[HN Gopher] Welcome to the Decade of Concern
___________________________________________________________________
Welcome to the Decade of Concern
Author : jseliger
Score : 50 points
Date : 2021-04-01 16:45 UTC (6 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (scholars-stage.blogspot.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (scholars-stage.blogspot.com)
| paulz_ wrote:
| I have no knowledge of this field. Certainly not enough to know
| if the article is accurate (haven't ever heard of this blog till
| now). But many of the claims seem well cited.
|
| If this is true...how maddening. How can you spend more than the
| next 10 countries combined and still mismanage your way into this
| predicament? Is there anything lumbering bureaucracy cannot
| destroy?
| torstenvl wrote:
| I'm not going to claim that everything in the DoD is well-
| managed, but don't discount the advantages China has in
| _gaining more advantages._ The PLA never has to cut its budget
| due to a lack of political will, and China has no qualms about
| riskier espionage that may get more agents killed or captured
| but results in being able to steal more advancements in
| military tech.
| cmalloc wrote:
| Having no prior knowledge of national security planning and
| outlook, this was a great read.
|
| Using real time strategy games a reference point for the
| uninitiated was a nice touch.
| snurfer wrote:
| Nuclear weapons are Taiwan's only defence against their asymmetry
| with China. Unfortunately, that ship sailed in the 1980s.
| phtrivier wrote:
| Is taiwan the Sudetes of someone ? What happens if taiwan just
| gets invaded, like crimea was, and no one balks ?
| ohazi wrote:
| There have been unsubstantiated rumors for years that the
| Taiwanese military has outfitted TSMC fabs with explosives that
| can be rigged to go off in the event of a mainland invasion in
| order to deny China access to TSMC capabilities.
|
| The rumor doesn't actually need to be true in order to act as a
| deterrent -- it just needs to be leaked to Chinese officials
| and considered credible. It also assumes that access to TSMC is
| a strong motivation for an invasion, which may or may not be
| true.
|
| In any case, the answer to your question depends on whether
| this is true, and whether the explosives are actually used. If
| the fabs are destroyed, it'll set the world back by at least a
| decade.
|
| So if you thought the chip shortage was bad _today_...
|
| On the other hand, if it's not true (or if it is, but the fabs
| aren't destroyed for whatever reason), and operations continue
| despite an invasion, I can definitely imagine a scenario where
| the rest of the world just sort of shrugs and goes with it.
| Kind of a horrifying thought, but what are the alternatives?
| Attack China? They have nukes. Everyone will condemn China,
| sure. Then China will get upset and claim that we're all
| "hurting the feelings of the Chinese people" [1], and that'll
| be the end of it.
|
| [1]
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurting_the_feelings_of_the_Ch...
| dageshi wrote:
| The chinese leadership/official position is that Taiwan is
| part of China. They don't want to invade and retake it
| because they want TSMC's chips, they want to retake it
| because they think it's a rebellious province that needs to
| be brought to heel.
| ohazi wrote:
| Right, which may mean that this threat is meaningless, but
| the rumors are still there, and the _outcome_ is probably
| what the rest of the world _actually_ cares about when
| considering the situation.
| hosh wrote:
| The dynamic between China and Taiwan is complex, with TSMC
| being only one factor. China has its hands in many pies,
| and it spans the economic, historical, cultural, and
| military.
|
| The best metaphor I have heard that sums this up was that
| if this were a Go game, Taiwan is a Ko fight between China
| and US.
| dirtyid wrote:
| TSMC still requires inputs from global supply chains to
| function, so doesn't matter of PRC captures it intact,
| disassembles fabs and reshores on mainland. US can sanction
| down the supply chain to kill fabs anyway. In the meantime,
| it's a source for uncomfortable detente between US/CN/TW.
|
| If CN were forced to move in 10/15 year timescale is
| "quarantining" Taiwan as summarized in another recent Greer
| article: All Measures Short of a Cross Straits Invasion [0],
| and hold access to TSMC hostage. Essentially PRC can blockade
| TW ports and airspace and exploit period where TSMC
| production still has substantial leverage, and I can see
| uncomfortable detente continuing to ensure continued supply
| of chips.
|
| [0] https://scholars-stage.blogspot.com/2021/03/all-measures-
| sho...
| AussieWog93 wrote:
| Even if the US doesn't really care, SEA will perceive it as a
| huge threat. Of course, not much we can do, since China's the
| only one with nukes...
| jseliger wrote:
| Meta comment: Scholar's Stage is the most interesting blog I've
| encountered in years and its RSS feed is worth subscribing to.
|
| One hopes China doesn't invade Taiwan, as one hopes a pandemic
| doesn't happen; if China does, a lot of the general audience,
| accessible material about what is likely to occur will have been
| published at Scholar's Stage.
| dirtyid wrote:
| Greer writes well on variety of topics and well worth
| sub/reading. But I would not rely on him for current
| developments for US/TW/CN topics. He was one of the last
| holdouts along with Ian Easton of TW can triumph alone crowd,
| changing his position only recently, years after general
| consensus from credible thinktanks suggested otherwise. I think
| he lives in TW and has blinders on - having held his positions
| so far past expiration date. His writing on the subject since,
| rather his recent regurgitation of US thinktanks and opinion
| pieces are more in line with reality. It's nice to see him
| sober up, but never know when his opinions will drift back into
| wish fulfilment.
| incomplete wrote:
| > Meta comment: Scholar's Stage is the most interesting blog
| I've encountered in years and its RSS feed is worth subscribing
| to.
|
| thanks for the rec... after poking around for 30m, i have to
| agree that it's worth subbing to. :)
| sbierwagen wrote:
| >How did this happen? It started with a Clinton era decision to
| focus on upgrading legacy platforms instead of developing or
| purchasing new ones:
|
| >By the end of the Bill Clinton administration, the Pentagon had
| laid out a strategy to update and replace the Reagan-era
| fleets...
|
| Strange not to mention the USSR collapsed two years before
| Clinton took office. Hard to justify new weapons systems when
| you're the global hegemon. Who were these new warships going to
| be used against, Serbia?
| dragontamer wrote:
| If China attacks Taiwan with its newly minted aircraft carriers
| and large fleets of smaller ships, who will defend them?
|
| Now, I'm pretty sure the USA still beats China in a fair fight.
| But if the USA is playing defense with Taiwan, the picture is
| very different. China is far closer and therefore has more
| nearby support: in particular, air support and cruise missiles.
|
| In a neutral fight, keeping our fleets outside of Chinese radar
| / aircraft range will be rather natural. But if we're talking
| about Taiwan specifically, its clearly a different picture:
| China can pretty much pepper any ship near Taiwan with its
| airforce and/or cruise missiles.
|
| China invades Taiwan is probably one of the potential fights in
| this "Terrible 20s" period, where China has enough advantages
| to seriously consider the move. Not necessarily because of
| Chinese military spending (which has increased), or technology,
| but because of simple geographical advantages.
|
| A proper invasion of Taiwan isn't even necessary. Chinese naval
| forces can start a blockade and really mess up international
| trade.
|
| -------------
|
| China vs South Korea is a bit further out but still within a
| zone where the Chinese Mainland offers a strong advantage to a
| hypothetical Chinese attacking force.
| maxrev17 wrote:
| Hmm, wish countries would poll their citizens with regards to
| wanting a war... I wonder how many would happen?
| retrac wrote:
| You're downvoted, but it has been postulated that no democracy
| has ever waged war against another democracy, and that this is
| a consequence of democratic governance:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_peace_theory
|
| As far as I can tell, the observation is historically true. The
| few possible exceptions are pre-modern, very minor, or are
| debatable whether the societies involved were in fact
| democratic -- the first war in the Balkans, 19th century border
| skirmishes in South America, the Western Allies against Finland
| in WW II, and Iceland's conflict with the UK over fishing, are
| some of the stronger counter-examples.
|
| The effect seems real enough, but I'm not sure if it actually
| means anything deeper, given the cultural similarity and degree
| of trade among most democracies.
| shigawire wrote:
| Maybe more. Depends on the country.
| warkdarrior wrote:
| As many or even more wars, since public opinions are easily
| swayed through appropriate news/meme campaigns.
| torstenvl wrote:
| If war were subject to referendum, only autocracies would wage
| war. Such a world is not worth living in.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-04-01 23:02 UTC)