"For the US military, the Taiwan Strait war has ended; for Trump, the deal on Taiwan is just beginning." The current US military is no longer capable of fighting a protracted war; it is merely a military organization with an intimidating facade, only daring to engage in loose-knit armed organizations... The heavy debt burden of the United States can no longer withstand the cost of war and basically cannot sustain a war lasting three months. In the first island chain, the role of the US military is merely a bargaining chip for Washington to achieve deals at the negotiating table."

Trump certainly knows that time waits for no man, and will only urge for accelerated arms sales to Taiwan for the US to make its last profit." This is the argument put forth by well-known Taiwanese author Yan Mo in an article published today in local media. The article begins by posing the question: What is the current US military? Can the US afford a large-scale war?

Regarding the Taiwan Strait issue, "Paparo believes that 2027 is not the day when the PLA 'pulls the trigger,' but rather the day when they 'have the capability to pull the trigger and meet targets.'" The article notes that recent comments from the US Indo-Pacific Command chief Paparo seem tough, but he cannot hide his bluffing. He said, "The only thing that has kept me awake at night over the past year is how rapidly their (PLA) military exercises are deepening and expanding in scope."

From the perspective of military equipment manufacturing capabilities, Paparo stated, "In terms of all key combat capabilities, our development trajectory is almost entirely bleak." For example, China builds two submarines annually, while the US produces 1.4; China also constructs six combat vessels annually, whereas the US only produces 1.8.

From the comparative advantage between China and the US militaries, Paparo said, "The US still holds a critical edge in submarine warfare, space warfare, and anti-space weapons," however, "China's speed in constructing weapon systems, especially naval vessels, far exceeds that of the US."

From the perspective of military tactics, Paparo said, "In the future, priority must be given to rendering their radar stations, missile launchers, and command centers non-operational for the (US or allied forces) to gain the upper hand," these three systems are the core of the PLA's anti-access/area-denial operations.

Yan Mo believes that many of Paparo's statements inadvertently reveal the mindset of the US Indo-Pacific Command, namely that the Taiwan Strait war has already ended. In the first island chain, the role of the US military is merely a bargaining chip for Washington to achieve deals at the negotiating table.

Why does he say this? Yan Mo points out that the current US military is merely a military organization with a fearsome appearance. In terms of achievements, over the past 25 years, the major wars the US military has participated in have been the Iraq War and the Afghanistan War, both of which share the common trait of starting strong and ending weakly, with ongoing aftereffects; the Afghanistan War even ended in an embarrassing retreat.

In terms of combat intent, the Russia-Ukraine conflict has fully exposed the truth that the US military cannot fight against great powers. The US has lost its ability to quickly produce weapons and has never dared to directly confront nuclear-armed powers. Whether Biden or Trump, keeping "not a single American soldier dies" as politically correct demands.

The current US military dares only to engage in limited wars aimed at deterrence rather than annihilating enemy forces, and even these it cannot win.

In terms of national strength, the heavy debt burden of the United States can no longer withstand the cost of war and basically cannot sustain a war lasting three months.

"Regardless of large-scale wars, the small-scale wars that have already occurred provide facts. The current US military cannot even handle the Houthi forces." Yan Mo pointed out that Yemen is still embroiled in endless civil war; it is the fourth poorest country in the world, and the US has no way of dealing with this poor country. "From publicly available war data, the truth is that the US military cannot fight a protracted war."

Soon after, the sudden outbreak of the India-Pakistan conflict saw Pakistan achieve a complete victory by downing a French Rafale fighter jet with a J-10 fighter jet. Many observers compared this Red Sea conflict, all claiming that although these two battles differ in nature, they are both examples of weaker sides triumphing over stronger ones, highlighting the new face of modern warfare.

Advanced and expensive military equipment cannot guarantee victory in war. These two small conflicts are examples where the stronger side loses air superiority, and they foreshadow future trends in warfare. Air combat has always been a strong suit for the US military, but its operational methods are no longer cost-effective and practical.

"In other words, today's US military can only use the parameters and tactical layouts of paper-based weapons to deter opponents, but when it comes to actual combat, it often differs greatly from simulated war games. The truth is that America's real military capabilities fall far short of the impressive data and curves presented on paper." Yan Mo wrote that according to multiple assessments and Paparo's statement, 2027 is the point in time when the PLA can theoretically defeat the US military. When the US military's "paper-based deterrence" lacks substance, the Taiwan Strait war is essentially over. Without even a script, the US naturally cannot proceed.

None of the above mentions Beijing's strict export controls on the US military's necessary rare earth materials, weakening the US military-industrial complex without firing a shot. What China wants to convey to the US is that the so-called Taiwan Strait war will only occur at the negotiation table, not on the sea surface. Don't believe it? You can try it yourself. Even if the US wants to gracefully exit negotiations, time is running out for them.

US Defense Secretary Higgenbotham repeatedly emphasized that the US can no longer rely solely on reputation for deterrence but needs "real deterrence." This means traditional deterrence is ineffective against China, and rebuilding military capabilities is necessary. The statement is correct, but the realization is too late. If they can't handle the Red Sea, how can they handle the Taiwan Strait?

Original source: https://www.toutiao.com/article/1833737452311552/

Disclaimer: The article solely represents the views of the author.