TSMC looks to double down on U.S. chip factories as talks in Europe falter

The chilling implication behind some Taiwanese downplaying the threat is that they think it'll be relatively bloodless. That is, they plan to surrender once China feels comfortable enough about its naval balance against the US to pull the trigger. Taiwan under new management doesn't affect their retirement. The king is dead, long live the king. After all, its their lives they'll be needlessly throwing away if America doesn't come through with an overwhelming navy.

The US sent an Aircraft Carrier battle group to the region because of these tensions: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-southchinasea-usa/u-s-car... (Jan 24, 2021)

A single US aircraft carrier is accompanied by a strike force of (IIRC) dozens of other ships, one or more submarines, anti-ship cruisers, anti-aircraft cruisers, and anti-submarine cruisers, logistics, etc. They carry a large number of aircraft and those aircraft have considerable strike capabilities, including the ability to attack enemy craft and ships from over the horizon; same with the ships. It's also worth remembering the large (permanent) US military presence in Japan, South Korea, Guam, and other nearby locations. Guam has been described as a permanently located US aircraft carrier combined with a military base.

I'm not an expert on Asian relations, tensions, or the military situation. I feel disappointed Obama's attempt to set up a trade block was nuked by the republicans for apparent partisans reasons. Now China is leading the same. That doesn't mean the US will allow China's expansionism to go unchecked. Part of US's activities in the region are to explicitly violate China's new claims of "sovereignty" around the islands they're building to expand their territory by sailing through those areas and flying planes over, and essentially daring China to do something about it. "We don't respect your claims at expanded borders."

Biden is clearly taking the threat seriously. FTA above:

> Biden’s nominee for secretary of state, Antony Blinken, told his Senate confirmation hearing on Tuesday there was “no doubt” China posed the most significant challenge to the United States of any nation.

I haven't studied China's military strength but I doubt it could contest the US in a traditional modern conflict. In a ground war maybe, but when we're talking navy and air power, the US likely has a substantial lead. And the US's goal would not be to invade China (at least not its mainland or traditionally recognized sovereign territories but simply to contain; though I could potentially see bombing or invading the islands that China is building in the ocean if there was some compelling reason for this.)

I personally am not well informed enough on the issue to understand why it's so sensitive that they want to build some islands in the sea near their mainland; perhaps the US simply wants countries to stick to their existing borders and not attempt expansionism like took place in decades and centuries past. Or perhaps it's as simple as the US doesn't want to accept countries expanding their territory and territorial waters by building islands in the ocean -- where would it stop?

China officially has a policy of "no nuclear first-strike" (which is not a policy US has adopted), but I can't imagine the US using nuclear weapons in this day and age, even in a conflict with another nuclear superpower (unless they were invading our mainland), so military action if it occurs is likely to take the form (I hypothesize) of skirmishes between ships and airplanes -- not necessarily fighting but flying really close, or playing chicken, that sort of thing; similar to what's been going on with Russian planes (whether both sides accuse the other of being reckless). Possibly with occasional shots fired by one side or the other before commanders on both sides order the troops to back off, because no one wants open war.

In the meantime it looks like the US is allowing China to build the islands but is refusing to recognize the new territory as sovereign land/waters, by sailing through it, flying over it, etc. Similar to the US's position on Iran and the Straight of Hormuz: it's international waters and Iran has no right to stop ships from sailing through it. The US demonstrates and enforces this by sailing its own ships through regularly and daring anyone to stop them.

The question may come down to whether China is willing to use military force to enforce its claims about sovereignty of the territory. That would be a massive step for them to take. China only has 2 aircraft carriers in service and it's unlikely their warplanes would be a match for the combination of all of the US's latest technology. China does have modern 5th generation stealth aircraft but I'm skeptical they could maintain air superiority against the entirety of US assets.

Like a law that's never been tested in court, we won't know how the militaries actually match up unless they go to battle.

Most of Europe doesn't have the will to defend themselves even in invasion, either:

https://brilliantmaps.com/europe-fight-war/

But that's how it is since the end of WWII. Major nations, or at least wealthy ones, don't go to open war with each other anymore. American hegemony and the NATO alliance structure, as well as the nuclear umbrella, has sapped the will to fight from most of the developed world, outside of brushfire conflicts. Taiwan is not a major nation, but it was an economic power, and at least has very comfortable first world living conditions. In such a situation, why would the population want to throw it all away?

Though on the other hand, why would the PRC, with its burgeoning middle classes and its coastal opulence, want to do something as destabilizing as to declare war, unprovoked? At the very least they'd face sanctions and diplomatic disapproval. The military build-up is concerning and should be taken seriously. But those who would assume that China would just cavalierly declare war in the near future should consider how much China would lose in the bargain.

I'd say the US is only partially sensitive to those islands in the south China sea in how they impact maritime navigation for their navy. Key to understanding the SCS dispute is that in comes in two parts. One is who the islands, the actual land, belongs to. Second is how the land impacts maritime rights over the surrounding waters in terms of control over navigation and natural resources. The US has taken no explicit position on the land and only defends a subset of maritime rights useful to itself. It has supported none of the land claims of the other parties, hasn't pledged support to defend the islands of the Philippines, arguably it's closest historical ally in the dispute, it hasn't done anything to stop China's island construction or seize them before they were fortified, and it hasn't done anything to protect local fishermen from being pushed out of fishing grounds by the Chinese coast guard. The only thing the US has done is maintain its right to sail its navy wherever it chooses and dare all the countries in the region, not just China, to stop them. Arguably these half-hearted exercises and the US's refusal to take a side in the territory dispute is why a lot of other countries in the region are lukewarm about aggressively staking their claims. The US is fighting for a narrow set of interests that benefits itself but will not fight for the interests of other claimants that have no direct benefits to the US Navy. If the Philippines decides to build an airstrip on one of their islands and China starts intercepting their construction crews or even goes as far as amphibious landings the Philippines has little faith that the US won't just frame this as a problem they instigated themselves.