PREVENTING NUCLEAR WAR BETWEEN CHINA AND THE U.S. OVER TAIWAN
  • Welcome
  • E-Books
    • Strait Talk >
      • Chapter 1: Historical, Cultural, Legal, and Geographical Factors
      • Chapter 2: The Political Factor
      • Chapter 3: The Economic Factor
      • Chapter 4: The Military Factor
      • Chapter 5: The Issues
      • Chapter 6: The Negotiations
      • Chapter 7: Conclusions
      • Appendices
      • Images
    • An Analysis of China's National Interests
    • One China, Five Interpretations
  • Blogs
  • Cross-Strait Info
    • Cross-Strait Timeline >
      • 2018-2019
      • 2016-2017
      • 2000-2015
      • 1980-1999
      • 1950-1979
      • 1911-1949
      • pre 1911
    • Official Documents >
      • Official Documents Library
      • 中国人民共和国​
      • 中華民國 (台湾)
    • Major Actors >
      • PRC
      • ROC
      • US
      • Japan
    • Military Balance
    • Political Warfare
    • Key Issues >
      • 1992 Consensus
      • Anti-Secession Law
      • One China
      • 'One Country, Two Systems'
      • Status Quo
      • Taiwan Independence
      • Taiwan Strait Crises
      • U.S. Arms Sales
      • Use of Force
    • Cooperation >
      • ROC
      • PRC
      • Signed Agreements
      • Cross-Strait Links
      • Peace Proposal
      • Military Talks
    • Glossary
    • Additional Resources on Cross-Strait Relations >
      • Books
      • Reports, Articles & Interviews
      • Multimedia
  • Photos
    • A Photographic Journey Through Old China

THE MILITARY BALANCE: CHINA, TAIWAN, US, & JAPAN

As we point out in Chapter 4 of our book Strait Talk, when considering threats China is more concerned with political warfare and the “intent” of other nations than with the “capability.”  Although there is little chance that China will use force against Taiwan to resolve issues, Japan in the East China Sea dispute, or parties to the South China Sea  dispute, it is still useful to understand capabilities.  As China, the U.S., Japan,  and Taiwan develop and acquire new military capabilities these efforts are more often than not part of a political warfare strategy especially for China and, to a lesser extent now than before, Taiwan.  This section of the EAPASI website will post links to reliable sources containing some capabilities discussions of the four nations.

Background on the Military Balance

Picture
​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. 
Picture
Source: Wikipedia

Implications for the Cross-Strait Relationship

Picture
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

Picture

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.

Comparison Results of Military Strengths

  • ​Military power comparison results for China vs. Taiwan.
​​​
  • Military power comparison results for China vs. United States.
​​
  • ​Military power comparison results for China vs. Japan.

Military Strength Individual Nation

2017 China Military Strength
  • Current military capabilities and available firepower for the nation of China.
​​
2017 Taiwan Military Strength
  • Current military capabilities and available firepower for the nation of Taiwan.
​​
2017 United States Military Strength
  • Current military capabilities and available firepower for the nation of United States.
​​
​​2017 Japan Military Strength
  • Current military capabilities and available firepower for the nation of Japan.

Additional Resources on the East Asia Military Balance

Picture
​

U.S. Nuclear Forces

  • Union of Concerned Scientists: The U.S. Nuclear Arsenal (Interactive Tool) 

  • Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists: ​United States nuclear forces (2018)
 
  • Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists: The Nuclear Posture Review and the US nuclear arsenal (2018)
 
  • CRS Report: U.S. Strategic Nuclear Forces: Background, Developments, and Issues (2018)
​
  • Council on Foreign Relations: U.S. Nuclear Weapons Modernization (2018)

  • Arms Control Association: U.S. Nuclear Modernization Programs (2018)
 
  • Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists: United States nuclear forces (2017)

U.S. Policy, Strategy, and Capabilities

  • Department of Defense: U.S. Nuclear Posture Review (2018)
​
  • The Federation of American Scientists: Chinese Nuclear Forces and U.S. Nuclear War Planning (2006)

PRC Nuclear Forces

  • SIPRI: Trends in World Nuclear Forces (July 2017)
​
  • RAND Corporation: China's Evolving Nuclear Deterrent Major Drivers and Issues for the United States (2017)
​
  • RAND Corporation: China's Evolving Approach to "Integrated Strategic Deterrence (2016)
​​​
  • Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists: Chinese nuclear forces (2016)
​
  • Union of Concerned Scientists: China's Military Calls for Putting Its Nuclear Forces on Alert   (January 2016)

  • Union of Concerned Scientists: China’s Nuclear Weapons Strategy (March 2015)

PRC Military Strategy

  • PRC Academy of Military Science: The Science of Military Strategy (2013)

PRC Amphibious Capability

Coming soon.

PRC Air Capability

  • Air Power (2016)
About us


Policies
Search
Copyright © 2018 The East Asia Peace & Security Initiative. All Rights Reserved. 
  • Welcome
  • E-Books
    • Strait Talk >
      • Chapter 1: Historical, Cultural, Legal, and Geographical Factors
      • Chapter 2: The Political Factor
      • Chapter 3: The Economic Factor
      • Chapter 4: The Military Factor
      • Chapter 5: The Issues
      • Chapter 6: The Negotiations
      • Chapter 7: Conclusions
      • Appendices
      • Images
    • An Analysis of China's National Interests
    • One China, Five Interpretations
  • Blogs
  • Cross-Strait Info
    • Cross-Strait Timeline >
      • 2018-2019
      • 2016-2017
      • 2000-2015
      • 1980-1999
      • 1950-1979
      • 1911-1949
      • pre 1911
    • Official Documents >
      • Official Documents Library
      • 中国人民共和国​
      • 中華民國 (台湾)
    • Major Actors >
      • PRC
      • ROC
      • US
      • Japan
    • Military Balance
    • Political Warfare
    • Key Issues >
      • 1992 Consensus
      • Anti-Secession Law
      • One China
      • 'One Country, Two Systems'
      • Status Quo
      • Taiwan Independence
      • Taiwan Strait Crises
      • U.S. Arms Sales
      • Use of Force
    • Cooperation >
      • ROC
      • PRC
      • Signed Agreements
      • Cross-Strait Links
      • Peace Proposal
      • Military Talks
    • Glossary
    • Additional Resources on Cross-Strait Relations >
      • Books
      • Reports, Articles & Interviews
      • Multimedia
  • Photos
    • A Photographic Journey Through Old China