neverfail wrote: ↑
Thu Mar 16, 2023 3:57 pm
Now, to return to the topic (after dealing with an unwonted digression.....
, as I have pointed out earlier, I have become fatalistic in my attitude towards US - PRC relations; seeing a further plunge in emnity between the two as inevitable. Having stated that I still pray that these might still change direction sparing us all a war - but presently remain pessimistic.
Its not just the US. I think that emnity with the democratic world is inevitable. As China grows more powerful and assertive, they will make more demands which will grate on your democratic sensivities. It will take a coalition of democracies to counter the China threat because of their vast population and thus high GDP potential. The higher the GDP, the more weapons they can produce.
The top echelon within the Chinese Communist Party are nothing if not a cautous bunch. They are not partial to making rash policy moves. They will not make a "grab" for Taiwan until convinced that the international environment along with conditions at home are optimum for the success of such a venture before they move.
Along with being prudent they are also very patient: patience I perceive as being a long lived Chinese virtue.
Patience is indeed a virtue. They will wait till China is too poweful for the US to handle. Then they will invade Taiwan. Then they will use their power to bully the countries in the Asia Pacific, including Australia. They thought they had reached that day when they stopped buying Australian coal a few years ago, only to learn that that day has not yet arrive.
Patience is not enough. They need wisdom too. Or patience can be detrimental. For example, they implemented the one child policy. When that was implemented, the people were unhappy but patiently bore the unhappiness. This policy was carried out too long and China is now facing a demographic disaster.
The most opportune time would be while a crisis situation in The West diverts attention away from the region and absorbs western energies. The best time coinciding with when the PRC has built up an overwealming propenderance of firepower would likely be at end of 2020's into the early 2030's.
Without wishing any ill on the inhabitants of Taiwan I am actually hoping (with regard to the best interests of my own country) that such a PRC move in conventional arms is successful and The West accordingly has to then suffer and cope with the rebuff (along with the inevitable finger-pointing recriminations).
In an earlier essay, I tried to draw your attention to the similarity of Taiwan to that of Ukraine. You were very outraged at the Russian invasion of Ukraine but seems indifferent to a likely invasion of Taiwan by Communist China. Both Russia and Communist China are authoritarian power seeking to extinguish a democracy in a state whose people resembles their own. Thus they both give an unwanted example to both Putin and Xi.
Why so? Because I now have little confidence in our national security establishment nor in the collective wisdom of our political parties.
As I explained in my earlier post; Australia once treated its own defence security as one and indivisible from that of the wider British Empire. Finding in the early months of 1942 that we had backed a loser we slipped seamlesly into the habit of treating with the USA the same way: vesting the same hopes and expectaions in our new ally qacross the Pacific. I want to see my countrymen cured of that long lived habit of expecting distant Anglosphere ersewile protectors to be guarantuers of our soverignty.
That's because without the British Empire, Australia could not survive against an imperialistc Japan. Without the US, Australia cannot survive against an assertive China. So you needed the British like you need the Americans now more than they need you. Without Australia, America can still survive.
To get across the message that ultimately we are on our own.
You cannot survive on your own.
The undignified manner in which American policy deserted South Vietnam in the early 1970's and Afghanistan in the early 2020's should have acquainted our policy establishment with the fact that when the going gets tough our American allies are inclined to cut and run. I believe that a humuliating American defeat over the preservation of Taiwan's quasi-soverignty would be enough to convince even our block headed defence and foreign policy planners that it is unwise to tie our security to the power of the United States
You got no one else to protect you but the US. That's the point you miss.
Which brings me back to those controversial nuclear powered subs. Since the first of those won't be operational until the early 2040's (perhaps even longer if the delays in construction I anticipate come to pass): with the conventional arms our navy is equipped with Australia will be in no position to support the USA in a conventional maritime war with the PRC over Taiwan; as long as the conflict takes place before the first of those subs are launched.
That explains my preferred choice of the latter 2020's into the early 2030's for the anticipated contest of arms to take place.
That's why I suggested you ask the Americans or the British to sell you a second hand nuclear sub in the meantime at a cheap price. Maybe the Los Angeles class nuclear sub that still has 10 years of shelf life. But unfortunately, the Americans need those subs and so are not willing to sell. Maybe you try the British or the French.