Mainland China blockading then invading independent Taiwan could involve economic sanctions, missiles, aircraft, cross-Taiwan Strait amphibious landings, sea-mines, UAVs, UUVs, cyber attacks and many other aggressive China/PRC strategies-tactics. (Photos and artwork courtesy The Sun UK newspaper, June 16, 2022).
---
A Donor who rightly sees mainland China's ongoing military threat to independent Taiwan as a litmus test on what China may do elsewhere in the region, has requested a discussion. This is along the following lines in bolded red:
A major crisis scenario for the AUKUS is China imposing a blockade on Taiwan, and whatever follows.
Four questions:
1. What are likely Chinese preparations for such a situation?
Pete's response: Since 1949 mainland China has discussed and prepared for a blockade and subsequent takeover of Taiwan. China has planned economic sanctions and built warships, submarines, UAVs, UUVs, sea-mines, aircraft and conventional warhead missile forces to blockade and/or invade Taiwan.
More recently China has developed cyber warfare, fixed undersea sensors, smart-mobile-sea-mines, satellites and nuclear armed medium range missile capabilities to isolate, hit Taiwan and to block or destroy genuinely democratic taskforces (like those of the US) who attempt to come to the aid of Taiwan.
2. What should AUKUS (and other "friendlies") preparations be?
Pete's response: Continue to advise Taiwan to stockpile fuel, food, ammunition, buy useful defensive weapons (including anti-tank, anti-air and anti-ship missiles) other staples, and lay smart sea-mines, to resist mainland Chinese aggression until relief forces and actions can come to the aid of Taiwan. This builds on the lessons of stockpiling and weapons acquisition undertaken by Ukraine.
3. What should AUKUS do when such an event occurs?
Pete's response: The US has moved from strategic ambiguity in defending Taiwan to a more active defence policy under President Biden. Medium sized powers Australia, Japan, South Korea and Singapore very much rely on the lead of military superpower, the US. The US should lead the way in countering conventional and nuclear armed military superpower China. This could be in terms of a close-in counter blockade against China (eg. widespread smart-sea-mine laying of Chinese commercial ports and naval bases).
The US should lead a Western worldwide political and economic sanction response against China in similar terms to the response to Russia's invasion of Ukraine.
As with Ukraine direct fighting between AUKUS, ANZUS, and the QUAD against China should be avoided as direct fighting would mean WW3, which could escalate from conventional to nuclear war.
4. What role (if any) for Australian submarines or Australian navy in general?
Pete's response: An Australian conventional submarine would use up all its fuel transitting to-from Fleet Base West (Australia) to Taiwan or China leaving no time for operations there. If future Australians SSNs eventuate they could spend 73 days on station in the China vs Taiwan environment.
However our submarines, like Singapore's and India's, can surveil or stop Chinese (SSKs, SSNs, warships and merchant shipping) transiting the Indian-Pacific ocean Indonesian archipelago if a war escalates.
Japanese, South Korean and US submarines are in geographical positions to support Taiwan.
Australian fighter/attack and maritime patrol aircraft would be the first Australian forces that could cover Chinese vessels transiting the Indian-Pacific oceans (if a war escalates that far).
Two Australian destroyers/frigates supported by an Australian naval supply ship might take 3 weeks to form part of a US led naval coalition supporting any close in counter-blockade against mainland China (if a war escalates that far).
I suppose our options range from issuing very strong diplomatic condemnations to World War 3, but political hesitancy will still be an issue, indeed I am sure China is counting on that.
Pete's response: Very true.
What are your views Pete [and other commenters]?
Pete's response: My comments (in black) are above.
I open this discussion to other comments. Pete.