To claim to have a clear understanding of Chinese intentions would require a level of arrogance that even I have yet to achieve. So let me be up front. I have no bottom-line truths on this topic. No one can speak with authority on how the Chinese who matter perceive the potential costs of a conflict. Therefore, I have no unassailable insights to offer. Most of what I have to offer is highly subjective. It is speculative. It is based on a meager handful of articles published in the press and bounded by my own interpretation of Chinese history.

Let me start with a proposition. Even in the absence of hard data, I would be surprised if the larger community of security analysis in Beijing and beyond, military and civilian, is not thinking very carefully about the potential costs and benefits of military conflict. Stated in the affirmative, I am prepared to assert that there is likely a good deal of thinking going on about the potential risks and costs. I say this even in the absence of hard evidence because the historical record suggests it. We are talking about a civilization and culture that has a legacy of strategic calculation that is more than two millennia in the running. This is, after all, the civilization that gave the world the oldest surviving, written treatise on war and statecraft. I refer of course to Sun Zi Bing Fa. Every once in a while it is good to review what Master Sun had to say about war. What one finds is that almost the entire treatise is about the need for proper cost-benefit analyses at the strategic, operational, and tactical levels of warfare. Indeed, at the strategic level of warfare, Sun Zi cautions rulers and generals alike that whether one should engage in a war at all is the most serious calculation. In fact, the very first sentence of the very first chapter (Estimates) of Sun Zi Bing Fa talks to this:

“War is a matter of vital importance to the State; the province of life or death; the road to survival or ruin. It is mandatory that it be thoroughly studied.”

In the preface to his own book of commentaries on Sun Zi Bing Fa published in 1995, Major General Xie Guoliang of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) Academy of Military Science highlighted the seriousness of contemplating war when he offered that the first of all the principles one can learn from Sun Zi is, “. . . have adequate respect for war and be wary of waging one.” Of course, we are talking about a book of uncertain origins that was purportedly written some 2,000 years ago. So the question, then, is this: Is it a stretch to postulate that Sun Zi Bing Fa and all of its emphasis on calculations have any relevance to current Chinese thinking on the issue at hand?

There was a time when I would have answered, “Yes, it is a stretch.” However, I am now of a mind that the study of Sun Zi Bing Fa is alive and well among Chinese military strategists. Of course, the historical record suggesting a legacy of careful calculations about war by Chinese need not go back as far as Sun Zi. Closer to our own times we need look no further than what the Chinese call Mao Zedong Junshi Sixiang, or, “Mao Zedong Military Thought.”

Mao was a rather conservative military planner, having learned many painful lessons throughout the 1920s, 1930s, and early 1940s. By “conservative” I do not mean “passive.” My use of the word “conservative” is meant to convey a sense of Mao’s use of careful calculations and cost-benefit analyses as part of the operational planning process. Of the ten famous “principles of operations” Mao highlighted for his commanders at the Central Committee meeting at Yanjiakou in December 1947, the one that seems to have had the most durability since 1949 is Number 5:

“Fight no battle unprepared, fight no battle you are not sure of winning; make every effort to be well prepared for each battle, make every effort to insure victory in the given set of conditions as between the enemy and ourselves.”

The point of this historical digression, then, is to make the point that, even if we had no data at all indicating that Chinese leaders and planners are thinking about the potential costs of a war, the historical record (not to mention just good common sense) would provide some reason to believe that Beijing will not enter into such a conflict without some careful analysis. Of course, careful analysis is no guarantee of correct analysis. So the question remains to be asked: “Do we have any evidence that Chinese analysts and other concerned individuals are thinking about what is at stake? Do they think about the “downside” of such an endeavor? My own reading of the press and journals as leads me to believe that there are Chinese security analysts that do understand what is at stake and that the costs to China, even if victorious militarily, could be quite high. China is one of the United States' biggest trading partners and a war would not benefit either. The Soviet Union and the U.S. were enemies for decades and they did not go to war.

Tibet was a part of the British Empire for a while and a Captain Younghusband ran a very interesting campaign in Tibet and his book is a very good read

Hi Lolwhassup,
Le plus c'a change, le plus c'est la méme chose.

During the 1929 depression Americans desperate for work flocked to the USSR (far less desirable at that time than China today), Mexico, etc,
By the way, it surprises me that the American administration refuses to call the present situation a depression, since by definition a recession that lasts so many years is a depression.

Read scientific and medical journals and you´ll se how many top articles are being published by Chinese scientists, check out the patents they are issuing and tell me if they have no ingenuity. Check out the quality and price of their latest machining centers. Check out the number of Chinese scientists, doctors, teachers, etc, in the US, many of which are in America for the money.
Hell they invented a whole new system in which they coordinate purchases making prices much lower to manufacturesrs than in any other country. They also centralized tool and die production, so factories pay the lowest prices for these items and get financing or even financial aid to get them, etc,

Hi Alte,
How carefully and conservatively did they evaluate their Tibet and Viet Nam invasions? How surprised would you be if Taiwan were forced to join China this year or even if it were attacked by China this year?

Originally Posted by samneanderthal

Hi Lolwhassup,
Le plus c'a change, le plus c'est la méme chose.

During the 1929 depression Americans desperate for work flocked to the USSR (far less desirable at that time than China today), Mexico, etc,
By the way, it surprises me that the American administration refuses to call the present situation a depression, since by definition a recession that lasts so many years is a depression.

Read scientific and medical journals and you´ll se how many top articles are being published by Chinese scientists, check out the patents they are issuing and tell me if they have no ingenuity. Check out the quality and price of their latest machining centers. Check out the number of Chinese scientists, doctors, teachers, etc, in the US, many of which are in America for the money.
Hell they invented a whole new system in which they coordinate purchases making prices much lower to manufacturesrs than in any other country. They also centralized tool and die production, so factories pay the lowest prices for these items and get financing or even financial aid to get them, etc,

Hi Alte,
How carefully and conservatively did they evaluate their Tibet and Viet Nam invasions? How surprised would you be if Taiwan were forced to join China this year or even if it were attacked by China this year?

Theoretically, the Republic of China (Taiwan) belongs to the People's Republic of China. As long as Taiwan does not declare themselves independent and if China use force toward Taiwan, the US will assist Taiwan (Taiwan Relation Act 1979) Further, if China use force against Taiwan it would like the Chinese shoot themselves in the foot. There are political forces in Taiwan that are pro-independence. Moreover, Taiwans armed forces can create havoc if the Chinese decide to cross the Formosa Strait. The major threat in theoretical assault could be a massive use of SS missiles to overwhelm the Taiwan defense. An invasion like Normandy is highly unlikely

France had a mutual defense agreement with Poland in 1939 and it didn't help Poland much (or France). Moreover, nothing indicates that the American public would go to war with China over Taiwan. They would be far more concerned if football players went on strike, than if China recovered part of its territory (it is more like the Sudetenland than like Poland)
Taiwan cannot hope to defend itself from tens of thousands of Chinese long range missiles, the Chinese air force, paratroopers and ships equipped with radar guided, very rapid fire cannon that can shoot down SS missiles. The Taiwanese know it and will have to yield eventually.

The Monroe doctrine didn't prevent Russia from owning Alaska, France from invading Mexico or Spain from owning Cuba (until the beginning of the 20th century). It is just as easy to make agreements and policies as it is to ignore them when real danger threatens.

Originally Posted by samneanderthal

France had a mutual defense agreement with Poland in 1939 and it didn't help Poland much (or France). Moreover, nothing indicates that the American public would go to war with China over Taiwan. They would be far more concerned if football players went on strike, than if China recovered part of its territory (it is more like the Sudetenland than like Poland)
Taiwan cannot hope to defend itself from tens of thousands of Chinese long range missiles, the Chinese air force, paratroopers and ships equipped with radar guided, very rapid fire cannon that can shoot down SS missiles. The Taiwanese know it and will have to yield eventually.

The Monroe doctrine didn't prevent Russia from owning Alaska, France from invading Mexico or Spain from owning Cuba (until the beginning of the 20th century). It is just as easy to make agreements and policies as it is to ignore them when real danger threatens.

And the costs for China if they are doing something like that? Taiwan has a strong air force; their air defense is really good. The Chinese air force must neutralize their air force and air defense. They must even reduce the ground forces prior an invasion. Modern naval ships are lesser capable to prepare an invasion beach before a landing of amphibious forces, so the job goes to the fly boys. Then how willing are the service men in China to do something like this? The Taiwanese will defend their homes.

What will be the gain for China to take the economic losses, the human losses to commence an operation like this?

The rhetoric about China reminds a lot how the West sounded about the Soviet Union, especially when the Russians' come up with something new. OMG!!! We are doomed

Originally Posted by samneanderthal

American public. They would be far more concerned if football players went on strike, than if China recovered part of its territory

The Monroe doctrine didn't prevent Russia from owning Alaska, France from invading Mexico or Spain from owning Cuba (until the beginning of the 20th century). It is just as easy to make agreements and policies as it is to ignore them when real danger threatens.

1st comment is only too true, or "American Idol"!
Monroe Doctrine was to prevent further European expansion in S.A. & to encourage independance, Alaska wasn't in the picture then. Cuba was an exisisting Colony. The US was distracted with the War between the States when France invaded Mexico, but the US did send guns to the opposition groups.

Originally Posted by samneanderthal

Yes, supposedly wars had also been rendered moot by the invention of the machine gun and quick firing artillery.
Once Taiwan falls to China and South Korea to North Korea and China, Japan and the Philippines will be open hunting ground.
With the Taiwanese, South Korean and Japanese industry under its control, China will be far more formidable than Hitler after gaining the Austrian, Czech and Polish industries.
China has even been courting its former enemy Viet Nam, which would make a powerful ally to help to occupy Thailand, Malaysia and Indonesia.

Hold the horses Sam!

1: China might be able to occupy Taiwan but at a considerable price.
2: North Korea cannot beat South Korea
3: China lacks the navy to support an invasion of Japan, let alone occupy it.
4: you forget the US fleet and India.
And last but not least, once China starts to wage war on a big scale, blockades will suffocate their economy, millions of Chinese become jobless and China will need their military to save the leadership.

Originally Posted by samneanderthal

France had a mutual defense agreement with Poland in 1939 and it didn't help Poland much (or France). Moreover, nothing indicates that the American public would go to war with China over Taiwan. They would be far more concerned if football players went on strike, than if China recovered part of its territory (it is more like the Sudetenland than like Poland)
Taiwan cannot hope to defend itself from tens of thousands of Chinese long range missiles, the Chinese air force, paratroopers and ships equipped with radar guided, very rapid fire cannon that can shoot down SS missiles. The Taiwanese know it and will have to yield eventually.

The Monroe doctrine didn't prevent Russia from owning Alaska, France from invading Mexico or Spain from owning Cuba (until the beginning of the 20th century). It is just as easy to make agreements and policies as it is to ignore them when real danger threatens.

During the Third Taiwan Strait Crisis in 1996 Clinton send 2 aircraft carrier battlegroups to assist Taiwan.

China has thousands of missiles pointed at Taiwan but they can't be fired all at the same time, so Taiwan will have plenty of time for a counterstrike.

Taiwan would lose half its population and China less than .1% in such a war. Taiwan would lose its economy, China less than .1%. Is Taiwan really going to oppose the invasion? Is dead better than red?
An independent Taiwan represents a major competitor to China. An annexed Taiwan represents an important increase in industrial, research and military capacity and a vital location for expansion in the Pacific.
North Korea and China can easily invade South Korea. Is the average AMerican willing to go to war against both contries to save South Korea?

Clinton sent 2 carriers at a time when America was much stronger and China much weaker, two decades later it is doubtful that Obama would be allowed to do the same and that China would pay any attention to the carriers (being there doesn't mean they will attack, starting WW III over a small island).

Blockades were going to suffocate Napoleon, Germany in WW II, etc, but they didn't.