Background on the Military Balance

EAPASI research shows that three military balances are relevant in any Cross-Strait analysis: (1) China v. Taiwan, (2) China v. U.S. and (3) China v. U.S and Taiwan; and possibly (4) China v. U.S., Taiwan, and Japan. Historically nations do not go to war unless they believe they can win in a kinetic conflict. If they believe they cannot win easily in an all-out war they resort to political and economic warfare short of military fighting until they have the power to win.

Most sources of military strength would agree that in none of the cases mentioned above is there a balance. China could clearly win a war with Taiwan without U.S. participation. The U.S., now, could clearly win a war with China and a combination of the U.S. and Taiwan would be the strongest. It is also clear that Taiwan could inflict much damage on Chinese cities just across the Strait. China’s recent military improvements make any war more destructive, but it cannot win if the U.S. enters the battle. As a result, all sides are content to compete in the political and economic arenas.

Nonetheless, we must still monitor real balances of equipment, weapons and strategies. We have to continue to watch the changes when new phenomena, such as cyberwar, enter the picture. If a combination of new weapons systems makes China believe they could easily win, it could change their calculus. If they believe the U.S. would not come to Taiwan’s aid, even though U.S. law requires participation, they could more easily resort to the use of force.

Part of the analysis to determine the likelihood of actual warfare is the strength of the forces for offense and defense. While an imbalance of numbers does not always win a war, it does often enhance bargaining ability. At some point the quantities of space-based systems, submarine launched ballistic missiles, land based intercontinental ballistic missiles, etc., and just the size of armies, air forces or navies has to be considered. The geography also has to be factored in any military plans.

Part of the decision to go to war also depends on internal politics. Some have observed that when President Xi Jinping consolidates and strengthens his power he is more likely to use force against Taiwan. Others have observed that if politics within Taiwan lead to actions that might be construed by the leaders in China to be a declaration of independence, it could lead to the use of force. China might even be willing to stand up to the U.S. if they believe they could deter the U.S. from entering the conflict by convincing U.S. leaders, for example, that they could sink any aircraft carrier that comes too close or they could deliver a nuclear ICBM onto U.S. territory. As we point out in Chapter 4 of our e-book titled Strait Talk: An In-depth Analysis China, Taiwan, US Relations, it could conceivable begin with a strategy that begins with a naval blockade coupled with a major political warfare effort. China has made it clear in all their open strategy documents that they intend to use “extra-military” means to accomplish their mission of unification with Taiwan. It is possible to believe China’s statements if we consider that China had the military capability to recover Hong Kong for over 30 years and did not use it. They have also had the military capability to recover parts of Taiwan (Jinmen and Mazu) for nearly 60 years and did not do it.

Source: Wikipedia

Implications for the Cross-Strait Relationship

The decision of whether or not to introduce the use of force to resolve the China Taiwan issue is complex at best. While it is highly unlikely, it is possible. If it were to occur it would be the time when two mature nuclear powers confront each other in conflict.

Information on the East Asia Military Balance

Institute for International Strategic Studies (IISS)

One of the best sources for up to date open and reliable information on the actual military balances between these countries can be found on the Institute for International Strategic Studies (IISS) website and called The Military Balance. It has been perhaps the best reporter of the capabilities and to some extent, the intent, of each of the four powers.

The Military Balance by Year

The Military Balance 2018

The Military Balance 2017

Global Firepower

Global Firepower allows us to compare basic numbers capabilities. Here we provide links to our relevant cases in which we use a comparison, China-Taiwan, China-US, as well as China-Japan. We also provide links to the military strength and capabilities of each country.