Conventional War with the PRC?

[BeirutDude]

So I was in a discussion about a possible conventional conflict with the PRC vs. the Western Allies (U.S., Japan, Aust. NZ, UK, etc.) and I made the point that unless we were pressed to support Taiwan or the ROK why would we even fight within the "First Island Arc" Seems to me that garrisoning the main islands of the Ryukyus, Philippines and other islands, and defending choke points against PLA(N) breakouts bottles up the PLA(N) with minimal risk and then elsewhere a world wide commercial anti-shipping campaign against the PRC Merchant Marine (preferably as prizes vs. sunk) would strangle their economy. My suspicion is they would be more prone to economic pressure than the west would be especially as we could make good some of the lost commerce from other sources but with a distant blockade they would be slowly strangled.

What am I missing?

I was thinking about this for some scenarios as well.

[Gunner98]

I think you're right. A knife fight in their backyard would not be the best place to be.

However that is not the sort of strategy that bolsters allies on their doorstep, so it is probably not in the public domain.

[KnightHawk75]

What am I missing?

The Belt and Road Initiative (the road\rail\pipeline infrastructure pieces) when it comes to ships being required for vast majority of direct import\exports? Not suggesting it can or would replace most ship trade, but for 2025+ scenarios with some sort of world-wide china anti-shipping initiative on-going (and I assume certain nations connected by land definitely not playing along) it could be a factor such that the increased risk\cost in sea transport might shift more trade transport to land routes as it becomes more feasible and more politically difficult to 'seize\capture\take a prize' from those routes. The added cost impact may remain (as does the cost of doing things on the interdiction side), but the ability to export\import what they need i imagine doesn't reach a point of strangulation. I could be totally wrong and it's a non factor, but just something that came to mind in that sort of CMO scenario.

[Fido81]

I don't see a coalition intentionally engaging PRC combat forces within the first island chain. But I should think that'd be where the coalition would want to strike to get at the PRC in depth. A strike on the mainland would be a serious escalation, but striking logistics and ISR facilities within the first island arc could be a way to attack the PRC in the rear without crossing that 'conventional strike on enemy homeland' psychological threshold.

I think in an idealized world OP is correct that allies are the only good reason to fight there as of now. But C:MO has taught me, if nothing else, that no plan survives contact with the enemy.

I'm less convinced that economic blockade would work effectively. If the coalition said 'choose between us or the PRC', it's quite possible in my mind that the majority of countries neutral in the conflict would choose to trade with the PRC. It's a larger, more unified polity than a coalition would be, has a bigger population, and has more buying power in many industries.

[guanotwozero]

ORIGINAL: KnightHawk75
The Belt and Road Initiative...

The problem there for PRC is that it reaches through intermediate countries to trading partners, so is extremely vulnerable to those transit countries shutting it down as well as trading partners being part of the blockade. While it's a network rather than a single path, blockade efforts could still drastically reduce the trade flow.

[KnightHawk75]

ORIGINAL: guanotwozero

ORIGINAL: KnightHawk75
The Belt and Road Initiative...

The problem there for PRC is that it reaches through intermediate countries to trading partners, so is extremely vulnerable to those transit countries shutting it down as well as trading partners being part of the blockade. While it's a network rather than a single path, blockade efforts could still drastically reduce the trade flow.

It is a weak link for sure, but I was thinking for the purposes of the scenario that some\most(?) of those land connected transit partners (the stans, ty,pk,ir,ru,bd,mm) are more likely than not, going to play ball with trade to the PRC officially or unofficially. Maybe that's plausible maybe it's not. I absolutely agree the land routes of substance can be disrupted (key bridges\rail stations\ports\transit politics) in transit countries, but to do so overtly could draw more parties into direct conflict. I was looking at that as an option\consequence\factor for the player in a large scene. Such as do I risk striking some key rail\bridge link in some at first current noncombatant territory say PK (or interdicting a neutral flagged ship say BR going to noncombatant port in PK carrying soybeans ultimately headed to the PRC) possibly having them go hostile and require additional sanction\blockade efforts in exchange for points\other trade-off or do I let it be.

Or not. Actually the more I think about it given what BD had in mind it may be too much to include geography\# of possible combatants, and split focus wise in the same scene anyway.

[Gunner98]

This would make a very interesting scenario from the PRC perspective as well...

[guanotwozero]

ORIGINAL: Gunner98
This would make a very interesting scenario from the PRC perspective as well...

Indeed it would.

My feeling is that most scenarios regarding a landward blockade would best be played as the PRC's opponents, as it would involve finding and neutralising land units - smugglers, convoys, etc, maybe a modern equivalent of the Ho Chi Minh Trail. However there could be more extensive scenarios perhaps representing the PRC backing a coup in a neighbouring country, e.g. Kazakhstan with its access to the Caspian, or better still Burma/Myanmar with its Indian Ocean coastline.

Realistically the bugbear would be Russia, which would be unlikely to join any blockade though would remain neutral militarily. It would be the PRC's landward lifeline, especially as Russia could make a fortune from an effective trade monopoly. I'm not sure what scenarios could be made out of that. Then again a post-Putin Russia may have very different priorities of which we can only speculate.

More conventionally a seaward breakout would be a very challenging scenario from the PRC point of view. It would likely need to either dominate the Malacca Straits (v tough) or else just punch a hole through the island blockade and push back the edges. No easy solution, depending on the number and strength of its opponents.

[Gunner98]

Then again a post-Putin Russia may have very different priorities of which we can only speculate.

Well we've got a couple decades breathing space before that happens...[;)]

[KungPao]

Well, a blockade may work from tactical standpoint but it will take a long time "
We are experiencing a cold war v 2.0. But there is a huge difference between this one and v1.0. In 2.0 version it is very hard to have a ?"western bloc?" vs ?"eastern bloc?" scenario , instead the countries in the region may hold a complicate diplomatic relations just like the European countries have before WWI.
ROK is experiencing increasing competition from PRC on global market, but generally speaking, they are still in the same supply chain. The rapid decoupling process or the military conflicts between Sino-US could unintentionally hurt ROK?'s products.
Japan would love to see a cold war between China and US , this will be the best opportunity to have military normalization and increase diplomatic influence. But it is unlikely to have her commit into a long time blockade campaign
To ROK and Japan, China can use its domestic market as a carrot . A market of 1.4 billion population (or 1.4 billion disposable battery , as many of us joking) is a delicious pie that nobody can ignore.
Other counties like Philippines will see this as a great opportunity to get free lunch from both China and US. If a hostile breaks out, everything could become a business style money talk.
US will have to hold a strong cause to form a strong military alliance that can support long time blockade of China. Other than that , it must persuade other countries leadership that the war will be short. ?"Home before leaves fall.?" Otherwise , the alliance could easily fall apart?.

My suspicion is they would be more prone to economic pressure than the west

I disagree, PRC is different from Imperial Japan.
While it is heavily rely on resource import from sea lane, it is basically a demand from a world factory, where resource and critical parts will be convert into final products and supply to world market. If a hostile breaks out then China will no longer able to export products and at the same time the demand of import diminish. China can still produce enough resource to meet domestic basic demand (oil, fertilizer and food). Of course CCP will have a hard time to buy the citizen?fs loyalty. Yes, I guess young generation will be very disappointed if they cannot log into their steam account or see their favorite K-pop stars on TV. But CCP regime has a history that successfully keep it?fs population in line with repressive rule, just think about Mao?'s China.

[guanotwozero]

The PRC is clearly trying to make itself indispensable in world trade, but it's not so simple. It's built up its economy primarily on cheap goods, as it's attractive for other countries to buy. The quality is not so important because they're so cheap. However to step up a gear it needs to export quality goods and service, but that needs a different level of trust and guarantees, and that's in short supply under Xi's leadership. The population has become used to a rising standard of living, so their increasing expectation is a concern for the government. Hence their international trade is increasingly a double-edged sword for them.

If there were to be a blockade that would undoubtedly hurt; a sea blockade would increase the cost of doing business significantly, as land-based middlemen would all demand a cut for breaking sanctions. Trade there would be, but on a much reduced and less profitable scale. It would also hurt their erstwhile trading partners, but likely less so as long as they've not actually become dependant on Chinese products. Hence the recent concern over Huawei's involvement in telecoms networks - many countries are realising that PRC products should be kept out of certain areas. Another notifier of that is the current coronavirus crisis, where suddenly many countries found themselves beholden to China as they had cornered the market in protective gear; lessons are being learned and dependencies reduced.

That's why I think that a future blockade (if anyway effective) would probably hurt China more than its neighbours and other trading partners, for whom it would doubtless be a major inconvenience but not a crippler. The inconvenienced neighbours would also take up part of the slack by increasing trade with China's erstwhile customers and vendors.

As for CMO, we have the advantage that it's a mil-sim, not a political or economic sim. Designers just have to come up with plausible excuses for scenarios!

ORIGINAL: Gunner98
Well we've got a couple decades breathing space before that happens...[;)]

At least - if anyone can find a way to wield control from beyond the grave, it'll be him!

[BeirutDude]

A knife fight in their backyard would not be the best place to be.

However that is not the sort of strategy that bolsters allies on their doorstep, so it is probably not in the public domain.

Agreed! But Taiwan is a big Achilles Heel for us!

[BeirutDude]

I'm less convinced that economic blockade would work effectively. If the coalition said 'choose between us or the PRC', it's quite possible in my mind that the majority of countries neutral in the conflict would choose to trade with the PRC. It's a larger, more unified polity than a coalition would be, has a bigger population, and has more buying power in many industries.

Agreed if we were just talking about an economic blockade but a Western Anti-shipping campaign they may have little choice as vessels in route to their ports may well be interdicted.

[BeirutDude]

Great discussion everyone, interesting points by all!

[DWReese]

Al,

You need to dump some of your PRIVATE MESSAGE files. Your mailbox is full, and it won't allow anyone to be able to send you anything. My messages to you have been rejected.

Doug

[Fido81]

ORIGINAL: BeirutDude

I'm less convinced that economic blockade would work effectively. If the coalition said 'choose between us or the PRC', it's quite possible in my mind that the majority of countries neutral in the conflict would choose to trade with the PRC. It's a larger, more unified polity than a coalition would be, has a bigger population, and has more buying power in many industries.

Agreed if we were just talking about an economic blockade but a Western Anti-shipping campaign they may have little choice as vessels in route to their ports may well be interdicted.

I think might well hold true in an anti-shipping campaign too. I'm not a logistician, but I think the value of goods to be sold to/bought from China by a ship over its war and post-war lifetime would be much greater than the value of the ship in most cases. I think that should be enough to encourage continued trade from neutral countries. If that isn't enough, since its economy uses central planning, I can see China sweetening the deal offering to replace sunk merchant ships for free/steep discounts. That seems like something a US-led coalition would have a hard time matching, and I think it'd make continuing to trade with the PRC a much more attractive option for a non-belligerent.

[caohailiang]

ORIGINAL: BeirutDude
Agreed! But Taiwan is a big Achilles Heel for us!

how is that? i always thought that is the achilles heel for China

[BeirutDude]

ORIGINAL: BeirutDude
Agreed! But Taiwan is a big Achilles Heel for us!

how is that? I always thought that is the Achilles Heel for China

IMHO Taiwan almost forces the USN-West's hand to go west of the First Island Arc and into the teeth of PLA(N), PLA(AF) strength to support and resupply them. It would be hard for the West to allow Taiwan to be battered and sit outside of theEast China Sea our with an extended blockade in the SLIM hopes of freeing Taiwan at the negating table later on.

Similar issue for the ROK but with more cover from bases in Japan.

[caohailiang]

ORIGINAL: BeirutDude
IMHO Taiwan almost forces the USN-West's hand to go west of the First Island Arc and into the teeth of PLA(N), PLA(AF) strength to support and resupply them. It would be hard for the West to allow Taiwan to be battered and sit outside of theEast China Sea our with an extended blockade in the SLIM hopes of freeing Taiwan at the negating table later on.

The risk of war is reduced, considering the subtle balance of power in this particular theatre.

From PRC perspective, PLA has a reasonable chance to take the island but no chance of breaking offshore blockade that is expected to follow. Because of worrying the long term economic impact to the nation, PLA will not venture any action unless completely cornered (such as formal declaration of TW independence or US military deployment on the island)

From US perspective, they will restrain from taking any further provocative move (such as above), because they would worry the strategic impact global-wise, in case of failing to defend the island.

This balance is very fragile, i am quite pessimistic it could last, say, beyond 2035

[BeirutDude]

The risk of war is reduced, considering the subtle balance of power in this particular theatre.

From PRC perspective, PLA has a reasonable chance to take the island but no chance of breaking offshore blockade that is expected to follow. Because of worrying the long term economic impact to the nation, PLA will not venture any action unless completely cornered (such as formal declaration of TW independence or US military deployment on the island)

From US perspective, they will restrain from taking any further provocative move (such as above), because they would worry the strategic impact global-wise, in case of failing to defend the island.

This balance is very fragile, i am quite pessimistic it could last, say, beyond 2035

Seems like there was a balance of power in July of 1914... [&:] [X(] [8|]