October 17, 2022 (The New Atlas) - Update for Russian military operations against Ukraine for October 17, 2022.
Russian forces are closing in on Bakhmut city - with even the Western media noting the inevitability of Russia’s victory there;
Ukrainian offensives are grinding to a halt - whatever additional gains they make will be temporary and inevitably reversed as Russia prepares what appears to be a major offensive of its own;
Western media is depending heavily on propaganda to paper over severe weapon and ammunition shortages in Ukraine and the implications it has on Kiev’s fighting capacity;
The US is lashing out with an increasingly desperate tone as nations around the globe refuse to subordinate themselves and their nation’s interests to US foreign policy objectives - India being among them;
October 15, 2022 (The New Atlas) - Update on Russian military operations in Ukraine for October 15, 2022.
Elon Musk placed temporarily on notorious Ukrainian kill list;
US aid to Ukraine continues to dwindle;
NATO air defense project spans years and unlikely to help Ukraine in short-term;
Ukraine's offensives are increasingly depleted quickening arrival at inflection point when irreversible Russian advances begin;
References: CNN - 'Bad timing': Elon Musk's company can no longer fund its vital service to Ukraine: https://edition.cnn.com/videos/tech/2022/10/14/elon-musk-company-spacex-ukraine-russia-marquardt-ebof-pkg-vpx.cnnElon Musk (Twitter) - “Is this list real? What’s the URL?” https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1581027630819979264Newsweek - Fact Check: Did Ukraine Put Pink Floyd's Roger Waters on 'Kill List'?: https://www.newsweek.com/fact-check-did-ukraine-put-pink-floyds-roger-waters-kill-list-1749051Myrotvorets Center - Homepage (WARNING!!! GRAPHIC CONTENT): https://myrotvorets.center/Myrotvorets Center - Roger Waters: https://myrotvorets.center/criminal/?cf%5Bname%5D=Роджер+Уотерс&cf%5Bcountry%5D=&cf%5Baddress%5D=&cf%5Bphone%5D=&cf%5Bdesc%5D=US Department of Defense (DoD) - $725 Million in Additional Security Assistance for Ukraine (October 14, 2022): https://www.defense.gov/News/Releases/Release/Article/3189571/725-million-in-additional-security-assistance-for-ukraine/BBC - Ukraine war: Russia to evacuate civilians from Kherson:https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-63243313
October 13, 2022 (The New Atlas) - An update on Russian military operations in Ukraine for October 13, 2022.
UN General Assembly vote demonstrates continued support for Russia by India and China as well as many other nations across the developing and newly industrialized world;
Russia continues missile and drone strikes across Ukraine;
Ukraine’s plea for air defense systems is impractical and reflect desperation in Kiev;
West is attempting to mix and match air defense systems to create an ad hoc integrated network;
Many air defense components will take a year or longer to arrive in Ukraine;
Many air defense components will be damaged or destroyed before the imagined integrated network is complete;
A turning point is coming where the West will have to decide between escalating or abandoning its proxy war in Ukraine;
September 3, 2022 (Brian Berletic - New Eastern Outlook) - The early August visit by US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi took place amid heavy protests from Beijing. The visit was a blatant violation of Washington’s bilateral agreement with Beijing regarding the “One China” policy as well as a violation of international law regarding political independence and territorial integrity.
As was pointed out by many analysts, US provocations over Taiwan mirror a similar pattern by Washington used to cross Moscow’s “red lines” regarding Ukraine, done deliberately to threaten Moscow’s national security concerns. These provocations eventually resulted in now ongoing Russian military operations in neighboring Ukraine. A similar conflict could potentially stem from ongoing US provocations over Taiwan.
China’s Other Military Means
In addition to very public protests by Beijing, Chinese military forces followed Speaker Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan with large-scale exercises, crossing the Taiwan Strait median line and into Taiwan’s self-declared “air defense identification zone” (ADIZ). Initially the US and its allies along with the Western media dismissed these exercises as a “tantrum” thrown by a highly displeased Beijing. However, shortly after, US representatives and the Western media began discussing a “new normal” being incrementally established by Beijing.
Articles like CNN’s, “’New normal’ across the Taiwan Strait as China threat looms ever closer,” would note:
China is attempting to establish a “new normal” across the Taiwan Strait, eroding self-ruled Taiwan’s territorial control and increasing the threat of a strike with each military sortie, officials and analysts say.
Chinese military exercises also included firing missiles over Taiwan. The BBC in its article, “US ‘must contest’ Chinese missiles over Taiwan, says admiral,” would note:
“It’s very important that we contest this type of thing. I know that the gorilla in the room is launching missiles over Taiwan,” Vice Admiral Thomas told reporters in Singapore. “It’s irresponsible to launch missiles over Taiwan into international waters.
“If you don’t challenge it… all of a sudden it can become just like the islands in the South China Sea [that] have now become military outposts. They now are full functioning military outposts that have missiles on them, large runways, hangers, radars, listening posts.”
US Vice Admiral Thomas did not suggest any measures the US could use to “contest” Chinese military activity around and now over Taiwan, and in actuality, there is little the US could do in order to do so.
US Provocations Help Beijing Justify “New Normal”
Lacking any sort of ability to “contest” Chinese military activity around Taiwan, the US appears instead committed to further provocations. Following Speaker Pelosi’s early August visit to the island, a group of US Congressmembers likewise touched down in Taiwan in mid-August, the BBC would report.
Just as Speaker Pelosi’s visit allowed Beijing to justify military exercises around and over Taiwan, this more recent visit by US Congressmembers gave Beijing an opportunity to stretch out and expand its military activity. The Associate Press in its article, “China announces new drills around Taiwan as a US delegation visits the island,” would note:
The exercises are intended as a “resolute response and solemn deterrent against collusion and provocation between the US and Taiwan,” the ministry said.
The United States, having provoked Russia into launching military operations in Ukraine mistakenly believing Moscow would not (and for some reason couldn't) escalate, is now putting Beijing up to a similar test. Beijing’s strategy of increasing military control of territory around and now in the skies above Taiwan appears to be a strategy that could eventually give Beijing an advantage in this growing crisis without requiring hostilities.
In hindsight it seems reasonable to believe Washington’s best decision to preserve an advantage over Russia regarding Ukraine would have been to encourage Kiev to uphold the Minsk Agreements. Russian forces would have remained within Russian territory, the Donbass region would have remained under Kiev’s control, and the US would be able to move forward with a pro-Western administration in power in Kiev into the foreseeable future.
Instead, Washington is now watching Russia absorb Ukraine, demilitarize not only the Ukrainian armed forces but also the inventories of Ukraine’s Western sponsors. Myths of Western military superiority are blowing away with the smoke on Ukrainian battlefields, revealing destroyed Western military hardware falling far short of their previously vaunted capabilities.
A very similar process is about to take place over Taiwan and the US appears incapable of stopping it let alone reversing yet another self-destructive strategy aimed at provoking near-peer or peer military powers – a strategy that was most likely conceived long ago when the US enjoyed much greater military superiority over its adversaries.
Indeed, far from stopping or reversing, the US transited the Taiwan Strait with two of its warships. Articles like CNN’s, “Why China’s response to US warships in Taiwan Strait surprised analysts,” claims Western analysts believed Beijing would have reacted visibly and directly to the transit and were surprised when they didn’t.
The only actual surprise is that Western analysts have not identified a clearly materializing pattern where Beijing refuses to react directly to provocations like unauthorized travel to Taiwan by US representatives or the violation of Chinese territory by US warships and instead is investing further into military activity around Taiwan to de facto establish control over the island.
As Beijing pursues this strategy, establishing a new normal on its own terms around and over Taiwan, the West is openly preparing more provocations to give Beijing precisely what it needs, continued justification to do so. Canada has now announced it will join the US in provoking China over Taiwan, the Guardian reported in its article, “China warns Canada over planned Taiwan visit by parliamentarians.” It doesn’t require much imagination to foresee Beijing will use this upcoming provocation as yet another justification to expand ongoing military operations.
The US-backed administration in Taipei is also fuelling this crisis. The Guardian in another article titled, “Taiwan fires warning shots at Chinese drone,” would report:
Taiwan fired warning shots at a Chinese drone that buzzed an offshore islet shortly after President Tsai Ing-wen said she had ordered Taiwan’s military to take “strong countermeasures” against what she termed Chinese provocations.
Rather than “counter” Beijing’s military activities, such actions will only justify Beijing’s military activities further as well as possibly give Beijing the ability to take more drastic and also much more permanent measures to cement full control over territory the administration in Taipei attempts to claim as its own.
Taiwan’s Economic Weak Points Offer Beijing Other Means
For an administration that attempts to pose as “independent” of Beijing, Taiwan’s economy is heavily dependent on the rest of China, providing Beijing with the ability to easily enhance its military superiority over and operations against separatist elements in Taipei through economic measures.
According to Harvard University’s Atlas of Economic Complexity, the Chinese mainland represented 22.92% of all the island’s imports followed by Japan at 16.97%. Over 49% of Taiwan’s total exports are shipped to the rest of China with the US following as the second largest export market at 12.65%.
Gradual reunification between Taiwan and the rest of China has already been taking place for many years, primarily through economic integration. Trade, tourism, and investment from the rest of China keeps Taiwan’s economy afloat. When the flow of any of these factors is cut it creates major disruptions.
CNN in their article, “China flexes military muscles, then targets Taiwan’s citrus fruits,” attempts to connect August bans on agricultural goods from Taiwan by the mainland to the ongoing tensions created by visits by US representatives. Regardless of whether there is a connection, the article helps illustrate just how disruptive it is to Taiwan’s economy when Beijing adopts policies impacting Taiwan’s exports. Other articles from across the Western media like the New York Times’, “How China Could Choke Taiwan,” discuss the impact of a Chinese military blockage of Taiwan from all trade. However, similar results could be achieved simply by stopping all trade to and from Taiwan by the rest of China alone.
Such disruptions in trade between Taiwan and the rest of China serve as warnings of just how detached from reality Taiwan “independence” really is from reality and how divergent it is from Taiwan’s actual best interests. They also demonstrate the power the mainland has over Taiwan should the administration in Taipei continue working with foreign interests to divide and destabilize China.
Taiwan’s Vulnerability Reveals the Malice of its “Allies”
It is in the economic realm that Taiwan’s Western backers reveal their lack of true commitment and vision for Taiwanese “independence.” It is a shortsighted and highly self-destructive policy that would lay waste to Taiwan’s economy and population in ways much worse than Ukraine suffered from 2014 onward when the US-installed client regime in Kiev irrationally cut many essential economic ties with Russia at the cost of Ukraine’s economic viability.
Why then would Washington and others across the West encourage Taiwan to pursue separatism and eagerly provoke Beijing, including now through military provocations? Taiwan is being encouraged to fight a war it cannot possibly win against the rest of China it cannot economically survive without. The answer is simply that the US and its allies do not care about Taiwan or its future. It is being cynically used to advance US foreign policy objectives in terms of encircling, containing, dividing, and destroying China. While mainland China will likely prevail, Taiwan which is part of China will suffer tremendously in the event of even a short-term conflict.
Beijing, understanding this fully, is attempting to extend control over Taiwan militarily without waging war, incrementally expanding military activities around Taiwan with each provocation provided to it from the US and its allies. Beijing is also fully prepared for a military confrontation either with armed forces in Taiwan or against an attempted intervention by foreign powers like the United States.
The fact that Taiwan is so vulnerable militarily and economically yet is still encouraged to adopt provocative policies toward Beijing demonstrates just how little Washington cares about Taiwan and its future. The idea of Washington intervening to “defend” Taiwan is highly unrealistic. “Defending” Taiwan would only be used as a pretext for the US to wage war against China or, what is much more likely, attempt to disrupt Chinese commercial shipping worldwide.
Washington, according to the US State Department’s official website, acknowledges Beijing’s stance that there is only one China and that Taiwan is a part of China. Washington’s goal is to divide and destroy all of China – including Taiwan.
Brian Berletic is a Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.
August 18, 2022 (Brian Berletic - New Eastern Outlook) - What many in the West at first dismissed as a tantrum thrown by Beijing over the unauthorized visit of US Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi to Taiwan appears instead to be a carefully thought-out strategy designed to incrementally reassert Chinese sovereignty over the island territory. Beijing’s ability to do this is underwritten by the nation’s growing military might.
Through a unique and powerful missile arsenal to a capable and growing air force, navy, and ground force, China has created the means through which to reverse decades of injustice, encroachment, and encirclement by the West against the Chinese people and their territory. Even Western analysts and military experts admit that China’s military capabilities have grown to world-class levels. These capabilities will be key to achieving and defending Chinese sovereignty now and into the future, through deterrence if possible, or through force if necessary.
The Long Sword: China’s Missile Force
Throughout human history weapons have been used to give a fighting force a greater reach than their adversaries. Be it sword, spear, or arrow, those with the longest and most effective reach often dominate the battlefield. On today’s battlefield, this reach is achieved through missiles.
China’s modern missile forces are the largest and most capable on Earth according to even Western analysts. Through a combination of long, medium, intermediate, and short range missiles as well as a variety of cruise missiles, China has the ability to hit targets near and far.
The US government and arms industry-funded Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) through its “China Power” project wrote a paper titled, “How Are China’s Land-based Conventional Missile Forces Evolving?,” which admitted:
Conventionally armed (non-nuclear) missiles have become an increasingly important component of military power. They can be employed to deter threats or project power hundreds or thousands of kilometers away. As part of sweeping efforts to modernize the People’s Liberation Army (PLA), China has developed one of the most powerful land-based conventional missile arsenals in the world.
The same paper would also admit:
According to the US Department of Defense (DoD), China’s missile forces in 2000 “were generally of short range and modest accuracy.” In the years since then, China has developed the world’s “largest and most diverse” arsenal of ground-launched ballistic and cruise missiles.
The PLA Rocket Force, which maintains and operates China’s land-based conventional and nuclear missiles, has fielded multiple new missile systems over the last several years. Many of these missiles are capable of carrying both conventional and nuclear payloads.
The paper describes cruise missiles able to hit land targets anywhere on potential battlefields like Taiwan, carrier-killer missiles reportedly able to target and destroy US carrier groups, and hypersonic missiles that can penetrate the most advanced Western missile defense systems. Even without the ability to penetrate Western missile defenses, the sheer number of Chinese missiles could saturate and overwhelm them.
China’s missile forces have been built up specifically to keep the United States and its allies from building up military forces along its periphery and thus threaten Chinese territorial integrity. Together with Chinese air defenses and anti-ship systems, China has assembled formidable anti-access, area denial (A2AD) capabilities that would prevent US military forces from even reaching Chinese targets let alone engaging them.
It is also worth noting that China has developed significantly capable multiple launch rocket systems (MLRS) in the form of its Type PCL191. It fires more rockets than its US counterparts, fires them further, and with at least as much accuracy guided by China’s BeiDou Navigation Satellite System.
A Business Insider article titled, “China’s new rocket launcher system is its most powerful ever, and it’s looming over the Taiwan Strait,” would note:
The system is capable of firing eight 370 mm rockets a distance of 350 km or two 750 mm ballistic missiles 500 km.
This means that China’s MLRS capabilities can reach any location in or around Taiwan from the mainland. In fact the bulk of any potential Chinese military operation regarding Taiwan and potential US intervention can be carried out from the mainland with China’s extensive and capable missile and rocket forces.
The Shield: Chinese A2AD
Russian military operations in Ukraine have been defined by Russia’s own long range fires as well as A2AD. It’s premier S-400 air defense system exists at the top of an ecosystem of other shorter range air defenses that when networked and layered make the air space they protect virtually impenetrable. Together with long range strike weapons like artillery and short-range ballistic missiles like the Iskander, there is nowhere for Ukrainian forces to hide and certainly no way for them to advance into Russia positions. By moving these capabilities forward, Russia has been incrementally securing territory from the regime in Kiev.
Not only has China emulated many tactics and strategies from Russia, it has also outright purchased the best the Russian Federation has to offer. Between 2018-2020 China purchased two regiments of Russia’s S-400 systems. China also produces a wide variety of its own air defense systems based on the Russian S-300, Russia’s Tor system, as well as systems incorporating certain aspects of the US Patriot missile system.
While Chinese air defenses have not been put to the test like their Russian counterparts, it stands to reason they would perform with similar efficiency and prevent US forces and other potential interlopers from entering Chinese airspace let alone cause damage within it.
The Dagger: Chinese Airpower
The People’s Liberation Army Airforce employs hundreds of modern warplanes including the Chengdu J-10, the Shenyang J-11 and J-16, as well as scores of its newest warplane, the Chengdu J-20.
As with Chinese air defenses, Chinese airpower has been heavily influenced by Russian military aviation. Over the years in addition to its own warplanes, China has purchased a number of advanced Russian warplanes including the SU-27, SU-30, and most recently, the SU-35 according to the Diplomat in its 2019 article, “Russia Offers China Another Batch of Su-35 Fighter Jets.”
While China’s airforce has not seen combat, the fact that it possesses a large number of Russian warplanes hints they will perform in a similar manner to Russian airpower as demonstrated in Syria from 2015 onward and now in military operations in Ukraine.
The warplanes themselves are merely platforms for advanced avionics and weapons, the latter of which is a central factor defining the success of any nation’s airforce. The US government and arms industry-funded International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) in a paper titled, “Chinese and Russian air-launched weapons: a test for Western air dominance,” would note the advancements of Chinese air-to-air missiles (AAMs) stating:
The extent of Chinese progress in the air-to-air guided-weapons arena was apparent with the introduction of the PL-10 AAM. This weapon provided a marked improvement in performance over the previous generation of short-range missiles operated by the People’s Liberation Army Air Force (PLAAF), and its development has placed China among the handful of nations with a defence-industrial base capable of producing such a weapon.
The paper would also note:
China is also developing a very-long-range AAM intended to be used to attack high-value targets such as tanker, airborne early-warning, and intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) aircraft. Furthermore, Beijing appears to be pursuing two or more configurations of rocket-ramjet AAMs.
By the early to mid-2020s, China will clearly have a broader – and far more capable – range of air-to-air weapons to complement the combat aircraft that are now in development. These will likely force the US and its regional allies to re-examine not only their tactics, techniques and procedures, but also the direction of their own combat-aerospace development programmes.
Chinese airpower when coupled together with its formidable A2AD capabilities creates a modern day sword and shield able to take on virtually any threat.
Other Critical Factors
One area in which the US still dominates is through its submarine fleet. While China possesses a large number of submarines with improving capabilities, the US is still thought to have an advantage in this field. US submarines could disrupt cross-strait shipping as well as threaten Chinese ground targets with submarine-launched cruise missiles.
US submarines would be one of the few platforms able to potentially breach Chinese A2AD capabilities. Because modern submarine warfare is rare, it is difficult to draw from recent examples to predict possible outcomes regarding submarine warfare between the US and China and is a critical factor that only time will fully reveal.
Chinese media, cyber and space-based military capabilities would also be critical in any potential conflict and are areas the US clearly understands parity is nearly reached with its own capabilities or has already been reached.
Other critical factors that would come into play during the most likely conflicts China faces would be the capabilities of its ground forces. Chinese tanks and armored vehicles have been developed through lessons learned from Russian platforms and are admittedly on par with their Western counterparts in terms of fire control, armor, and countermeasures against anti-tank missiles. Chinese artillery also follows the Russian model, a model proving itself deadly and effective in Ukraine.
Underwriting all of these capabilities is China’s massive industrial base. Western experts including those at the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI) in a paper titled, “The Return of Industrial Warfare,” would note that the West has fallen behind Russia in this regard.
The paper claims:
This situation is especially critical because behind the Russian invasion stands the world’s manufacturing capital – China. As the US begins to expend more and more of its stockpiles to keep Ukraine in the war, China has yet to provide any meaningful military assistance to Russia. The West must assume that China will not allow Russia to be defeated, especially due to a lack of ammunition. If competition between autocracies and democracies has really entered a military phase, then the arsenal of democracy must first radically improve its approach to the production of materiel in wartime.
If it is true that the West lags behind Russia in terms of its military industrial production, it is many times more true in regards to China. While the RUSI paper admits this is a problem the West must rectify, it is unlikely able to. Whatever steps the West takes to improve its military industrial capacity, both Russia and China will not only match such steps but ensure they remain far ahead of them.
Even should US capabilities match those of China, the fact that it is provoking a conflict halfway around the world particularly in regards to Taiwan puts it at a disadvantage logistically. It is a fight the US holds multiple disadvantages in and a fight the US should not be picking in the first place.
China has carefully for decades cultivated its military capabilities to defend China from foreign aggression, subjugation, and the humiliation associated with it, all of which the Chinese people have suffered at the hands of Western powers in the past.
With the US military itself admitting Chinese military capabilities are in some ways reaching parity with US military capabilities and in other areas surpassing them, the notion of the US using military force with impunity in or around Chinese territory has significantly diminished. In fact, the desperate, reckless urgency that has taken hold of Washington in recent years in regards to China and Washington’s growing inability to “contain” it is at the center of US provocations like Pelosi’s recent visit to Taiwan.
It will now be a matter of Beijing managing additional and increasingly desperate provocations by the US against China to defend Chinese national security while avoiding a potentially destructive conflict with the United States. The most logical decision Washington could make is to adopt a multipolar mindset allowing it to peacefully coexist alongside China and other nations rather than its current continued attempts to assert itself above all other nations.
Brian Berletic is a Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.
August 14, 2022 (The New Atlas) - Update on Russian military operations in Ukraine for August 14, 2022.
Russian forces continue to make incremental progress along the Siversk-Bakhmut defense line even according to pro-Ukrainian sources;
There is no sign of any Ukrainian offensive around Kherson, even according to the Western media;
Another US-supplied HIMARS has been destroyed according to the Russian MoD, that is now 8 out of 16 sent to Ukraine destroyed;
The Pentagon is now struggling to explain why it is unable to supply Ukraine with sufficient weapons needed to execute the ever-pending “Kherson Offensive” yet to materialize;
Claims made by the Pentagon regarding the effectiveness of various weapon systems sent have been contradicted by recently discovered documents from the US military itself;
The US Army claims the effectiveness of common US anti-tank weapons like the Javelin and the AT-4 is around 19% among trained US soldiers. This would be much lower among Ukrainian troops;
The Western media has decided to assign credit to Ukraine for a recent explosion in Crimea despite Kiev denying any involvement;
Ukraine is shelling Zaporozhzhia Nuclear Power Plant in an attempt to force Russian troops to leave through international pressure;
August 12, 2022 (Brian Berletic - New Eastern Outlook) - Under the US’ own one China policy, Washington recognizes there is only one China, that Taiwan is a part of China, and that there is only one government of China, the People’s Republic of China (PRC) in Beijing. Despite this, the US undermines Chinese sovereignty over Taiwan by treating the island as a de facto nation and the Republic of China in Taipei as its de facto legitimate government.
This culminated most recently in the visit by US Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi to Taiwan against Beijing’s warnings and has predictably triggered what many analysts in the West are considering the “Fourth Strait Crisis” in which tensions between the US-backed regime in Taipei and the legitimate government of China have escalated to near-conflict levels.
Also as predicted, with the continual rise of Chinese economic and military power, the US’ own maxim of “might makes right” has boomeranged around and now threatens the very status quo Washington was abusing to incrementally infringe on Chinese sovereignty.
Chinese Military Might Seeks to Make Taiwan Question Right
In the wake of Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan, massive Chinese military drills were launched including a de facto air and sea blockade of the island as well as simulated assaults on Taiwan’s military infrastructure around Taipei and its southern Tainan and Kaohsiung regions. What was first dismissed as a “tantrum” by an “embarrassed Beijing” is quickly shaping into a much more deliberate and complex reaction meant to reshape both the status of the Taiwan Strait as well as the status of Taiwan itself.
US representatives appear to believe that the recent exercises are only the beginning of what is an incremental process of implementing greater and permanent control over Taiwan by Being. A Guardian article titled, “China resumes military drills off Taiwan after shelving US talks,” would note:
The US defence department policy chief, Colin Kahl, said the Pentagon had not changed the assessment given last year by the former chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, Mark Milley, that China was unlikely to invade Taiwan in the next two years. However, Kahl said Beijing was trying to “salami-slice their way into a new status quo”.
“A lot has been made of the missile strikes but really it’s the activities in the strait itself, the sheer number of maritime and air assets that are crossing over this de facto centre line, creeping closer to Taiwan shores, where it’s clear that Beijing is trying to create a kind of new normal,” he said.
The article would also note that the recent exercises demonstrate China’s growing abilities. The article claimed:
Timothy Heath, a defence researcher at the Rand Corporation, said China’s drills over the past few days showed the PLA was strengthening its ability to carry out a blockade.
“A blockade could be executed alone or in conjunction with other military options such as missile barrages or an invasion of Taiwan,” he said.
Indeed, China has one of the largest and most capable missile arsenals in the world even according to Western experts.
The US-based government and arms industry-funded Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) in a China Power paper titled, “How Are China’s Land-based Conventional Missile Forces Evolving?,” would explain:
As part of sweeping efforts to modernize the People’s Liberation Army (PLA), China has developed one of the most powerful land-based conventional missile arsenals in the world.
Chinese missiles combined with formidable air and sea defenses make up its anti-access, area denial capabilities, capabilities advanced enough to prevent the United States from intervening should Beijing choose to fully resolve this crisis of Washington’s making.
China is Pushing Back, But How Far?
It is now a matter of waiting to see just how far Beijing is willing to go down each respective path; economically, politically, and militarily. If China’s recent Global Times article, “PLA extends ‘Taiwan encirclement’ exercises with anti-submarine warfare, showcases unrivaled area denial capability; ‘drills will not stop until reunification’,” is any indication, Beijing is prepared to go all the way.
International law favors Beijing’s stance on Taiwan versus decades of US-sponsored separatism done in full violation of both Washington’s own bilateral agreements with Beijing and in violation of international law. Decades of US military aggression, meddling, and subversion around the globe have now, ironically, played into the hands of Beijing who can easily cite US actions to justify virtually any level of force it feels is necessary in pursuit of defending its own sovereignty in regards to Taiwan.
Many contributors to and supporters of Washington’s strategy of belligerence toward China are attempting to dissuade Beijing from its current apparent course of action, understanding just how permanently Beijing could settle the “Taiwan question” if it commits fully at this time. They are doing so through “warnings” that any attempt to change the current “status quo” regarding Taiwan and the waters around it could be “disastrous” for Beijing.
A recent article by David Uren, an Australian economic writer and a senior fellow at the anti-China “Australian Strategic Policy Initiative” (ASPI) in a recent op-ed titled, “A blockade of Taiwan would cripple China’s economy,” would claim:
If a real Chinese blockade were challenged by the United States and the Taiwan Strait were designated a war zone, trade finance and insurance would evaporate for all shipping in the area.
Any real-life disruption of the sea lanes to the east and west of Taiwan would have a crippling effect on China’s own economy, since its major ports of Shanghai, Dalian, Tianjin and others are dependent on passage through waters near Taiwan.
Yet, as the op-ed also grudgingly admits, it would not be only China’s economy that suffered, but also Australia’s, Europe’s, and it stands to reason America’s as well.
There is one option that appears to escape the “top” Western “thinkers” and “analysts” when it comes to Taiwan, finally and fully upholding the West’s own agreed upon one China policies. Indeed, if the US and its allies simply made good on their own bilateral agreements with China, respecting its sovereignty over Taiwan, and stopped the artificial propping up of the regime in Taipei, this whole crisis and the potential war it may lead to would resolve itself.
Yet as US-led meddling in Ukraine has proven, the West is not capable of respecting international law or its own bilateral agreements with the rest of the world, making conflict all but inevitable. Russia for its part was fully prepared for the conflict that finally resulted after decades of abuse by the West, leaving a relatively unprepared West to suffer the consequences of its own belligerent actions. Only time will tell if China is likewise prepared and whether or not the West is as eager or able to weather yet another crisis of its own creation.
Brian Berletic is a Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.
