More like the Battle of the Somme in 1916. Masses of infantry flung against Taiwan's defenses, and backed by massive artillery and missile bombardment. As we can see with the Russian Army in Ukraine, authoritarian regimes seem happy to fight this way.
So just to be clear do you view this as an actual realistic strategy because it looks absurd to me. I'm happy to explain why but I want to be sure this isn't some kind of weird satire before I spend the time.
It doesn't matter whether you or I think a mass infantry invasion of Taiwan is absurd. It's what Chinese leaders think, and they have their own calculus about what makes sense. If China lost hundreds of thousands of soldiers -- but could conquer Taiwan -- Xi would consider that a bargain.
Sure but this seems like a totally unworkable strategy even if you don't care how many of your people die. To start with the most obvious objection: do you have navy crews for all of these conscripted fishing boats or are you expecting random fishermen to be not only willing to deliver troops through mined and droned waters to a defended beach head in a vessel that can probably be disabled by a single hit from a hand mortar or machine gun burst but able to coordinate an amphibious landing on a beachheas that is apparently going to be full of tens of thousands of fishing boats piloted by terrified amateurs and the wreckage of half the boats from the previous wave?
The interesting thing about this scenario is it works similar to the Infiltration tactics Russia has been using against Ukraine. For China, the equivalent is having a constant stream of small boats putting soldiers ashore in disbursed and spread out landing spots - basically any random spot on shore they aren't getting shot from. The troops would have to advance forward on their own without support.
It has the potential of being very disruptive as Chinese soldiers could be almost anywhere on the island, and cause a great deal of havoc. I'm not sure that tactics could win an attritional war though, as the number of small boats sunk/destroyed would go up every day and the flow of new troops would drop very quickly.
Based on experience in Ukraine, there should be some way to model this out.
The idea may be that swarms of Chinese infantry (cannon fodder) will storm Taiwan's beaches at enough points to overwhelm any Taiwanese counterattack. They'll advance inland to secure a beachhead, that allows bigger ships to bring in armor and artillery.
If China's plan is to invade with masses of infantry carried by fleets of fishing boats, than Taiwan's best strategy is to lots of cheap munitions, especially drones and mines. Instead, Taiwan is buying expensive F-16 fighters and M1 Abrams tanks. These are useful in their own way, but they're also vulnerable to Chinese aircraft, missile and drones.
The recent exercise whereby hundreds of fishing vessels were spontaneously ordered into a geographic box is an example of the control that the PLAN has over its civilian and commercial fleets and its ability to weaponize said fleet for geopolitical and military objectives.
This article is doing some major shenanigans with its force numbers comparing the PLA's 2 million regulars to the ROC's 170k regulars when China has long militarized frontiers with India, Russia, Vietnam and Central Asia that it's not going to denude of troops plus internal security roles whereas Taiwan is not only going to have all it's regulars in the field it also has the better part of a million reservists. Besides which the only chinese ground troops that matter are the ones you manage to get across the water whereas Taiwan has its troops already on the island.
I've no doubt that the PLA have gamed this out carefully, but I remain confused.
You think armour is not survivable because of ATGMs but somehow think that small motor vessels are not vulnerable to ATGMs? Why would anyone bother using expensive sea skimmers when a man-portable missile can reach out several kilometers over open water.
The problem isn't tanks, but how to transport them to Taiwan for an amphibious assault. Heavy armored vehicles require special landing craft. China can land masses of infantry using commercial fishing vessels. Those fishing vessels will take heavy losses, but China can mobilize thousands of fishing boats.
I’m not sure you understood their point. Fishing vessels don’t need expensive missiles to be destroyed.
I can see why the Chinese concluded that heavy armour wasn’t suitable, but it doesn’t follow that a large fleet of poorly trained, unarmoured boats would do well, especially if the fortifications on the shore did have heavy guns, and plenty of warning.
Also it’s a myth that the fishing vessels saved the British army in Dunkirk- most were brought back on navy vessels.
China seems to view a Taiwan war as being an infantry + artillery/drone/missile fight over terrain that's not tank-friendly. If China is also willing to accept heavy losses, then using a huge fleet of commercial boats to swarm the beaches with masses of infantry is one approach.
Whether it's a good idea -- or whether any Western army would attempt this -- is another matter.
Feasibility and plausibility do not necessarily intersect.
Switching to a light-infantry dominated approach does not reduce the need for engineering and other supply forces. Many of these need to be in the same first wave swarm to assure success. These resources are not available in the unlimited numbers you ascribe to infantry.
Willingness to lose small craft and infantry is one thing, tolerance for losses in essential much higher value specialists is something entirely different.
This debate seems oblivious to the military significance of China’s near weekly launches of satellites and anti-satellite weapons - giving her pin-point powers of surveillance and targeting - to not at least consider that any attack on Taiwan would be waged from space.
I don’t think anyone will ever use tanks against a peer enemy ever again. Russia/Ukraine have showed us that in the age of drones it’s an unconscionable waste.
Tanks are still useful. They offer firepower, protection, and the mobility to move that firepower and armor plate to where it's needed. If the weather is bad and drones can't fly, it's nice to have a tank.
China isn't planning to invade Taiwan without using tanks. But tanks will just be support weapons. The foot soldiers will be the doing most of the work.
What is the exact business plan for invading Taiwan?
How will it make money? Invasions are expensive, as is control.
There’s no oil or minerals, I think? How do you get a guy to run a chip fab with a gun to his head? The bad-chip count is bound to go up and lose customers.
Wow, pride is indeed heavy baggage. I think even a six-week shutdown of those chip fabs could throw major economies into recession - including China’s…
This reads more like a plan for killing off china’s excess yoing men than conquering Taiwan.
Easiest way to miss that this is a modernized and hyper-mechanized version of a human wave attack.
More like the Battle of the Somme in 1916. Masses of infantry flung against Taiwan's defenses, and backed by massive artillery and missile bombardment. As we can see with the Russian Army in Ukraine, authoritarian regimes seem happy to fight this way.
But with drones everywhere and close air support…I doubt the Chinese can make it work, either.
China's declining birthrate means it doesn't have "excess young men” to invade Taiwan.
So just to be clear do you view this as an actual realistic strategy because it looks absurd to me. I'm happy to explain why but I want to be sure this isn't some kind of weird satire before I spend the time.
It doesn't matter whether you or I think a mass infantry invasion of Taiwan is absurd. It's what Chinese leaders think, and they have their own calculus about what makes sense. If China lost hundreds of thousands of soldiers -- but could conquer Taiwan -- Xi would consider that a bargain.
Sure but this seems like a totally unworkable strategy even if you don't care how many of your people die. To start with the most obvious objection: do you have navy crews for all of these conscripted fishing boats or are you expecting random fishermen to be not only willing to deliver troops through mined and droned waters to a defended beach head in a vessel that can probably be disabled by a single hit from a hand mortar or machine gun burst but able to coordinate an amphibious landing on a beachheas that is apparently going to be full of tens of thousands of fishing boats piloted by terrified amateurs and the wreckage of half the boats from the previous wave?
Why would Chinese leaders think this?
That's kind of my point.
The interesting thing about this scenario is it works similar to the Infiltration tactics Russia has been using against Ukraine. For China, the equivalent is having a constant stream of small boats putting soldiers ashore in disbursed and spread out landing spots - basically any random spot on shore they aren't getting shot from. The troops would have to advance forward on their own without support.
It has the potential of being very disruptive as Chinese soldiers could be almost anywhere on the island, and cause a great deal of havoc. I'm not sure that tactics could win an attritional war though, as the number of small boats sunk/destroyed would go up every day and the flow of new troops would drop very quickly.
Based on experience in Ukraine, there should be some way to model this out.
The idea may be that swarms of Chinese infantry (cannon fodder) will storm Taiwan's beaches at enough points to overwhelm any Taiwanese counterattack. They'll advance inland to secure a beachhead, that allows bigger ships to bring in armor and artillery.
If China's plan is to invade with masses of infantry carried by fleets of fishing boats, than Taiwan's best strategy is to lots of cheap munitions, especially drones and mines. Instead, Taiwan is buying expensive F-16 fighters and M1 Abrams tanks. These are useful in their own way, but they're also vulnerable to Chinese aircraft, missile and drones.
It will be drone swarms with Ai auto targets. Russia and Ukraine are using it in huge scale . But for china scale would be enormous.
The recent exercise whereby hundreds of fishing vessels were spontaneously ordered into a geographic box is an example of the control that the PLAN has over its civilian and commercial fleets and its ability to weaponize said fleet for geopolitical and military objectives.
Really great piece
This article is doing some major shenanigans with its force numbers comparing the PLA's 2 million regulars to the ROC's 170k regulars when China has long militarized frontiers with India, Russia, Vietnam and Central Asia that it's not going to denude of troops plus internal security roles whereas Taiwan is not only going to have all it's regulars in the field it also has the better part of a million reservists. Besides which the only chinese ground troops that matter are the ones you manage to get across the water whereas Taiwan has its troops already on the island.
I've no doubt that the PLA have gamed this out carefully, but I remain confused.
You think armour is not survivable because of ATGMs but somehow think that small motor vessels are not vulnerable to ATGMs? Why would anyone bother using expensive sea skimmers when a man-portable missile can reach out several kilometers over open water.
The problem isn't tanks, but how to transport them to Taiwan for an amphibious assault. Heavy armored vehicles require special landing craft. China can land masses of infantry using commercial fishing vessels. Those fishing vessels will take heavy losses, but China can mobilize thousands of fishing boats.
I’m not sure you understood their point. Fishing vessels don’t need expensive missiles to be destroyed.
I can see why the Chinese concluded that heavy armour wasn’t suitable, but it doesn’t follow that a large fleet of poorly trained, unarmoured boats would do well, especially if the fortifications on the shore did have heavy guns, and plenty of warning.
Also it’s a myth that the fishing vessels saved the British army in Dunkirk- most were brought back on navy vessels.
China seems to view a Taiwan war as being an infantry + artillery/drone/missile fight over terrain that's not tank-friendly. If China is also willing to accept heavy losses, then using a huge fleet of commercial boats to swarm the beaches with masses of infantry is one approach.
Whether it's a good idea -- or whether any Western army would attempt this -- is another matter.
Feasibility and plausibility do not necessarily intersect.
Switching to a light-infantry dominated approach does not reduce the need for engineering and other supply forces. Many of these need to be in the same first wave swarm to assure success. These resources are not available in the unlimited numbers you ascribe to infantry.
Willingness to lose small craft and infantry is one thing, tolerance for losses in essential much higher value specialists is something entirely different.
This debate seems oblivious to the military significance of China’s near weekly launches of satellites and anti-satellite weapons - giving her pin-point powers of surveillance and targeting - to not at least consider that any attack on Taiwan would be waged from space.
I don’t think anyone will ever use tanks against a peer enemy ever again. Russia/Ukraine have showed us that in the age of drones it’s an unconscionable waste.
Tanks are still useful. They offer firepower, protection, and the mobility to move that firepower and armor plate to where it's needed. If the weather is bad and drones can't fly, it's nice to have a tank.
China isn't planning to invade Taiwan without using tanks. But tanks will just be support weapons. The foot soldiers will be the doing most of the work.
Right. The Chinese now value pride and nationalism over money. Wake me up when this fantasy is over.
What is the exact business plan for invading Taiwan?
How will it make money? Invasions are expensive, as is control.
There’s no oil or minerals, I think? How do you get a guy to run a chip fab with a gun to his head? The bad-chip count is bound to go up and lose customers.
There were experts before 1914 who said that European economies were so interdependent that a general war couldn't happen. Then came World War I.
For Xi, it's not about money. It's a matter of national pride -- as Xi sees it -- and also of demonstrating Xi's power and legacy.
Wow, pride is indeed heavy baggage. I think even a six-week shutdown of those chip fabs could throw major economies into recession - including China’s…