Ukraine Invasion: Part 29

[MagicFox]

Welcome all, part 29

There are few similarities between Taiwan and Ukraine.
Taiwan isn't recognised as a country#

No, it isn't, because China has been more successful than Russia has in preventing it from being recognised. Russia, as Putin has frequently stated "made the mistake" of giving Ukraine recognition as a country - and it is now attempting to "undo" that mistake. But, according to Putin, it was never a real country.

Taiwan operates as much as an independent country as Ukraine or any other in terms of functionality. It has all of the trappings of an independent country. It is just that China has succeeded in bullying other countries to withhold recognition (look at what they did to Lithuania). But if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, there is a lot to be said that it is a duck and telling truth to power says it is a duck.

No land border with friendly countries, indeed, Japan aside, no nearby friendly countries or rather countries that would take the US side.

Well it doesn't exactly have a land border to anywhere, China included. Not sure Australia has a land border with friendly countries either. Interesting you think that its closest neighbour other than China, namely the Philippines, would take China's side. Vietnam I understand, it was invaded by China, so what do you expect. The next closest beyond Japan is surely South Korea. Little bit further away, I don't know what Indonesia's position would be. Nor Malaysia's if you want to get that far. Thailand? Cambodia one assume would be in the China camp. Laos probably. Singapore? Papua New Guinea? Then Australia of course, although that is quite far.

Size.
ALL of Taiwan could be attacked and destroyed before the US even got a plane in the air.

That is what everybody said about Ukraine. And yet here we are. That was what I thought was particularly interesting about the Times article. 14 beaches on which an amphibious landing could be made, and a strait that only has two windows of opportunity a year because of how treacherous it is really doesn't sound easy. Yes they could release a nuclear bomb on it and blow it to smithereens - but if they actually want to "reunite" it with China, rather than having it be somewhere uninhabitable for the next 50 years, they have to take it at least somewhat intact. Most people don't seem to think that the nuclear bomb is what they are planning as that would defeat Xi's purpose. Again the Times article suggested that Xi needs an army of around 2 million to take it. I am sure China has that, but even for China, that is a lot. Russia has only thrown about 200,000 at Ukraine I believe.

And just like with Russia, with that kind of mobilisation, the US would know well in advance. You can't move that number of troops secretly anymore if you ever could.

Chinese military is a completely different one to Russia.

Agreed - although I believe there has been some concern in China about how badly the Russian military has performed, as they were using a lot of the same stuff. I am absolutely sure the China will learn from Russia's lack of performance and improve - but that also takes time. One of the reason people seem to think the invasion route has become much less likely. China's military also hasn't seen action since Vietnam. If Russia had been able to waltz into Ukraine, Taiwan was likely to follow shortly after. That, it seems to me, was what "friendship without limits" was all about.

China can blockade Taiwan if they wish and starve the world of its exports which are vital in our hi tech industries and next gen computing.

Possibly. But if it was so easy to do so, why haven't they yet? I don't know how the chips get in and out of Taiwan. Doesn't sound like it is via sea, if it is so difficult to cross except in March and October. Is it by air? Are they going to shoot down the American (and other) planes which presumably transport this stuff? That is presumably what a blockade actually means in this context.

Whether they will take further action or not, will not depend on the US military response but on the economic and diplomatic cost an invasion would bring to Chinas doorstep..

But in Ukraine, the economic and diplomatic cost to Russia has unquestionably been much higher because of the US military response (think HIMARs). Given that any invasion would clearly involve a) a lot of air attacks and b) an amphibious landing, US military equipment would surely help Taiwan's defence, a lot. And I really find it difficult to believe that China is worried about the response in the Philippines, or Japan, or Australia or Thailand or India. The economic and diplomatic cost is by and large about a) their large markets in the US and Europe and b) how much damage a determined Taiwan could do to their army with the help of US weapons and how that would look at home (boys coming home in boxes, the Chinese army not looking so invincible). That does seem to me to be one difference between Russia and China. I think China would care much more about being seen by the rest of the world to be "held off" by a tiny number of determined fighters than Russia is. I might be wrong, but Russia has lost a lot of face as a military power from their "special operation", and that was clear already by the time they gave up on Kyiv. i wonder whether China would have found an excuse to go home at that point so long as everybody agreed to pretend it never happened (while they invested even more in their military to make sure it didn't happen next time).

That is why I think encouraging China to think it is going to be easy is the most dangerous thing the world can do, as it makes it more likely they will try. Except that they are likely smart enough to work out for themselves that Taiwan will fight like Ukraine, and that is not good news for them. It seems to me that the biggest players here, oddly enough, are the Ukrainians. Which is why this discussion actually does belong on this thread, because both sides see the situation in Ukraine as the prototype. The trial run by proxy if you will.

@prettybird thanks for linking to this article.

One of the authors of the article Wayne Jordash is a QC specialising in international human rights and humanitarian law. Might explain the flowery language.

These are excerpts to give the gist. If you have time, I think it is worth reading the middle section of the article for a point-by-point explanation of how AI did not consider the available facts.

What is wrong with Amnesty International’s Conclusions that "Ukrainian fighting tactics endanger civilians"
...
But human rights organisations, especially those with the international reach of Amnesty International (AI), have a correlative obligation to ensure that trenchant allegations alleging failures are based upon a comprehensive fact-finding exercise, a proper methodological approach and conclusions that take into account the realities of a beleaguered government’s attempt to defend its population from systematic war crimes, a persecutory campaign encompassing crimes against humanity and possibly genocide.

By no stretch of the imagination does yesterday’s press-release by AI meet that solemn obligation nor appear to serve any useful protective function. To the contrary, as Russian propogandists now celebrate and add another excuse for targeting civilians to their ever-growing list, allegations such as these may well lead to less protection, not more.
...
AI’s Press-Release is critical of the Ukrainian Armed Forces and accuses them of serious violations of IHL, e.g., "Ukraine’s tactics have violated international humanitarian law as they’ve turned civilian objects into military targets", "[Ukrainian military failed] to take feasible precautions to protect civilians", "[t]he Ukrainian military has also routinely set up bases in schools in towns and villages in Donbas and in the Mykolaiv area".

The problem of course is not the making of these allegations, which need to be made – and made clearly – if the evidence establishes them to be true. That is the role of AI, often played to great effect. But in this instance, AI’s methodology is not only unclear, but considers little to none of the military or humanitarian context essential to any reasoned view of what was (or was not) necessary in the prevailing military context. In these circumstances, regrettably, AI conclusions drift into anecdote and speculation dressed up as incontrovertible facts and violations of IHL.
...
In sum, AI’s conclusions are short on facts and analysis and long on intemperate accusation. AI appears not to have concerned itself with the most salient questions. If it had, the authors of the Press-Release would, at a minimum, have sought to reconstruct the military activity at the time and focused upon any efforts made by the Ukrainian military active at the time to defend the locations and the beleaguered civilian population.

At the very least, they would have spoken to the Ukrainian MOD and any of the highly professional local humanitarian organisations working on the ground at the time. Who knows, if AI had done so, it might have found that the Ukrainian forces took all feasible measures to protect its population against the effects of hostilities while defending the population and territory against the crimes of the Russian forces. A quieter, more sober conclusion but perhaps a fairer one.

@AndreaC74

The US wont do anything, China isn't Russia and Taiwan is an island next to some pretty powerful military.
A few mlaws wont hold them back.

Russia was thought to have a powerful military until Feb, and Chinese Forces would be faced with the task of carrying out an opposed beach landing against forces equipped with modern western kit...

It wouldn't be a walkover.

China wants to steal and sell the semi-conductors for its own benefit, or to prevent them from being made at all so that the West suffers for the lack of them and China can start to sell more of its own, would be my cynical take on that.

As for "Taiwan is not a recognised country" -- horsefeathers and flim-flam. That does not mean the Beijing government is entitled to invade it, subjugate its people, kill or "disappear" into concentration camps any it decides are not politically acceptable (that would be all of them, then), and destroy their way of life and government. Berkshire isn't a recognised country either, and they are not entitled to grab Berkshire.

I look at the Uyghur in Xinjiang and at Chinese behaviour there, and shudder at any view that says Beijing is fit to be in charge of a mentally deficient hamster, let alone any human females.

I am reading the posts on the parallels between Ukraine and Taiwan with interest.

There are going to be criticisms of the US in Asia for stirring up a hornet's nest on their doorstep. China is generally regarded more benignly there than in the US or UK. That said, I do agree with Wannago's statement below. Nancy Pelosi is sending a strong message to China before it is too late. The West failed to do so to Russia in Ukraine and Ukraine and Europe are now paying the price. The message is that Taiwan just has to hold off a military invasion from China long enough for US to step in to defend Taiwan's 'democracy'. Why else is China going ape if they never intended to invade in the first place.

That is why I think encouraging China to think it is going to be easy is the most dangerous thing the world can do, as it makes it more likely they will try. Except that they are likely smart enough to work out for themselves that Taiwan will fight like Ukraine, and that is not good news for them. It seems to me that the biggest players here, oddly enough, are the Ukrainians. Which is why this discussion actually does belong on this thread, because both sides see the situation in Ukraine as the prototype. The trial run by proxy if you will.

Missing the point @Ijsbear @notimagain

Taiwan is little to do with us, just as we didn't do anything about Tibet, in fact just the opposite....trade and cultural exchange boomed in the following years...

We are not the worlds Police Force and unless we want to destroy the world, we just cannot go around defending people from oppressive regimes.

Taiwan not being recognised as a country, is of course very important.

I take it your not into attacking Israel over its treatment of the Palestinians or is that "different" ?
Or maybe re enter Afghanistan? invade Iran? Syria? Bomb Saudi over its backing of the war in Yemen?

If anyone thinks intervening in Taiwan would secure our supplies of hi end chips, they are living in another universe, war in that region would destroy the world economy.... China also knows this, as i think do the Biden administration.

So, the way to deal with China, is to stop all this off shoring & giving away all our technology to them, we shoul;d never have relied on them in the first place, even now UK sold off our remaining chip factory to them... beyond stupid.

We also need China to realise that maintaining the status quo is in their best economic and diplomatic interests.

I look at the Uyghur in Xinjiang and at Chinese behaviour there, and shudder at any view that says Beijing is fit to be in charge of a mentally deficient hamster, let alone any human females

China is an evil and oppressive regime, always has been, which is why we should never have courted them in the first place.

They have been killing and imprisoning their peoples for decades.

Personally, i avoid as far as possible, buying anything made there or using any Chinese companies.

Wonder how many people on here, in favour of tough action against China, are replying on a Lenovo or a device made in China?

imho they are far worse for our security and safety than Russia ever is.

Not missing the point one tiny bit.

You're deliberately ignoring the point that Taiwans semiconductors are very important to the West and we do do want to be held to ransom by a highly hostile China.

I'd agree selling crucial chip making facilities to China was beyond stupid.

I'm not quite sure how you think the West can hold a very powerful land with one hell of a chip on its shoulder about the West, back if it wants to disturb the status quo. Which it does.

Whataboutism is not persuasive.

We do not*, sigh, want to be held to ransom by a hostile power.

@AndreaC74

Missing the point

I wasn't missing the point at all...my reply was strictly limited to your comment that:

"China isn't Russia and Taiwan is an island next to some pretty powerful military.
A few mlaws wont hold them back."

I don't know what specific point you may be replying too, if you were, i missed that.

Chinese defence budget dwarfs the Russians and it has a hi tech manufacturing sector, which it uses extensively in its military.

As i said, we try and make China see its in its best interests to work with the West, a huge export market for its economy & china needs economic growth, perhaps more than any other country.. or it implodes, as it has done many times before.

China wants Taiwan in one piece, it needs its manufacturing capabilities, maybe even more than we do, so we have, pardon the pun, a great bargaining chip.

If we cannot hold back China by economic means, how do you expect to do so militarily?
As one expert said "if the US didn't want a war with Russia, it sure as hell doesn't want one with China"

which is also why Pelosi was advised by the administration, not to go.

The reverse is also true. I don't think China relishes the prospect of a war with the USA and its allies, either. It won't invade Taiwan unless:

a) it can do so quickly and
b) with acceptable losses.

The first is to avoid a prolonged conflict which will turn into a manufacturing arms race. China might win that one - especially if it has Taiwan's chips - but it's not a foregone conclusion. Nor can they rely on the support of their neighbours; India, Japan, Indonesia and Australia will all be manoeuvring for their own interests.

The second point is that China does have a surplus of younger, unmarried men (something like 24 million?), but we are talking about the 'child emperors' of entire families who are supposed to take care of the parents in their old age. Too many losses will cause public unrest at a time when that country is already worried about it's birthrate.

Military base has been hit in Crimea. 200km from front line. Everyone scratching heads as no one announced supplying long range missiles.

The Russian defence ministry is apparently claiming the blasts were caused by detonated aviation ammunition, or at least so Russian state media RIA Novosti has reported. So it might be an own goal.

Yes, probably sabotage.

@AndreaC74 The newport chip factory makes power semiconductors - nothing to like the logic chips made in Taiwan

Sure but does that mean its ok to sell to the Chinese?

How much of the arms supplied do you think we actually hear about? It’s more useful to Ukraine if the Russians don’t know about it after all.

If it was a missile strike, there will probably be enough wreckage to identify the missile used. My guess would be sabotage or accident. Safety doesn't seem to be much of a priority for the Russians. They set off ammo being unloaded from a train last week.

Apparently sabotage of that magnitude is hard in an occupied zone.

I love that Ukrainian officials keep their sense of humour

twitter.com/iaponomarenko/status/1557035297019510786?s=21&t=vXdZL0ZcBpUod-frC7K1wA

LoveLarry · Today 17:13
I love that Ukrainian officials keep their sense of humour

twitter.com/iaponomarenko/status/1557035297019510786?s=21&t=vXdZL0ZcBpUod-frC7K1wA

Very dry humour about the dna or business card that may be found by the Russians. What did it mean about the hygienic cotton clothing? I didn’t get the joke there.

If you look at the reply tweets it's explained. The words for clap and cotton are pronounced the same in Russian, and Russians have been using clap as a euphemism for an explosion.

Anybody's guess..

Some sources are pointing out the explosion site is actually more like 150km from the front which might just put it in range of some Tochka variants..

OTOH as we know the Russians are quite capable of blowing themselves up.

OTOH as we know the Russians are quite capable of blowing themselves up.

It's a bit shocking that they don't have an ordnance MOS. In the US Army, a 16 week course is required for the specialty qualification. And the Russians still pack everything into wooden crates that have to be lifted and moved by hand, creating further opportunities for goodwill gestures. Thank god the UAF doesn't have to fight a modern army.