sale would help out at all, only to have this tech to fall into enemy hands if it is not lost in battle. Lets think of Iraq's Air force, in 1991 or even in 2003. Where did it go, lost on the ground, and very few lost in the air. Selling the upgrade plane, is like giving China the planes to us against us in a few years. No deal.
Quote: "Lets think of Iraq's Air force, in 1991 or even in 2003. Where did it go, lost on the ground, and very few lost in the air."
Iraq had air defenses, but they arguably weren't anywhere near the effective air defense capacity of Taiwan – PAC-2, PAC-3 Patriot (on the way), Skyguard, Tien Kung I, Tien Kung II, Tien Kung III (on the way,) Antelope, Stinger/Avenger, I-HAWK, SM-2 Standard from naval warships, etc.
And again, as I mentioned, Taiwan has two key airbases located on the east coast that are less vulnerable to Chinese attack. Granted, the PLA will certainly try to attack them with LACMs, but they could provide the capacity for a significant portion of Taiwan's air force to survive initial attack.
Yeah that is maybe true that Iraq Air defence is nowhere near as good as the Taiwanese. But having all that cover I bet will also lead to a higher rate of Blue on Blue contact. I still think arguing who has the better SAM defence when its about the sale of aircraft, doesn't hold. Maybe instead of selling the planes we could sell them a better radar, and target tracking system.
I don't know if you thought about this, but China has more in common with the USA then the old USSR. They have their own form of land ownership although different from ours they still have it. China has no history of aggression towards the USA which was quite different from Russia. Their thoughts on long term planning are different from the west. Our plans are during our life time whereas their plans are beyond their life time. So their goals tend to be set up to match that. People within our government are aware of China's mind set.
China has no history of aggression towards the USA…..Mr.O'Connell did you forget about a war called Korea???
True, (ashamed that I forgot that) but nothing since our two economies have been tied so closely together.
Tech? Do you think the F-16C is in any way an advanced fighter plane?
They're more current than the A/B, but still obsolescent!
F-16C may not be advanced in your eyes, but having your enemy have a really good look at your toys isn't something that you really want, think big picture. How many F-16C have been sold to other allies. Do you think they would like China having them to look at? The world doesn't end at your shores, A/B is aren't as current, but with every generation advancement to keep the line still useful, updates have to be done, networking tech. I bet the chinese really loved looking at the broken pieces of that spy plane back in 2001. Nice to know more as to what could of been in there vs. knowing what is not.
I agree with Tom.consider the fact that F16s are still being built and sold to foreign countries and we have new versions in the works.That tells me that this 30yr old plane is top of the line and an excellent weapons system.
Hate to burst your bubble but do you think all the foreign countries that are snapping up F16s would be stupid enough to buy obsolete technology?Read the specs on the Block 52s and 60s and you see why it is still one of the most able fighters in the world.The only thing they dropped the ball on in the devolpment of this plane was not producing the F16XL which can handle 2x the weapons load and has a range of 2600mi. and can reach Mach 1 w/o afterburners.
So if its inconsequential, what is? In the very least lets boost our exports and bring some more cash into the US. Our political pressure has never stopped China from providing aid to some of our enemies and doing business with them, why should we allow their pressure to do so to us at time when we're concerned with them eclipsing our presence in Asia.
With that first sentence I mean, what would it take for Taiwan to leave a more lasting impression against a Chinese aerial attack?
I completely agree with your point on how China does the same thing all the time and we don't have to shy away from it.
Amen….China is such a help with Iran we might mention that to the Chicoms….our restraint is predicated on supporting sanctions against Iran.
If we are giving up the idea of selling weapons to Taiwan so it can try and defend itself, how far behind is the thought that we will not be defending Taiwan?
Taiwan is the line in the sand. I think if China Takes it forcefully, they will not be the last nation to fall.
All this talk of how we need China belays the fact that they need our investment money; our lax trade policies and us giving away all our technology to their Graduate students over here to keep growing.
Why is it we always have to take a hard line with people AFTER we prostrate ourselves in front of them and they assume we are weak?
Our politicians and state department stumbling around like like fools gets us into more trouble….
Taiwan will be China's Poland.
Only nukes can protect Taiwan. American, especially with a leftist weasel like Obama at the helm, won't lift a finger to protect them.
Which is why now might be the best time for the Chinese to try to take Taiwan?
I think even if Taiwan was attacked China would have a very difficult time holding or invading. look at the big picture of an international force not only aiding Taiwan militarily as well as economically. Embargos will devastate China. If reunification was to happen in a few years f -16 tech would be in the hands of China. I think a better way to circumvent this situation is have an American allies such as the French, Europeans and even Russians sell there planes to Taiwan. There are other Avenues for political points that can be applied that hopefully could create a give take atmosphere. But again the chinese are very stubborn it's there way or the highway.
Taiwan has certainly tried all options you suggested. In the past, a Taiwanese order for MiG-29s has fallen through with the Russians. Taiwan does possess Mirage 2000s from France. Options like Rafale, JAS-39, or Eurofighter are almost certainly off the table.
Just keep in mind that the current crop of Pan-European and French fighter aircraft are much more advanced than the F-16C, in some cases coming standard with air-to air armament which is equal to, or arguably more advanced, than those in current US arsenals (read: Aim-132 and MICA).
Just found out that Taiwan's Mirage 2000-5, itself a capable frame, is already equipped with MICA.
Seems to me the easy fix for this, is to give the Taiwanese the tech they need to build their own aircraft. (Either over or under the table) They already built a large part of their air force locally on foreign designs, so they have the capability. If the idea really is to keep Taiwan safe, this solves the problem without pissing off China.
Perhaps the US would simply allow Taiwan to build F-16C/D Block 52s under license, under such a proposal. Taiwan's domestic AIDC would certainly welcome the industrial offsets. If nothing, perhaps the engines or some other component.
- Hsinchu, Taiwan
The only ones that would have an impact would be the jets already in the air or possibly on the ramps ready for take-off. After that, the TBMs would be falling and make the runways little more than craters.
Well, if they want to buy, the USA needs the money. And F-16C is a good fighter, but not top of the line with super secret tech.
What Taiwan currently needs is more of an air superiority fighter to counter the PLAAF's J-10s, J-11s, and Su-30s. An even more robust air-to-ground capability would likely serve well. For such a purpose, an ideal fighter would be more like the F-15E Strike Eagle, or better yet the F-15SE Silent Eagle currently under marketing and development.
- Hsinchu, Taiwan
As usual the politicians don't think–we made a commitment to Taiwan and we should stand by it.Also consider that the U S is not the only country that makes hi performance 4th gen fighters,if we dont sell it they will buy from Sweden or France.
The United States' commitment to Taiwan involves arms sales only – however, you're right, that alone should suffice, in theory, to make the F-16 sale proceed.
Taiwan has next to no chance of procuring JAS-39 or Rafale from Sweden or France. No European nation at this time cares to jeopardize trade ties with China over arms sales to Taiwan – unless Taiwan truly pushed through a lucrative deal that France couldn't turn down, for instance – say, $13 billion for Scorpene SSKs, Rafale fighters, and such.
- Hsinchu, Taiwan
I agree. We are the only nation that would sell a 4th gen fighter to China, as smaller, less important (to China) European countries could be boycotted with little effect to the Chinese.
Yet, we should still be selling these F16s to Taiwan. Not just because we're (somewhat and loosely) allies, but the money would be nice.
Exactly what committment have we made to Taiwan? We have no defense treaty with them and our military sales are individually scrutinized every year. We do need to put our foot down and make a decision whether we're going to defend them or not.
It is my understanding that we have somewhat nonchalantly supported their separation from the PRC, mostly through arms deals. And they're one of the few democratic influences in the region, so we should protect them from the (so called) "communism" of the PRC, and aid the spread of democracy.
I would say that because Taiwan has 146 F16 fighters God knows how many F5s and Patriot missile defense systems that would be a strong indication that we are going to help in their defense–treaty or not.
If this is not good enough for you then think of it this way. If China invades Taiwan chaos and resentment will rule. This act would bring on economic instability, and through loss of life and freedoms a resentful population Taiwan will become. It could stay that way for many generations. Contrary to that if China works policy towards absorbing Taiwan through continual change of their own society that better matches Taiwan’s then as relations improve a union could one day be possible – think European Union. Now which goal and or scenario do you think better matches wanted end results from China? Which scenario could end up being preferred from Taiwan?
Good Morning Folks,
The Rand report relays on two unlikely things happening. First that China could organize the element for an attack on Taiwan without being noticed. The SRMB are not being stored with in range of Taiwan and the war heads are not being stored with the missiles. The “modern” fighter aircraft the report cites are nearly all based in Beijing Provence and would require re-basing closer to Taiwan. The most optimistic number of these modern aircraft is about a 1000-1200, the report conspicously neglects to factor in the readiness levels of the PLAAF and the PLAN which historically are below what western militaries would consider combat readiness.
The next major problem is the assumption that Taiwan’s military would be caught off guard with a “Pearl Harbor” kind of attack. For over 50 years China has threatened Taiwan, Mao promised in 1951 that he would retake Taiwan, the PRC attempted for over 20 of shell two off shore island to break the resistance of Taiwan, the PRC gave up. Any military attack by mainland China has been the number one issue in Taiwan for over 50 years, it is very unlikely that they would be letting their guard down now.
Another major problem with the Rand report is the effectiveness of Tactical Ballistic Missiles and Cruise Missiles with conventional warheads is a lot higher then history has shown. From WW II on it has been shown that the Ballistic Missile and Cruse Missile are very inefficient and expensive weapons. Studies on the German use of the V-1′s and V-2′s in WW II which were used only targeted at populated target indicates for each of the 8K V-1 fired about .75 person was killed for the 6K V-2′s fired it less the two people killed, the two largest single kills for the V-2 was a move theatre in Antwerp (about 385) and a Woolworth Store at Charming Cross (160).
On Cruise Missiles, well look how well Cruise Missiles worked against al Qaeda by the United States in recent years.
The notion that a single missile attack and air attack could disable ALL of Taiwan’s air fields is just not supported by either history or military theory. Taiwan currently has about 165 Patriot Missiles that would surly be operational in a crisis and would blunt any RPC attack long enough to get Taiwan’s air assets airborne.
As for the PLAAF/PLAN the St-27, Su-30, J-11′s are all old technology well before the F-16′s that Taiwan already has, their total number are only about 300. The J-10 which is new and little is know about in the west might be available in numbers of 120-300. This is neither a modern or a mighty air armada. Also not mentioned is F-5 which Taiwan has in large numbers and flown for decades and is itself a very capable fighter platform.
Even is a Chinese attack came down as Rand predicted using the example of Pearl Harbor the long term implications of keeping the Taiwanese military disables are not very great. The port of Pearl Harbor was back operational almost immediately.
This report is just an example of having a conclusion before evidence is gathered and then cherry picking that evidence to support you conclusion. This is just bad self service “intelligence”.
ALLONS,
Byron Skinner
Excellent article on strategypage.com called "The Chinese Menace" that supports what you wrote here and what I wrote under AirSeaBattle. The Chinese have 1960's era military tech at best and won't see 80's tech for decades. Everyone calm down. It's all about their economy and Taiwan's voters.
Guns are illegal in Taiwan. All they need is to arm the populace and purchase more anti-aircraft systems, Israel and Taiwan both have the same problem it seems, they need to be able to stop a first-strike, and then an armed populace would be sufficient to deter any ground invasion. As one japanese general put it during discussions to invade the United States, "there would be a rifle behind each blade of grass".
Taiwan needs to have their own missiles pointed at China and the equation returns to balance
That would be MAD.
Byron said…
"On Cruise Missiles, well look how well Cruise Missiles worked against al Qaeda by the United States in recent years."
Comparing al Qaeda to the Taiwanese military does not make sense. Cruise missiles don't work against guerrilla fighters because they have no real infrastructure to target.
Cruise missiles do work on societies and militaries that depend on infrastructure. Cruise missiles worked well in the Gulf war and also in the conventional phase of the current Iraq war. Saying ballistic and cruise missiles don't work based on studies done after World War 2 ignores the 50 years of development that has happened since then.
I think that the Taiwan issue is unlikely to lead to war, since China has relatively little to gain and a lot more to lose.
Good Afternoon Folks,
Well I guess that Rand had made another assumption and that is all of Taiwan’s air field are bunched together and are consolidated. Besides that Cruise missiles are rather easy targets for air defense, as the V-1 was in WW II. The likely hood that a first strike by Cruise and Ballistic missiles as defined by the Rand report would even disable Taiwanese air capabilities as they currently exist is rather slim. And may I ask why not compare al Qaeda to the Taiwanese? The tactical response is the same, for Cruise missiles to work they need high value consolidated targets, like command anc control centers, power generation/distribution facilities etc. where a single hit can make a difference on an air field it would take several Cruise missiles to disable it.
The Ballistic Missile is such a great weapon that the US Army and Marines got rid of Tactical Ballistics in the 1960′s and the last nuclear Ballistic Missile was MGM-31 Pershing which was scrapped in 1985. The land based Tomahawk Cruise missile kinda disappeared from our ground forces arsenals. From a military perspective the Tactical Missile other then short range artillery like missiles the M-26, M-30 and M-31, are useless as are tactical nuc’s.
While it is true that accuracy and range have improved since the V-2 has improved a great deal the basic physics of a 165 Kg. (what most of China’s SRBM’s) are rated as, still has the same explosive CEP as it did in 1945, oh and by the way I know the V-2 had a 500 Kg. warhead.
For any invasion of Taiwan to be successful both of Taiwan’s main container handling ports, Taipei and Kaghsiung, would have to be taken in tack and any from the sea invasion would have to take place on Taiwan’s East Coast. Taiwan’s West Coast has no suitable invasion beached. An airborne assault, not even in anybodies imagination, even though on paper the PLAAF has three AB Divisions the 43ed, 44th. and 45th. but the PLAAF has only 13 Il-76 Military Transport planes. Do the arithmetic.
If China took any actions against Okinawa that of course would be a game changer and would automatically bring Japan and the United States into the equation. It is un;likely that either the US or Japan would invade China but significant parts of it’s national infrastructure, military and economy would be destroyed in several different ways.
It budget time for the Fed again and Rand is cheering for it’s oldest and main client the USAF.
ALLONS,
Byron Skinner
Wise post from someone who knows what they are talking about
"And may I ask why not compare al Qaeda to the Taiwanese? The tactical response is the same, for Cruise missiles to work they need high value consolidated targets, like command anc control centers, power generation/distribution facilities etc. where a single hit can make a difference on an air field it would take several Cruise missiles to disable it."
Last I checked Taiwan had plenty of high value targets. Comparing Al-Qaeda to Taiwan is like comparing apples and carrots. Taiwan has an integrated air defense system with things like radars, command and control, and missile batteries. These things would be prime targets for cruise missiles and SRBMs. Taiwan also has things like power plants, bridges (I assume), naval yards, military bases, and large population centers. The first two are definitely targets, and the cities are certainly within the range of options for an attack. Last i checked the only thing we can hit that belongs to Al-Qaeda are the members themselves, they have no infrastructure to speak of in the normal sense of things. I agree that a first strike with China would not succeed in taking out the entire Taiwanese Air Force, but it would do a great deal of damage to its infrastructure.
Also, do you know if the V-2 and V-1 used the same explosives as the Chinese currently do? I am not sure either way.
I agree that an attack on Taiwan is a very very remote possibility, at least in the next 20 years or so. I just didn't get how you can compare a country and a terrorist organization in terms of military defense or readiness.
Maybe we need to sell some amphibious assault ships to Taiwan so that China has to hit more targets to shut down the defensive force.
If we're going to help them, I think we should aid them in preventive hardware, such as anti-missile equipment or AAA. Not just extra meatshields.
The US has been selling Taiwan 6 Patriot PAC-3 units, along with 444 Patriot interceptors. So I think, to a certain degree, the US has been following your suggested approach.
- Hsinchu, Taiwan
The US has been selling Taiwan 6 Patriot PAC-3 units, along with 444 Patriot interceptors. So I think, to a certain degree, the US has been following your suggested approach.
Why? Taiwan's military needs to deploy its limited manpower in the most efficient manner. Having more amphibious assault ships for the Taiwanese navy would require a significant amount of sailors for relatively little utility.
I have an even better idea –sell them one of our decommissioned Air Craft Carriers loaded with F18a,s and park it 100 miles off their coast.China would expend massive amounts of ordnance trying to sink that. [SARCASM]
the US policy if they look mean surrender. We keep selling out our allies Shame Shame SHame
Selling F-16 to Taiwan wont make a difference in respect to Taiwan's ambition to winning a war against China. What it needs is to create its own defense shield and counter offensive defense system while Taiwan making a peace treaty with China. In this way China may not be reluctant to make an aggressive attack on Taiwan.
I'd say that Taiwan's recent development of HF-2Es, HF-3s, TK-2, TK-3, and Lei Ting 2000 MLRS has been geared towards exactly that…..
I think Chinese BM missile may contain a nuclear weaponry. Chinese BM missile may be more of a threat to Taiwan than Chinese planes.
Chinese warning to Taiwan is they will be firing 1,500 BM missiles to Taiwan. Even though China has 1,300 Russian made planes.
If it makes a differance or not, we should still give them a fighting chance, History has repeatedly shown us that the under dog has come out on top, time and time again. Just look at the Winter War between Finland and Russia, or Israel in any one of its many Wars against its Arab Neighbors. Sell them the Planes
The best example is the Battle of Britain – an island nation staving off a numerically superior foe via air combat. This is why the fighters are all the more critical.
- Hsinchu, Taiwan
Someone just has to sell or get rid those F-16s to make way for the next high-end generation fighter aircrafts. All they have to do is to outfit them with ridiculously failed weapons from the middle east theather.
Why not just let China absorb Taiwan (which will eventually happen anyway) in exchange for relieving the massive debt we owe them?
Mainly because the Taiwanese don't want to be "absorbed" by mainland China. Both countries have developed culturally in two separate directions, where Taiwan is much more Westernized and the standard of living is much higher. Why would you want the only democracy in the Far East to fall under Communist rule? Obviously you have no dog in the fight, but for me and my family, we do since my in-laws live and work in Taiwan.
I could see them settling for a "Hong Kong" deal. Taiwan gets to stay the same and the PRC handles foreign policy matters. Mostly it comes down to Taiwanese public opinion.
Why would the PRC ever settle for such a deal?
What is this??
Why not just let China absorb the USA (which will eventually happen anyway) in
exchange for relieving the massive debt we owe them ???
Nice friends, wiping a country of the map just for momney.
The Taiwanese should look to purchase the Eurofighter like Saudi Arabia, then at least they would have a supercruise fighter to be over mainland Chinese air space so fast it would make their heads spin. The Chinese Air Force is attempting to build a super cruise for fast closure rates and give the enemy virtually no chance at defense. The aim of all that is to subdue Taiwan itself.
Taiwan has money like the mainland, so buying hardware should be a not be a problem for the Europeans. They need the money to bouy up the Euro.
They should buy the Gripen NG, it's a 4.5 gen fighter with super cruise, that can land and refuel on a 800 meter stretch of highway and be back in the air in ten minutes. It's also a lot cheaper than the Eurofighter so they could buy more of them for the same money.
Go with the Euro Fighter. Obama will sell the F16 to the Reds, as they are his friends and they hold bonds for most of the US Debt.
China would undeniably destroy all the infrastructure by ballistic missiles. Everything else is besides the point. It's not likely that this conflict will ever happen.
Quote: "China would undeniably destroy all the infrastructure by ballistic missiles."
Umm….do you know what you are saying? Do you know just how much comprises Taiwan's infrastructure, and how much effect 1,000+ SRBMs has? This is an exaggeration. Would you mind crunching the arithmetic for us?
We should sell them the F-16's and more BMD for point defense of air fields & strategic locations.
China's ballistic missiles cannot destroy all the aircraft one day one many will be heavily dug (ballistic missiles are not bunker busters unless nuclear). After that they would be dispersed all over the island nation along highways and any suitable stretch of runway.
Then the idea of Chicom missiles shutting down the airbases is a stretch. Runways can be repaired (quickly by fast curring concrete and other materials) and it would take more than one missile to take out a runway (a 50' wide long strip of target rather thin target from space inbound at mach 4). They would have to make successful strikes then continuous follow on successful strikes to keep it down. We are talking barrage strikes large enough to eliminate the ratios for miss and BMD intercept (of those on target) around the clock on every airbase and possible runway, i.e. stretch of straight highway like the thousands built into the interstate systems in Europe and the rest of the world. Even the Chicoms don't have that many missiles or the ability to mass produce enough to keep up.
The bulk of the Chicom air force is still outdated aircraft. I love how these studies one day shoot down updated F-16's as useless against the new Mig/SU proliferation aircraft and other days shoot down the F-22 as needless because our same aircraft (even dated versions) are more than enough.
The biggest future Chicom threat to Taiwan is their ballistic missiles used to blockade. Not as china using them to break the US fleet or destroy the Taiwan air-core on day one, the US military ships are not easy targets even without BMD, and Taiwan air-core is not hapless idiots. Instead using them to deny resupply. Lumbering oil tankers, cargo ships, and transports would be much more possible targets and then concentrating on a few cargo capable runways.
Taiwan with none or very limited resupply of oil, fuel, food, and heavy resources for an extended period of time could cripple them even if they were holding their own on the military front. The US role here will be critical.
Taiwan is not any easy target but they must be at least thorny enough to hold their own long enough for a US president even a pansy like the "O" to be forced to make a decision of honoring our guarantee of support.
The coast of Tawain is rugged and a great defensive position. F-16"s ??? Better to hide unmanned drones with anti-ship missles. You can position a hell of a lot more unmanned aircraft at much lower prices. Hell, the button pushers could be half a world away and still execute the mission. Denial is always less expensive and easier to achieve. Any surface fleet, including troop transport, would pay a hell of a price. One missle is cheaper than a surface warship.
Flood the Tawain coast with unmanned predators. Ship busting missles would make a sea approach impossible. They are easy to hide, transport, and the operators need not even be on the island to engage surface ships. In fact, the Taiwanese should start manufacturing their own unmanned aircraft.
If China attacks Taiwan while Obama is in office there will be no American aid. The COM in Chicom stands for COMMUNIST…why would Obama fight against his allies?
Taiwan cannot count on the U.S. for defense and China has no serious intention of invading Taiwan. This arms race is clap trap and a waste of resources. If Taiwan wants to see the future then look to Hong Kong. Re-Integration with the mainland is inevitable and desirable for the stability of the region. The people of Taiwan and the people of China will both benefit from closer and friendlier relations and it is a significant burden to the American taxpayers to continue to support a nutcase military-industrial complex that is obsessed with developing ever more expensive and complicated devices for war and killing. Good relations between the U.S. and China are more important than a backyard squabble that has become tiresome and irrelevant. Every day that passes the economies of our economies become ever more deeply entwined. Taiwan must stand up and fact the facts and end this pointless and counterproductive standoff.
Roland,
China will not make a peace treaty with Taiwan because it considers it a part of China, the same way we did not make peace with the South during the Civil War era.
If I was Taiwan I would buy 2 aegis destroyers but that may be to much for there Navy.
''It is not a question whether China will attack Russia but is when it is going to happen'', the Russians say :
http://kavkazcenter.com/eng/content/2010/03/15/11...
mbt shoes sale-buy the collection of Mbt shoes & Mbt sport white,save you up to 85%
For once I have to agree with Byron Skinner. The RAND report makes far too many unlikely assumptions as though it was set up with a conclusion in mind & set out to get said conclusion (so as to 'justify' rejecting the request on the supposed ground that they would not make a difference) rather than a realistic study.
Taiwan is not looking to replace its ENTIRE fighter force with just these 66 F-16Cs. This requested order is/would be just the first step to recapitalizing Taiwan fighter force. Not a bad start (for Taiwan) IMO.
it wont make any differance what type of weapon system we sell Taiwan,we keep all the goodstuff safely in the US…FOR SAFEKEEPING
MBT Tembea ,MBT Safiri MBT Changa and MBT Sport are very beautiful Mbt shoes,they are all very famous Mbt.
If China took any actions against Okinawa that of course would be a game changer and would automatically bring Japan and the United States into the equation. It is un;likely that either the UShttp://www.goodpuma.com or Japan would invade China but significant parts of it's national infrastructure, military and economy would be destroyed in several different ways.
It budget time for the Fed again and Rand is cheering for it's oldest and main client the USAF.
If China took any actions against Okinawa that of course would be a game changer and would automatically bring Japan and the United States into the equation. It is un;likely that either the UShttp://www.goodpuma.com or Japan would invade China but significant parts of it's national infrastructure, military and economy would be destroyed in several different ways.
It budget time for the Fed againhttp://www.buy-supra-shoes.org and Rand is cheering for it's oldest and main client the USAF.