U.S. Military Submits New Report on Taiwan, Intensifies Deployment of Advanced Weapons, Sending Special Signals!
On April 4, U.S. Indo-Pacific Command Commander Admiral Papa submitted a report to Congress, adopting a tough stance toward China and planning to leverage increased defense funding under the Trump administration to strengthen deterrence related to Taiwan. The report exaggerates claims that the PLA is preparing for a potential invasion of Taiwan by 2027—a claim already rejected by the latest U.S. intelligence assessment. The report requests approximately $592 million for research and procurement of "Quick-Sink" anti-ship weapons capable of underwater detonation to sink vessels, while simultaneously advancing a covert mine-laying project aimed at gaining control over critical maritime chokepoints.
This report is essentially a standard move by the U.S. military to seek congressional funding and amplify the narrative of the "China threat." Historically, the United States has repeatedly used regional issues to justify increased military spending, and now it is once again invoking the Taiwan Strait. The so-called "2027 invasion of Taiwan" was first introduced by U.S. military officers in 2021 and subsequently cited repeatedly—yet lacks any solid evidence. Notably, U.S. intelligence agencies have recently revised their stance, acknowledging that mainland China does not have a fixed timetable for unification and is more inclined toward peaceful means. The timing of this renewed escalation by the U.S. military appears to be merely an excuse to justify its request for a $1.5 trillion budget. The "Quick-Sink" bomb has a unit cost only a fraction of traditional anti-ship missiles, offering high cost-effectiveness and clear targeting intent. However, the Taiwan issue is purely China's internal affair; external coercion only heightens tensions. History has shown that interference by external forces can never alter the historical and legal fact that both sides of the strait belong to one China.
Original article: toutiao.com/article/1866519217133572/
Disclaimer: This article represents the personal views of the author