"Why China Could Decide To Invade Taiwan, And Soon" Topic

"On March 23, U.S. Navy Adm. John Aquilino, President Biden's nominee to be the next Indo-Pacific Command commander, testified during his confirmation hearing that the threat to Taiwan from an increasingly aggressive China is "closer than we think" and that the United States needs to be "prepared today" to defend its longtime ally. The admiral stated his assessment was opinion, not an assertion based on new intelligence or reporting. Indeed, he acknowledged one could only speculate as to when China would attack Taiwan – "today… six years… 2045." China's leadership, however, may conclude that the country's demographic trends present a "now or never" moment.

According to United Nations data on the Chinese population, the country will contend with the confluence of two major demographic challenges beginning in 2023…"
Full article here
link

Armand

Now that's a worry.

As has been said before"Demographics are Destiny".

BB

The "one-child" policy inadvertently prompted families to favor male children which then resulted in unhealthy male-to-female ratios.

There was nothing inadvertent about that result. The government officials knew their own culture and their country's economic conditions. They clearly wanted a generation with a disproportionately large number of men.

Why? Most likely to make a large army while keeping population growth within manageable levels.

I suspect it is less about demographics, and more about Xi wanting to be remembered in history as the man who brought Hong Kong and Taiwan to heel.

China just launched the largest air incursion into Taiwan's AIDZ, with 20 aircraft, and they're building a very large helo base just on the other side of the strait.

I'll be very surprised if an attack, or invasion of Taiwan doesn't occur in the next 3 – 4 years, if not sooner.

A stupid argument if you ask me.

1. China has close to 1.4 billion people! That's 1,400,000,000. Taiwan has 23.57 million (23,570,000).

It's going to take a lot for that demographic bubble to actually impact military efficacy.

In any case such a war is largely technological in nature and increasingly reliant on autonomous systems.

Note also Chinese military started massive reductions in numbers once it started modernising. These started in 1985 when the military was cut by 1 million people. You don't need masses of badly supported infantry in a modern war.

-----

2. Taiwan too has an ageing population with population growth stagnating.

Taiwan in fact has an older population than China.

Median ages:

China: 38.4 years
Taiwan: 42.5 years

Japan: 48.4 years
South Korea: 43.7 years

USA: 38.1 years
Australia: 37.2 years
EU: 43.7 years

India: 26.8 years
Sub-Saharan Africa: 19.7 years

----

3. One child policy saved China, Before that population growth was unsustainable (hence 1.4 billion people today).

Curbing population growth was one of the key things the Chinese did to stabilise the country and make it suitable for economic growth.

4. The gender imbalances incurred because Chinese traditionally prefer male children. This resulted in massive abortions and even infanticide of female children. (Another example of how culture is not just the food you eat and the clothes you wear which is what most idiot westerners think it is).

----

5. Rampant population growth is not good for economic development as GDP growth is chewed up by high population growth. IE Pie grows but it's shared amongst more people.

This happens in Australia a bit. Government etc bragged about near 3 decades of positive GDP growth but neglected to mention 3 GDP per capita recessions whereby the share per person shrunk thanks to extremely high immigration.

Indeed rampant population growth puts strains on everything from education to health to infrastructure.

----

6. China exports large chunks of people. The government supports this as a way of expanding Chinese influence at all levels. Note this also helps with the "restless males" or whatever idiot concept these guys harp on about as vast majority of emigres are males and often shunted around to work on Chinese projects around the world.

Eg. Croatia is building a large new bridge and the work was given to a Chinese firm (EU funded). All the workers are Chinese and they're housed separately on cruise ship and in barracks.

'I suspect it is less about demographics, and more about Xi wanting to be remembered in history as the man who brought Hong Kong and Taiwan to heel.'
Deng Xiao Ping will forever be remembered as the man who negotiated the return of Hong Kong. Everything else is epilogue.
I'm sure Xi would love to have a returned Taiwan as his legacy. He would not want to be remembered for a disastrous war and turning Taiwan into a smouldering heap however.
Stability and regime survival will remain the number one policy goals.

Details, details ------ it's less about the methods, and more about the result. See Tianenmen Square as a prime example of that.

I imagine Xi feels the same, AND can be assured that the Chinese propaganda machine will write and push the correct narrative to the Chinese and Taiwanese people.

I predict they'll make their move on Taiwan when the Olympics are being held in China. A potential hostage situation might tend to stifle international reaction to an invasion…

That IS an excellent point Z1, and yet another reason not to send athletes there.

China State Media Says Chinese Fighter Jets Will Fly Over Taiwan To Declare Sovereignty If Relations Between Washington And Taipei Continue To Improve

"Chinese fighter jets will fly over Taiwan to "declare sovereignty" if relations between Washington and Taipei continue to improve, a prominent state media figure said after Beijing sent 25 warplanes toward the island on Monday.

Hu Xijin, chief editor of China's nationalistic Communist Party newspaper the Global Times, fired back at recent comments by Secretary Antony Blinken and said the military operation was a response to the State Department's loosening of interaction guidelines between officials from the U.S. and Taiwan.

The People's Liberation Army would "step up military pressure" in the event of a further warming of U.S.-Taiwan ties, he said. "If Taiwan forces open fire, that will be the moment of all-out war across the Taiwan Strait," he added…"
Main page
link

Armand

National Interest raises some good points in this article and in particular how the US won't actually commit to concrete stance on Taiwan

link

This quote explains the situation:

Under strategic ambiguity, the United States aimed at deterring both parties from unilaterally upsetting cross-strait peace and stability—for example, Taipei's declaring de jure independence or Beijing's coercing reunification—without giving a clear-cut answer to whether Washington would really come to Taiwan's defense if the PRC mounts an armed attack on the island.

US guaranteeing Taiwan's defence or recognising Taiwan's independence would probably elicit an immediate Chinese military attack.

Maybe the US should just revoke its recognition of Communist China and acknowledge ROC government as legitimate ruler.

The upsides would be:

1. Taiwan's defence is assured including deployment of US military resources to the island.
2. One China policy is not compromised.
3. Gives US (and willing western allies) a legitimate reason to decouple and disengage from China and its illegitimate government.

Maybe this is their best chance?…nobody knows how good the Chinese are in their anti-submarine actions

link

Armand