Plausible things Taiwan's allies might do to assist if China invades

[Mithridates]

Would allied aircraft be stationed be stationed on Taiwanese soil? There are political sensitivities involved, mainly having to do with keeping it a limited war (a la the Korean War). Would the PLAN mount a blockade of Taiwan by setting up a Maritime Exclusion Zone around the main island? Would allied ground troops be placed on Taiwanese soil? During the Korean War, UN forces attacked Chinese forces inside Korea, but stopped short of targets beyond the Yalu River. What would be a similar boundary be for allied forces in the event of a Chinese invasion?

[Dreadnought]

Problem is they cant. International waters that a large portion of the worlds shipping traverses on a daily basis and the USN will no doubt sail a CVN through those waters perhaps even a full CVNBG or more. They wont need to station aircraft on taiwan soil when you have the flat tops airwings available and you also have bases in Japan not far away.

[Skywatcher]

If Taiwan did something unilateral, than they're really up the proverbial creek.

[Stitch]

Problem is they cant. International waters that a large portion of the worlds shipping traverses on a daily basis and the USN will no doubt sail a CVN through those waters perhaps even a full CVNBG or more. They wont need to station aircraft on taiwan soil when you have the flat tops airwings available and you also have bases in Japan not far away.

Do we still have any air assets at Clark International Airport? I know it USED to be an Air Force Base; it's not too far from Taiwan, either.

[astralis]

the question is, WHAT allied forces? it'll be a US show and nothing else.

[cdude]

the question is, WHAT allied forces? it'll be a US show and nothing else.

Other than the US, is any other country required by LAW (internationally or domestically) to fight Chinese invasion IF the US decided to jump in?

And even for the US, isn't it at the POTUS's discretionary to fight China or not?

[Skywatcher]

Other than the US, is any other country required by LAW (internationally or domestically) to fight Chinese invasion IF the US decided to jump in?

And even for the US, isn't it at the POTUS's discretionary to fight China or not?

Actually, we're just required to maintain plans and the capability to jump in. Nothing more.

[Mithridates]

the question is, WHAT allied forces? it'll be a US show and nothing else.

The US could presumably strong arm its allies into participating, if American interests were held to be sufficiently at stake. There are defense treaties that can be abrogated and a military presence that can be downgraded. A draw down of American forces similar to the British withdrawal of its forces east of Aden, back in the day, would be detrimental to American allies (public or tacit) in the region.

China has a history of incrementally expansive territorial claims. Who knows where they end? Do they really want to face the Chinese colossus alone? Can they trust it not to engage in more land grabs? When the Pinoys booted Uncle Sam from Clark and Subic in the early 90's, they were presumably operating under the assumption that the world had entered a new era, that involuntary border changes were a relic that died out with Western imperialism. They are now rediscovering the reality that with respect to territorial issues, China's motto is the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must, or equivalently, China is a big country and other countries are small countries, and that's just a fact.

However, your point is a detour from the topic posted and deserves a separate discussion of its own. The topic here is what plausible steps Taiwan's allies, assuming any materialize, could take to help without touching off a wider war, in the event China invades.

[Dreadnought]

Other than the US, is any other country required by LAW (internationally or domestically) to fight Chinese invasion IF the US decided to jump in?

And even for the US, isn't it at the POTUS's discretionary to fight China or not?

Only if NATO decides too but bear in mind it would effect most NATO countries by virtue of a common interest in the shipping lanes that China would have to use for their attack aka their shipping lanes too. But its not certain they would join but China in no way would want to challenge a NATO submarine threat nor a NATO battle group. If you think about it the NATO countries combined could put more force to sea then Russia and China combined.

If you think about it all they would have to do is pull a "port visit" for a time.

POTUS is bound by Treaty that he himself cannot change to defend Tawain.

Add to this the US State Department ,Congress and the War Department not liking the idea altogether since China has elected not to follow UN sanctions against Iran.

In addition to this it would seem pretty clear that if China elected to follow this action then what would stop her from doing the very same thing to the Islands that her and Japan are in dispute over outside of a US presence.

[Dreadnought]

The US could presumably strong arm its allies into participating, if American interests were held to be sufficiently at stake. There are defense treaties that can be abrogated and a military presence that can be downgraded. A draw down of American forces similar to the British withdrawal of its forces east of Aden, back in the day, would be detrimental to American allies (public or tacit) in the region.

China has a history of incrementally expansive territorial claims. Who knows where they end? Do they really want to face the Chinese colossus alone? Can they trust it not to engage in more land grabs? When the Pinoys booted Uncle Sam from Clark and Subic in the early 90's, they were presumably operating under the assumption that the world had entered a new era, that involuntary border changes were a relic that died out with Western imperialism. They are now rediscovering the reality that with respect to territorial issues, China's motto is the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must, or equivalently, China is a big country and other countries are small countries, and that's just a fact.

However, your point is a detour from the topic posted and deserves a separate discussion of its own. The topic here is what plausible steps Taiwan's allies, assuming any materialize, could take to help without touching off a wider war, in the event China invades.

Are you implying that China itself led to the closure of the US Subic Bay Naval facility?

The base could have remained had the US paid the increase outside of the Nuclear weapons issue since Bush Sr. removed all nukes from the surface vessels

Clark airbase was close do to volcanic activity...


The shutdown of the sprawling Subic Bay base, together with the closing of Clark Air Base after a volcanic eruption this year, amounts to the biggest reduction to date in the United States military presence in the western Pacific. The 60,000-acre Subic base is the Navy's principal supply and ship-repair installation in the region. U.S. to Look for New Sites

Although it is theoretically possible that a new agreement could be hammered out, Administration officials in Washington said that they considered this unlikely, and that they would accelerate the pullout and the search for alternative sites in the Pacific.
American and Philippine officials reached tentative agreement last summer on a treaty that would have extended the lease on the naval base for at least another decade in exchange for $203 million in annual aid. But the Philippine Senate rejected the treaty in September after an impassioned debate in which the American military presence was assailed as a vestige of colonialism and an affront to Philippine sovereignty.

The United States never increased its offer, but opened negotiations on a three-year phased withdrawal in the hope that the lease could be extended after a new government is elected in the Philippines in May.

The negotiations stumbled, officials said, over the United States' reluctance to commit itself to a firm schedule for removing troops and equipment and to guarantee that no nuclear weapons would pass through the base. Though President Bush has said that tactical nuclear weapons will be removed from surface warships, it is assumed that many of the ships that pass through the port are armed with them now.

But over the past month it has become clear in any case that the American military was reconciled to losing the base, and saw little use in dragging out the process. By the middle of 1993, most of the American personnel and much of the movable equipment would have been moved elsewhere, at a cost of billions of dollars, and sending them back would have probably proved prohibitively expensive.

The USN still pulls port visits at Subic.


U.S. and Philippine officials recently confirmed that Subic Bay – a natural harbor 80 km north of Manila that was the US 7th Fleet’s home until 1992 – is going to be playing a much larger role in U.S. Pacific Fleet deployments from now on.

http://thediplomat.com/2012/10/16/ju...o-philippines/

[Mithridates]

Are you implying that China itself led to the closure of the US Subic Bay Naval facility?

That thought never occurred to me, given the nationalistic tenor of Filipino politics with respect to the presence of American bases on their soil. I doubt it was the deciding factor, although it's certainly possible that local politicians took money from Chinese government sources to eject Uncle Sam. Since they wanted US troops out anyway, why not get paid as well?

[Officer of Engineers]

The US could presumably strong arm its allies into participating, if American interests were held to be sufficiently at stake. There are defense treaties that can be abrogated and a military presence that can be downgraded. A draw down of American forces similar to the British withdrawal of its forces east of Aden, back in the day, would be detrimental to American allies (public or tacit) in the region.

Ever noticed that American allies in the region don't have an alliance with each other? The US got Japan to agree to participate in a Taiwan scenario. Taipei replied thanks but no thanks.

[Bigfella]

That thought never occurred to me, given the nationalistic tenor of Filipino politics with respect to the presence of American bases on their soil. I doubt it was the deciding factor, although it's certainly possible that local politicians took money from Chinese government sources to eject Uncle Sam. Since they wanted US troops out anyway, why not get paid as well?

Given the way the Philippines works it seems most likely that as a nation without any worthwhile combat aircraft or a navy worth a damn they got rid of the one nation actually prepared to defend them out of a sense of national pride. Taking money from China would at least be a logical motive. Makes it less likely.

[Bigfella]

the question is, WHAT allied forces? it'll be a US show and nothing else.

Depends what day of the week it is. For 7 days each fortnight we are a committed US ally who will help out our 'good friend' no matter how bad an idea it is, on the other 7 days we are a regional Asian power that doesn't need to make any more enemies. We alternate days & don't tell any anyone which day we are on, so its a roll of the dice really.

[Mithridates]

Given the way the Philippines works it seems most likely that as a nation without any worthwhile combat aircraft or a navy worth a damn they got rid of the one nation actually prepared to defend them out of a sense of national pride. Taking money from China would at least be a logical motive. Makes it less likely.

I looked for the graphic where the smiley face is face down with one hand pounding the table. Couldn't find it, so these will have to do...