Two Major Confrontations: Taiwan / China and Ukraine / Russia Test the Limits of U.S. Power ~~ dmorista

 Two Major Confrontations: Taiwan / China and               

       Ukraine / Russia Test the Limits of U.S. Power     

Written by dmorista for The Class Struggle

The current war taking place in Ukraine is, in the opinion of many analysts on the Left and of other ideological persuasions, just a prelude to a looming war between the U.S. and China.  In fact, in the most modern definition of war (i.e. hybrid war), one that includes economic, cultural, and informational struggles, the U.S. and China are already engaged in a low-intensity war. The most likely flashpoint for a war between the two countries is the situation in Taiwan.  Biden has stated now four times that the U.S. would send troops to Taiwan if an outright war between China and Taiwan were to occur.  

A recent New York Times article noted that:

“Officials say Taiwan needs to become a 'porcupine' with enough weapons to hold out if the Chinese military blockades and invades it, even if Washington decides to send troops.  (Emphasis added)

“WASHINGTON -- American officials are intensifying efforts to build a giant stockpile of weapons in Taiwan after studying recent naval and air force exercises by the Chinese military around the island, according to current and former officials.    ….

“But the effort to transform Taiwan into a weapons depot faces challenges. The United States and its allies have prioritized sending weapons to Ukraine, which is reducing those countries' stockpiles, and arms makers are reluctant to open new production lines without a steady stream of long-term orders.”  (Emphasis added)

(See, “U.S. Bolstering Taiwan Muscle Against China”, Oct 6, 2022, Edward Wong & John Ismay, New York Times, {note this is the title used in the print edition of the New York Times for an article, “US aims to turn Taiwan into giant weapons depot”, posted online on Oct 5, 2022, at                                                                                                    < https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/05/us/politics/taiwan-biden-weapons-china.html >}:   “US transforming Taiwan into 'giant weapons depot' ”, Oct 11, 2022, Peter Symonds, WSWS, at < https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2022/10/11/jdmq-o11.html >)

The fact is that the U.S. and its allies in NATO are all, to one degree or another, deindustrialized and are not capable of ramping up weapons production at short notice and have vulnerabilities in sustaining production (such as being dependent on China for inputs for making the weapons).  This plays a major role in  the situation, that article in the TImes pointed out: “arms makers are reluctant to open new production lines without a steady stream of long-term orders.”  Unlike the fabled days of WW 2, the U.S. no longer produces thousands of examples of given weapons on massive assembly lines.  Now, much of the production of high-tech weapons is more like specialized craft production.  Increasing production means finding highly skilled workers who are in short supply, and producing products that have little or no commercial / civilian sales potential.  The companies involved are not interacting with the sort of dollar-a-year government leaders who ran the war production in WW 2 America, and the venality is barely disguised.  The ruling class will pay what the companies demand, if they decide that a larger flow of these weapons is needed to achieve their foreign policy agenda.  The price for this will be felt in more inflation and cuts to the already threadbare social services in the U.S., and in Europe the closing of much of their industry and cold dark apartments in the upcoming winter.

Taiwan and Ukraine could hardly be less alike, either in their basic social orders, or in their places in the world economic order. Ukraine has been defacto incorporated into NATO for several years, and was heavily armed by NATO in the years since the 2014 Coup.  Since the war began in February of this year the volume of armaments flowing into the country has been massive.  Ukraine, once the most prosperous region of the Soviet Union, had sunk to being the poorest nation in Europe (other than perhaps Moldova), in the years since it gained independence in 1991.  The poor economic conditions are reflected in one job women could still obtain; acting as surrogate mothers for women from more affluent places (average pay of $16,000 for 9 months of pregnancy and delivering the baby); or in appearing in the sorts of advertisements in which Slavic Women are featured for sale that abound on the internet.  The main product that Ukraine produced was Wheat, the production of which was severely disrupted by the war that began in February of 2022.  Millions of people in poor countries that cannot afford to buy the wheat at the new higher prices will suffer from hunger. (a situation largely due to Neoliberal policies, largely enforced by the IMF, that have moved agricultural production in peripheral Global South countries to export plantation type crops, and oriented those societies to importing staple foodstuffs)

Taiwan, in contrast, is one of the most technologically advanced and prosperous societies on Earth.  Taiwan produces about 92% of the most advanced computer chips, those with widths of 10 nanometer and less, in the world.  The U.S. retains a strong, though slowly declining, position in terms of research and development of new advanced chips and some other aspects of producing semiconductors, but does not produce any advanced computer chips.  Both the U.S. and China, along with most other economies, depend on Taiwan's advanced computer chip production.  This situation protects Taiwan from a Chinese invasion.  China, along with the U.S. and most other places, would suffer drastic economic damage if Taiwan's Computer Chips quit arriving.  China produces a large amount of less advanced chips; and the U.S. is trying to reestablish its production of advanced chips.  But, for the foreseeable future, both the U.S. and China are dependent on Taiwan.  (See, “Silicon Fortress: T-DAY: The Battle for Taiwan”, Dec. 27, 2021, Yimou Lee, Norihiko Shirouzu & David Lague, Reuters, at                                                                                                      < https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/taiwan-china-chips/ >: and Strengthening the Global Supply Chain in an Uncertain Era, Apr 2021, Antonio Varas, Raj Varadarajan, Jimmy Goodrich, Falan Yinug, Boston Consulting Group & The Semiconductor Industry Association.) 

The supply efforts for the U.S. / NATO weapon delivery operations to Ukraine are made easier by the fact that Ukraine shares a long land border with several NATO members.  Of course, Ukraine cannot pay for these weapons; and the tens of billions of dollars worth of weaponry provided so far are being paid for with taxes; collected largely from the middle class and upper middle class in the U.S.  It is also possible, and in fact it proved very much necessary, for the Western Capitalist ruling class, to provide mercenaries to bolster Ukraine's military and fascist paramilitary forces. The mercenaries who traveled to Ukraine in the early days of the war were mainly ideologically motivated middle aged couch potatoes who proved to be incompetent and militarily worthless, many of whom tried to flee the country.  Often they were refused permission to leave and, in retaliation, were used in suicide type missions.  In the rebuild of the Ukrainian military over the last few months a much tougher cadre of experienced professional mercenaries, numbering over 20,000 were provided by the U.S. and NATO to stiffen up and lead the Ukrainian forces. These are the crack mercenary forces built up by Western Capitalists over the years, and used in the terror campaigns and dirty wars from Rhodesia to Iraq to El Salvador to Angola to Afghanistan.  Other assistance given to Ukraine's military no doubt played a significant role in such spectacular operations as the sinking of the Russian Black Sea Fleets flagship the Moscow and the recent explosion on the Crmean Bridge (See, “Scott Ritter on Ukraine's counter-offensive, Russia's next move”, Max Blumenthal & Aaron Mate interview Scott Ritter, The Grayzone, at < https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r_FY87Se1d8 >)

Taiwan, in contrast, buys its U.S. produced weapons, produces some of its own weaponry, and maintains well trained and well armed military forces.  The difficulty that Taiwan faces is that the geographical situation is much less favorable for the U.S. in terms of supply and deployment.  Rand Corporation along with U.S. military planners have carried out several war simulations.  The result of those classified exercises, according to what little leaked out, was consistently that the U.S. forces would be defeated.   In August the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) ran an unclassified publicly available simulation.  In that simulation CSIS found the U.S. prevailed; but only did so at a very steep price, for both the U.S. and China.  (See, “In think tank’s Taiwan war game, US beats China at high cost”, Aug 12, 2022, Todd South, Military Times, at < https://www.militarytimes.com/news/2022/08/12/in-think-tanks-taiwan-war-game-us-beats-china-at-high-cost/ >: “A bloody mess’ with ‘terrible loss of life’: How a China-US conflict over Taiwan could play out”, Aug 11, 2022, Justin Katz & Valerie Insinna, Breaking Defense, at < https://breakingdefense.com/2022/08/a-bloody-mess-with-terrible-loss-of-life-how-a-china-us-conflict-over-taiwan-could-play-out/ >: “US could lose 900 warplanes defending Taiwan against China invasion: analysis”, Aug 14, 2022, Alia Shoaib, Business Insider, at < https://www.businessinsider.com/china-us-conflict-taiwan-heavy-losses-analysis-2022-8 >

Certainly we should hope that the strategic global economic position that Taiwan's advanced computer chip fabrication industry occupies, that affects the strategic economic position of both the U.S. and China, will continue to deter any military confrontation.  The Taiwanese company that makes the chips, Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Ltd, is working hard to remain the world leader in producing advanced chips.  That is a far better way to protect the Island than any military force and a war could ever be. 

The challenge to U.S. influence in the world by the proxy war with Russia that is taking place in Ukraine is more immediate now.  But in reality Russia is a much less formidable foe and rival than China is.  Russia has a GDP about the size of that of Italy and has a variety of serious problems.  Ukraine has a long tradition of fascist political organizations and fascist oriented state power, and Russia did not have the troops to conquer and occupy the great majority of Ukrainian territory (whatever the Corporate Controlled Media propaganda and disinformation blitz tries to convince the Western Populace of).  Their invasion aims were far more modest, and were mostly aimed at helping the Russian Ethnic populations of Eastern Ukraine.  Even there the Russian effort proved to be not equal to even their limited aims in Ukraine; when Ukraine was receiving billions of dollars of military equipment, training and mercenary forces provided by the U.S. / NATO alliance.  The economic effects of the Ukraine War on the U.S., and particularly on the NATO allies have been extremely negative.  Whether the Europeans come through the coming cold season still loyal to the U.S. / NATO campaign against Russia, after their populations suffer through a cold dark winter.remains to be seen. 

China, in contrast, has over 4 times the U.S. population, and has now over double the industrial output of the U.S.  China has been building a powerful Blue Water Navy for over 10 years, it has not overtaken the U.S. Navy yet but has already created a formidable naval force.  Any confrontation over Taiwan will take place just 100 miles from China but over 6,000 miles from the U.S.  The geographical advantage that China would have in such a confrontation is decisive.  Taiwan would be well advised to make their island society much more valuable to both the U.S. and China the way it is, rather than the way it would be after the devastation of a military campaign.  Their dominant position in advanced computer chip production is certainly helpful in maintaining such a value position to both China and the U.S.  

A comparison of these two long-term geostrategic situations is instructive.  China and East Asia is now the most dynamic and advanced region of global capitalism.  There is a great likelihood that the Taiwan situation will be resolved without resort to a war.  U.S. rulers have been informed by their military high command that a military confrontation with China over Taiwan would cost the U.S. dear.  China and Taiwan are already closely related in terms of trade and commerce.  For the time being neither China, nor the U.S., would benefit from a violent confrontation over the island.  Europe and especially Russia, that stretches across 5,600 miles of Eurasia, now occupy a lower rung in the Global Capitalist Hierarchy than does China and East Asia. There is much less to lose from a military confrontation, especially one that can be implemented using proxy forces and mercenaries by the U.S.  In the late 1940s and early 1950s the Chinese had to assume the burden of committing its own troops in a military struggle with the U.S. in Korea; while the Soviets provided weaponry and a few pilots to fly the Mig-15s.  Now the Russians, having slipped down the power hierarchy, are forced to confront the expansion of NATO into a country on their border.  In the 1950s Korea mattered little and was readily used as a place to conduct a military struggle, the same is true of Ukraine now.   China stands aloof from the Ukraine War, though it supports Russia by purchasing Russian oil and gas.  The role of the U.S., in the two confrontations, has remained roughly the same.  (I want to make clear that the clever comparison of the role reversal of Russia / U.S.S.R. and China, when we look at the Korean War and the Ukraine War, is not my original idea, I read it somewhere.  I just cannot remember exactly where, so I am unable to give credit to the original thinker here) 

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Because the New York Times article, that I referred to at the beginning of this essay, is not accessible to many of our readers, I am posting a copy of the text of that article here below.  The rest of the material referred to is available freely online and I provided the urls..  The report Strengthening the Global Supply Chain in an Uncertain Era, can be found with a simple web search.  

“U.S. Bolstering Taiwan Muscle Against China.”  (Internet Version Title: “US aims to turn Taiwan into giant weapons depot”)

Edward Wong and John Ismay: Oct. 6, 2022

The New York Times:    Article Length: 1,685 words

Officials say Taiwan needs to become a ''porcupine'' with enough weapons to hold out if the Chinese military blockades and invades it, even if Washington decides to send troops.

WASHINGTON -- American officials are intensifying efforts to build a giant stockpile of weapons in Taiwan after studying recent naval and air force exercises by the Chinese military around the island, according to current and former officials.

The exercises showed that China would probably blockade the island as a prelude to any attempted invasion, and Taiwan would have to hold out on its own until the United States or other nations intervened, if they decided to do that, the current and former officials say.

But the effort to transform Taiwan into a weapons depot faces challenge,s. The United States and its allies have prioritized sending weapons to Ukraine, which is reducing those countries' stockpiles, and arms makers are reluctant to open new production lines without a steady stream of long-term orders.

And it is unclear how China might respond if the United States accelerates shipments of weapons to Taiwan, a democratic, self-governing island that Beijing claims is Chinese territory.

U.S. officials are determining the quantity and types of weapons sold to Taiwan by quietly telling Taiwanese officials and American arms makers that they will reject orders for some large systems in favor of a greater number of smaller, more mobile weapons. The Biden administration announced on Sept. 2 that it had approved its sixth weapons package for Taiwan -- a $1.1 billion sale that includes 60 Harpoon coastal antiship missiles. U.S. officials are also discussing how to streamline the sale-and-delivery process.

President Biden said last month that the United States is ''not encouraging'' Taiwan's independence, adding, ''That's their decision.'' Since 1979, Washington has had a policy of reassuring Beijing that it does not support independence. But China's foreign minister, Wang Yi, said in a speech at the Asia Society last month that the United States was undermining that position ''by repeated official exchanges and arms sales, including many offensive weapons.''

The People's Liberation Army of China carried out exercises in August with naval ships and fighter jets in zones close to Taiwan. It also fired ballistic missiles into the waters off Taiwan's coast, four of which went over the island, according to Japan.

The Chinese military acted after Nancy Pelosi, speaker of the House, visited Taiwan. But even before that, U.S. and Taiwanese officials had been more closely examining the potential for an invasion because Russia's assault on Ukraine had made the possibility seem more real, though Chinese leaders have not explicitly stated a timeline for establishing rule over Taiwan.

The United States would not be able to resupply Taiwan as easily as Ukraine because of the lack of ground routes from neighboring countries. The goal now, officials say, is to ensure that Taiwan has enough arms to defend itself until help arrives. Mr. Biden said last month that U.S. troops would defend Taiwan if China were to carry out an ''unprecedented attack'' on the island -- the fourth time he has stated that commitment and a shift from a preference for ''strategic ambiguity'' on Taiwan among U.S. presidents.

''Stockpiling in Taiwan is a very active point of discussion,'' said Jacob Stokes, a fellow at the Center for a New American Security who advised Mr. Biden on Asia policy when he was vice president. ''And if you have it, how do you harden it and how do you disperse it so Chinese missiles can't destroy it?''

''The view is we need to lengthen the amount of time Taiwan can hold out on its own,'' he added. ''That's how you avoid China picking the low-hanging fruit of its 'fait accompli' strategy -- that they've won the day before we've gotten there, that is assuming we intervene.''

U.S. officials increasingly emphasize Taiwan's need for smaller, mobile weapons that can be lethal against Chinese warships and jets while being able to evade attacks, which is central to so-called asymmetric warfare.

''Shoot-and-scoot'' types of armaments are popular with the Ukrainian military, which has used shoulder-fired Javelin and NLAW antitank guided missiles and Stinger antiaircraft missiles effectively against Russian forces. Recently, the Ukrainians have pummeled Russian troops with mobile American-made rocket launchers known as HIMARS.

To transform Taiwan into a ''porcupine,'' an entity bristling with armaments that would be costly to attack, American officials have been trying to steer Taiwanese counterparts toward ordering more of those weapons and fewer systems for a conventional ground war like M1 Abrams tanks.

Pentagon and State Department officials have also been speaking regularly about these issues since March with American arms companies, including at an industry conference on Taiwan this week in Richmond, Va. Jedidiah Royal, a Defense Department official, said in a speech there that the Pentagon was helping Taiwan build out systems for ''an island defense against an aggressor with conventional overmatch.''

In a recent article, James Timbie, a former State Department official, and James O. Ellis Jr., a retired U.S. Navy admiral, said Taiwan needs ''a large number of small things'' for distributed defense, and that some of Taiwan's recent purchases from the United States, including Harpoon and Stinger missiles, fit that bill. Taiwan also produces its own deterrent weapons, including minelayer ships, air defense missile systems and antiship cruise missiles.

They said Taiwan needs to shift resources away from ''expensive, high-profile conventional systems'' that China can easily destroy in an initial attack, though some of those systems, notably F-16 jets, are useful for countering ongoing Chinese fighter jet and ship activities in ''gray zone'' airspace and waters. The authors also wrote that ''the effective defense of Taiwan'' will require stockpiling ammunition, fuel and other supplies, as well as strategic reserves of energy and food.

Officials in the administration of Tsai Ing-wen, the president of Taiwan, say they recognize the need to stockpile smaller weapons but point out that there are significant lags between orders and shipments.

''I think we're moving in a high degree of consensus in terms of our priorities on the asymmetric strategy, but the speed does have to be accelerated,'' Bi-khim Hsiao, the de facto Taiwanese ambassador in Washington, said in an interview.

Some American lawmakers have called for faster and more robust deliveries. Several senior senators are trying to push through the proposed Taiwan Policy Act, which would provide $6.5 billion in security assistance to Taiwan over the next four years and mandate treating the island as if it were a ''major non-NATO ally.''

But Jens Stoltenberg, secretary general of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, said in an interview that weapons makers want to see predictability in orders before committing to building up production. Arms directors from the United States and more than 40 other nations met last week in Brussels to discuss long-term supply and production issues.

If China decides to establish a naval blockade around Taiwan, American officials would probably study which avenue of resupplying Taiwan -- by sea or by air -- would offer the least likelihood of bringing Chinese and American ships, aircraft and submarines into direct conflict.

One proposition would involve sending U.S. cargo planes with supplies from bases in Japan and Guam to Taiwan's east coast. That way, any Chinese fighters trying to shoot them down would have to fly over Taiwan and risk being downed by Taiwanese warplanes.

''The sheer amount of materiel that would likely be needed in case of war is formidable, and getting them through would be difficult, though may be doable,'' said Eric Wertheim, a defense consultant and author of ''The Naval Institute Guide to Combat Fleets of the World.'' ''The question is: How much risk is China and the White House willing to take in terms of enforcing or breaking through a blockade, respectively, and can it be sustained?''

China has probably studied the strategic failure of Russia's invasion of Ukraine, he said, and the United States should continue to send the kinds of arms to Taiwan that will make either an amphibious invasion or an attack with long-range weapons much more difficult for China.

''The Chinese naval officers I've spoken to in years past have said they fear the humiliation that would result from any kind of failure, and this of course has the effect of them being less likely to take action if there is an increased risk of failure,'' Mr. Wertheim said. ''In essence, the success the Ukrainians are having is a message to the Chinese.''

Officials in the Biden administration are trying to gauge what moves would deter China without actually provoking greater military action.

Jessica Chen Weiss, a professor of government at Cornell University who worked on China policy this past year in the State Department, wrote on Twitter that Mr. Biden's recent remarks committing U.S. troops to defending Taiwan were ''dangerous.'' She said in an interview that pursuing the porcupine strategy enhances deterrence but that taking what she deems symbolic steps on Taiwan's diplomatic status does not.

''The U.S. has to make clear that the U.S. doesn't have a strategic interest in having Taiwan being permanently separated from mainland China,'' she said.

But other former U.S. officials praise Mr. Biden's forceful statements, saying greater ''strategic clarity'' bolsters deterrence.

''President Biden has said now four times that we would defend Taiwan, but each time he says it someone walks it back,'' said Harry B. Harris Jr., a retired admiral who served as commander of U.S. Pacific Command and ambassador to South Korea. ''And I think that makes us as a nation look weak because who's running this show? I mean, is it the president or is it his advisers?

''So maybe we should take him at his word,'' Admiral Harris added. ''Maybe he is serious about defending Taiwan.''