American think tank Cato Institute recently held a seminar titled "Military Balance in the Indo-Pacific, With or Without Taiwan." Senior visiting researcher Jonathan D. Caverley from the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) Americas and Evan B. Montgomery, vice president of the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments (CSBA), analyzed the U.S. strategy to maintain military balance in the Asia-Pacific region under the circumstances of the Taiwan Strait. Although their approaches differ, both acknowledge that the military balance in the Asia-Pacific is indeed tilting in favor of China.

American think tank Cato Institute held a seminar on "Military Balance in the Indo-Pacific, With or Without Taiwan"

Montgomery stated that over the past few decades, the military balance in the Indo-Pacific has changed significantly. What worries Americans greatly is that the military power China has invested in seems specifically designed to exploit the weaknesses of U.S. force projection. The U.S. relies heavily on a small number of bases and logistics hubs on land, sea, and in space for its force projection. China is taking advantage of these vulnerabilities by developing more long-range, increasingly precise missiles, with more complex delivery platforms. The pace at which China is enhancing its ability to exploit U.S. vulnerabilities is faster than the pace at which the U.S. is addressing those vulnerabilities, creating an asymmetry that concerns the U.S. the most.

Montgomery pointed out that the PLA's toolbox is expanding. Perhaps in three, five, or ten years, amphibious attacks may no longer be as attractive to Beijing; they might have alternative ways to take control of Taiwan, which could be more appealing to them and cause greater problems for the U.S. In a Taiwan Strait conflict, the U.S. will face an increasingly broad range of issues. Moreover, the U.S. military also needs to deal with three or four theaters simultaneously, with opponents spread around the world, making it difficult to focus on China. Although the U.S. military has indeed been adjusting over the past five to seven years, directing more resources toward the Asia-Pacific region, this has not happened in a meaningful way.

Caverley said that the military balance between the U.S. and China is indeed tilting in favor of China

Caverley said that the military balance between the U.S. and China is indeed tilting in favor of China, but if one were to ask about the current state of the military balance in the Pacific, no one can give a clear answer. Because the two militaries are very different. The U.S. military has strong projection capabilities, while the PLA focuses on projecting power to a specific area and islands, with a strong emphasis on domestic security and regional defense. None of these have been tested in real combat. The U.S. military has not participated in conflicts in space or cyber warfare. If a war breaks out over Taiwan, there is a risk of escalation into a nuclear conflict. Both sides are actually changing their military postures, with China being more obvious. There is no such risk-mitigation relationship between the U.S. and China as existed between the U.S. and the Soviet Union. The uncertainty in the change of the balance of power is greater, increasing the likelihood of miscalculations and leading to conflicts. This is what is worrying.

U.S. and South Korean defense ministers held a security consultation meeting last week, and the statement after the meeting opened the possibility of reducing U.S. troops in South Korea and expanding "strategic flexibility."

Caverley pointed out that China has consistently focused on developing asymmetric capabilities, pushing U.S. force projection as far away from China's coastline, coastal areas, and Taiwan as possible, to prevent the U.S. from playing an effective role in defending Taiwan during a PLA unification operation.

"Deterrence of U.S. force projection is a prerequisite for unification, but unification is not a prerequisite for threatening U.S. strength," Caverley said. He showed two maps indicating that regardless of whether Taiwan is considered or not, the PLA's medium and long-range missile coverage has not changed.

U.S. Nimitz-class aircraft carrier Carl Vinson participating in the 2024 Rim of the Pacific military exercise

Caverley pointed out that China's strategic profile has not changed significantly due to the consideration of Taiwan. China can set missiles or sensors on other sovereign islands. Similarly, the U.S. can deploy to islands in Japan or the Philippines. The U.S. does not have a military treaty with Taiwan and has not deployed a large number of aircraft to Taiwan, and it is believed that it has not deployed sensors to Taiwan either. The U.S.-Taiwan relationship is politically risky, and Taiwan is not a treaty ally of the U.S. U.S.-Taiwan security cooperation is far less than U.S.-Japan or U.S.-Philippines cooperation.

Original: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7571367926440149538/

Statement: This article represents the views of the author and others. Please express your opinion below using the [Up/Down] buttons.