Debate: 空军制胜论2.0版 Short rocket war-can China recover Taiwan by force within 1 year?

China will recover Taiwan by force within one year


Pioneer of the new military revolution on underwater


The American Academic Press recently published China’s latest combat plan for regaining Taiwan. The title is THE MAIN ATTACK PROGRAM OF ROCKET ARMYTHE NEW THINKING OF CHINA’S ZERO CASUALTIES REGAINING TAIWAN. This is the second military work I published in the United States.

This book shocked the United States and Taiwan and shocked Beijing even more. The research results of this book reveal that the period from 2008 to the end of 2018 is the window period for China’s armed recapture of Taiwan. In the window period, China can easily recover Taiwan. After this window period, under the new war model, China may never recover Taiwan.

Ⅰ.The origin of the program

Until the spring of 2018, the U.S. military and the Taiwan military believed that mainland China had no ability to use force to unify the country. The mainland military also thought so privately. If the attack on Taiwan fails, the top leadership of the country will be forced to restructure and influence political stability. Therefore, the top officials of the country are extremely cautious about the reunification by force, and the separatist forces in Taiwan are becoming bolder

In fact, the Chinese military only lacks a good strategy for attacking Taiwan and does not lack offensive means. Chinese military scholars decided to ask civil scholars for assistance.

Professor Liu Mingfu of China National Defense University, is the author of The Chinese Dream: Thoughts and Strategic Orientation of the Great Powers in the Post-American Age. After reading the first military work I published in the United States WILL THE U.S.A. BE REPLACED BY JAPAN?——The Immediate Completion of Japanese Underwater Military Revolution, Professor Liu Mingfu believes that I must have a way to recover Taiwan. On August 24, 2017, he commissioned me to formulate a plan to attack Taiwan. This is the supreme responsibility and glory. We agreed to formulate a plan within six months and publish it in the United States.

Ⅱ. Synopsis

One of my research conclusions is that the main attack program of rocket army can subdue Taiwan’s separatist forces within 10 minutes.

Mainland China may use intermediate and short-range ballistic missiles to destroy all step-up sub-stations of electric system in Taiwan with 10 minutes in the summer or fall in 2018 or 2019. As a highly industrialized and urbanized area, Taiwan will be paralyzed and have to agree to be taken over by the mainland. Kosovo War shows that destroying the electric system can quickly make the opposite side give up resistance. After the Second World War, the United States Air Force found that coal mine, coal chemical industry, coal-fired power plant and coal locomotive were the Germany’s economic lifeline. They also discovered that destroying coal mine could quickly paralyze Germany. Just as the Maginot Line was bypassed, China could recover Taiwan without using landing campaign. In 2008, the mainland advanced ballistic missiles were enough to destroy the electric system in Taiwan many times.



If China recovers Taiwan by force in the summer or fall of 2018 or 2019, Taiwan should be relieved, because Taiwan has earned! Originally, China could easily recover Taiwan in 2008.

For a long time, the landing and anti-landing warfare programs carefully prepared by the mainland military and the Taiwan military will bring 100,000 casualties to the Chinese army and at least 50,000 casualties to the Taiwanese army. In order to avoid this bloody civil war that is about to erupt, this book evaluates various peaceful reunification plans and plans for resuming the use of force, offering combat plans for ending civil war with zero casualties and a peaceful reunification plan that can be convinced by Taiwan. The main attack program of rocket armyis the one most likely to be adopted by the highest leadership in China. This book is only a strategic analysis for the reference of sage intellectuals.

The book stands on the civil war perspective and expresses the two sides of the civil war: the mainland and Taiwan.

The mainland had already had the advantage of regaining Taiwan’s victory 10 years ago. Just as Ancient Chinese politicians Liu Bei had three excellent generals Zhao Yun, Guan Yu and Zhang Fei, he did not know how to use them. The mainland has severely underestimated its own strength. Taiwan has overestimated its defense capabilities. Both sides have chosen to maintain the status quo. Scientifically, objectively and accurately assessing the overall strength of the two sides of the Taiwan Strait and revealing new types of combat plans will cause Taiwan to shudder; supplemented by tolerance, restraint, and effective „one country, two systems“ solutions, the peaceful unification of Taiwan will quickly become a reality.

Taiwan currently has high-performance „Hsiungfeng-2“ anti-ship missiles, „Hsiungfeng-2E“ medium-range cruise missiles, „Hsiungfeng-3“ supersonic anti-ship missiles and „Tiangong-3“ air defense missiles. In a few years, if Taiwan has stealth cruise missiles and long-range speed boats for laying mines at sea, Taiwan’s reunification war will be even bloodier. The mainland now has an overwhelming advantage in the number and performance of short-range and medium-range ballistic missiles. It can use a ballistic missile in the summer or fall in 2018 or 2019 to destroy all step-up sub-stations of electric system in Taiwan in 10 minutes, causing Taiwan to be paralyzed and force Taiwan accepts national unity within 2 weeks.

Based on the dominant position of the world’s largest cargo trading country, the Chinese mainland can take a diplomatic offensive in the summer or fall of 2018 and 2019, allowing European countries to close their offices in Taiwan, and allow European countries to close Taiwan’s offices in European countries, and let European countries not accept Taiwan passport, Taiwan origin certificate and Taiwan customs documents. Then China expanded its diplomatic offensive to other regions and regained Taiwan with a diplomatic offensive.

It is not feasible to impose a blockade on Taiwan shipping. If the shipping fleet of the five major shipping companies in Taiwan hangs the flags of the United States and Japan, it will lead to a complicated confrontation.

National Chung-Shan Institute of Science & Technology and Taiwan’s military’s daunting innovation/asymmetric new operational thinking forced Beijing to make a decision as soon as possible. The existing military advantages of the mainland and Taiwan’s counterattack measures and counterattacks indicate that the initiative of the Taiwan Strait military game is difficult to predict: in 2018, the initiative will be on the mainland military, and in 2019 the mainland’s military advantage will remain. In 2020, the mainland will face the stronger counterattack capability of the Taiwan military.

III. The new thinking of the main attack program of rocket army from the United States

The American Civil War Reveals the Law of War

The final result of modern warfare is to make the enemy unable to resist. The sign of inability to resist is a large-scale humanitarian disaster. This was first demonstrated by the American Civil War. The short-cut to the road to victory is to create a large-scale humanitarian disaster. This law is called Sherman’s Law.

The reason why the American Civil War lasted for four years and suffered heavy casualties was because the two sides could not find a way to overcome each other for a long time. Most of the battles that took place between the two sides were like a field duel. The two sides were close and intensively charged in intensive artillery shooting and rifle shooting. In the final eight months before the end of the war, General Sherman performed an overall battle against the southern confederation, destroying infrastructure such as the southern railways and cities, destroying villages, houses and crops, and robbing southern civilians of jewels, food, and livestock. The non-moving food and other necessities were burned. In addition to the collective slaughter, General Sherman’s troops changed the area they passed to Hell. The massive humanitarian disaster created by General Sherman destroyed the war potential of the Confederacy.

The American Civil War ended in a wide range of humanitarian disasters. During a military attack, it is difficult to eliminate the enemy’s army or allow the enemy’s army to yield. The enemy soldiers either counterattacked or concealed or fled. The enemy’s civilians are the basis of the enemy’s military. They destroy the living conditions of the enemy’s civilians, cause humanitarian disasters, and let the military lose material support. The enemy’s army will surrender.

Three Definitions of Humanitarian Disasters

The first is the humanitarian disaster in agricultural society. The agricultural society is characterized by self-sufficiency and does not depend on external supply. Each farmer has independent and complete production tools, production materials and premises. In the aftermath of the American Civil War, where General Sherman went, he burned houses of civilians in the South, looted all property, burned food (including seeds), stole horses, scorpions, carriages, and eaten cattle, pigs, and poultry. None of the useful things left, leaving local civilians unable to maintain their basic survival. To create a humanitarian disaster in an agricultural society requires only a few words: burn out and rob everything.

The second is in semi-industrial and semi-agricultural society. Take Germany and Japan during the Second World War as an example. Every family needs to use coal stoves to cook and boil water; most families don’t have refrigerators to store food; most families do not have air conditioners, fans, televisions, and other appliances; most homes have electric lights. However, kerosene lamps are also available; there are radio or cable broadcasts. In semi-industrial and semi-agricultural societies, the most effective way to create a humanitarian disaster is to use incendiary bombs to carry out carpet bombing on the city.

The third kind is in industrial society. In an advanced industrial society, the urban population accounts for 80% of the local population. All people participate in certain types of labor and exchange labor with other people. Their lives and work lack independence. Once the exchange is interrupted, life and work cannot be carried out properly. . In modern cities, water, electricity, pipeline gas, communication networks, and transportation networks are the core elements of life and work. The most critical element is the production and supply of electricity. As long as electricity production or supply is interrupted, all living and production facilities cannot be used, and urban operations and family life will immediately be paralyzed and a humanitarian disaster will occur. In industrial societies, destroying or partially destroying power facilities can create a humanitarian disaster. The modern city in industrial society is very vulnerable.

China can easily recover Taiwan in 2008

Three Enlightenments of the Kosovo War

First, air strikes alone can lead a war without the intervention of ground forces.

Second, the order of air strike targets can be rearranged, and the opponent’s power system can be listed as the only strike target. The humanitarian disaster overwhelming the Serbian government was caused by the third phase of air strikes on the power system. It has little to do with the air strikes in the previous two phases. Post-war investigations also proved that 90% of the military targets destroyed in the first two phases were false goals. Destroyed civilian targets are real and effective. If we want to create a humanitarian disaster, we can only carry out the third phase of air strikes. If combat aircraft or ground-attack missiles are adequately prepared, if the opponents are industrialized and highly urbanized countries or regions, one or two full-scale attacks on the other’s power system can quickly create a humanitarian disaster.

Third, bombardment of fixed ground targets from above 6,000 meters is a short cut. Most countries lack heavy antiaircraft missiles that intercept high-altitude targets.

Supplementary to the Air Strike in the Kosovo War

Even with long-range air defense missiles, it is difficult to cope with ballistic missiles that use high trajectories to accurately hit targets on the ground from the blind spot at the top of the radar system. This over-top attack is still not used in the Kosovo War. The United States and NATO allies lack ballistic missiles with a range of 1,000 kilometers that can be used for over-head attacks.

China has enough short-range ballistic missiles in 2008

As long as we read the „China Space News“ at the end of 2007, we know that the missions of the various companies of the aerospace system in 2008 were mainly civilian production, and the order of the military „finally“ was over. As for the content and quantity of military orders, people who have worked in the space system are aware of it, but do not talk about such confidential information.

In February 2018, there were a total of 183 sets of all generator sets (including wind power plants and solar power plants) in Taiwan. Wind power plants and solar power plants also had step-up sub-stations.

According to the Kosovo war model, China can destroy all step-up sub-stations of electric system in Taiwan. Destroying only one time can cause power outages in Taiwan for more than three days. China’s short-range ballistic missiles at that time were enough to destroy the target many times. Using compound guidance, the accuracy of hits could meet the requirements. The nature of the Kosovo war was an international intervention, so NATO used only graphite bombs to interrupt the electricity supply for several hours. The power outage was only a few days after the Serbian government was unable to repair because of multiple graphite bomb attacks. After the mainland’s military strike against Taiwan is launched, it should interrupt Taiwan’s power supply for several days instead of interrupting the supply of electricity for 12 hours.

In 2008, if China uses short-range ballistic missiles to attack Taiwan’s power system, it is sufficient to attack the power plant’s 340,000-volt step-up sub-station, and reserve the plant’s core equipment. The step-up sub-station of the power plant has a large area, and the deviation of the short-range ballistic missile’s hit accuracy can meet the tactical requirements. In 2008, it was generally accepted that the accuracy of Chinese short-range ballistic missiles was 30 meters in circular error probable (CEP). China does not have to use graphite bombs. Using conventional high-explosion warheads, the step-up sub-stations of each power plant were razed to the ground, and one attack interrupts power supply for more than 3 days. After one or two attacks, Taiwan with an urbanization rate of 80% could not survive due to power outages, water supply disrupted, and gas supply disrupted. Accepting the takeover of the Central Government is the only choice. Taiwan’s population density is four times that of Serbia and it is easy to fall into a humanitarian disaster.

Since the invention of ballistic missiles, ballistic missiles have been known to be difficult to intercept because ballistic missiles fall from high altitudes and are faster than the fastest bullets. The projection of ballistic missiles that are several tens of kilometers away is equivalent to that of close-range bullets. Since it is impossible to intercept bullets, it is of course difficult to intercept ballistic missiles. However, ballistic missiles have the disadvantage of poor accuracy of hitting, and the circular error probable (CEP) of the precision of the advanced ballistic missiles is also a few hundred meters. Therefore, the Taiwan military does not regard the large number of ballistic missiles deployed by the mainland as a real threat.

Advances in inertial navigation technology have eliminated the shortcomings of the short-range ballistic missile’s hit accuracy. Using high-precision, low-cost ring laser gyroscopes, the short-range ballistic missile’s hit accuracy error (CEP) can be reduced to 50 to 30 meters. Using radar terrain matching end guidance technology, the circular error probable (CEP) of the short-range ballistic missile’s hit accuracy has dropped to less than 30 meters.

In 2008, Taiwan has almost no defense against ballistic missiles

In 2008, Taiwan’s long-range air defense missiles had four models, namely „I-Hawk„, „Tien Kung I„, „Tien Kung II„, and „Patriot II“.

In theory, the long-range air defense missiles owned by Taiwan in 2008 all have the ability to intercept ballistic missiles. In fact, „I-Hawk“ is a 30-year-old antique. The „Tien Kung I“ is generally capable of intercepting aircraft and cruise missiles. „Patriot II“ has a certain ability to intercept, and the probability is low. The reason is that „DF-15B“ and „DF-11A“ are warhead separation type, and the warhead radar section is small and difficult to detect. After upgrade, „DF-15B“, „DF-11A“ can choose to launch on the coast, with a higher trajectory to speed up the fall, increasing the difficulty of interception. The performance of „Tien Kung II“ is lower than that of „Patriot II“ and the probability of interception is even lower.

According to data from the US Defense Intelligence Agency in January 2010, the number of medium-range, long-range, and mid-to-high altitude air-defense missiles owned by Taiwan in 2008 was at most 1,075. Assume that each Taiwan’s medium-range, long-range, mid-to-high altitude air defense missiles can successfully intercept a „DF-15B“ and „DF-11A“ upgraded ballistic missile launched by the Chinese mainland military. After the consumption of 1,075 medium-range, long-range, and mid-to-high altitude air-defense missiles in Taiwan, the „DF-15B“ and „DF-11A“ upgraded ballistic missiles of the Chinese mainland’s military are still numerous. This is the meaning of “long and long” before completing the military purchase order.

After the consumption of 1,075 medium-range, long-range, and mid-to-high altitude air-defense missiles in Taiwan was completed, Taiwan had no defense against ballistic missiles. The mainland Chinese military can re-launch upgraded DF-15B and DF-11A ballistic missiles, destroy all step-up sub-stations of electric system in Taiwan, and immediately allow all Taiwan to paralysis at least one week. From beginning to end, the entire attack was completed within 10 minutes. The United States simply had no time to make any response and the attack was over. The mainland Chinese military can wait for Taiwan to give up its resistance and accept the mainland military to take over the defense.

In 2008, the large number of Chinese short-range ballistic missiles could easily exhaust Taiwan’s medium-range, long-range, and mid-to-high altitude air-defense missiles; the accuracy of hits was sufficient to accurately destroy the step-up sub-stations of each power plant in Taiwan. The „DF-15B“ and „DF-11A“ upgraded ballistic missiles with terminal guidance capability can upgrade the software and implement cross-attacks. That is, aiming at point B first, changing direction at the end, actually attacking point C, it can get rid of all interception, without exhausting Taiwan’s air defense missiles. In 2008 China could indeed easily recover Taiwan by force.

China’s favorable conditions for regaining Taiwan in 2008

The best year for China to recover Taiwan is 2008, because it was precisely in 2008 that the United States was deeply trapped in a once-in-a-century “financial crisis”; U.S. troops were deeply immersed in the battlefields of Iraq and Afghanistan; Taiwan has only passed an arms purchase case for eight years because of party disputes.

China’s mistakes on the Taiwan issue in 2008

Perhaps due to the following misjudgments, China missed the opportunity to unify Taiwan in 2008.

First, China must perform a grand amphibious combat drama. Because China’s strategic planning team can only write landing operations scripts, and China did not have the strength of landing operations in 2008, can not stage amphibious combat drama.

Second, the mainland must wait for Taiwan to declare its independence before launching an offensive. The fact that the separatist forces in Taiwan do not declare independence does not constitute a condition for using force. This is really a self-restraint. What is the excuse for the United States to launch the war in Iraq? The United States took the initiative to attack the Vietnamese northern government’s torpedo boats from August 1-4, 1964. The US Navy pilots fabricated radio call records and claimed to have been attacked. On August 7, the US Congress passed the Tokyo Bay Resolution, authorizing the President to use armed forces in Southeast Asia. This incident is an important sign that the United States has implemented a gradual escalation strategy during the invasion war and expanded the war to the north of Vietnam. Whether it is in 2008 or 2018, if China decides to regain Taiwan by force, it can follow the example of the United States without any excuse.

Third, when the KMT was in power, it was not appropriate to recover Taiwan by force. On March 22, 2008, KMT candidate Ma Ying-jeou was elected the top leader of Taiwan. At the time, the Kuomintang and the Democratic Progressive Party opposed each other for eight years. The Kuomintang’s position on national reunification was moderate.

On December 15, 2008, the two-way direct air route of the Taiwan Strait North Line was formally opened. The Shanghai Regional Control Center of Civil Aviation and the Taipei Regional Control Center established the first direct handover procedures for the air traffic control departments on both sides of the Taiwan Strait, marking direct, two-way, and full-fledged air navigation became a reality. This is what the compatriots on both sides have long been waiting for. This is indeed a great achievement, but it is still not comparable to the ultimate goal of national unity. The main reason why the Chinese government abandoned the use of force to reunify Taiwan was that the old thinking of landing warfare was doing something. This old thinking did not change after 10 years. Lose at sunrise and gain at sunset.

Counterattack from Taiwan

Taiwan’s military has a variety of countermeasures. National Chung-Shan Institute of Science & Technology also has sufficient technical strength to develop new types of counter weapons. It was only in 2008 that the Taiwan military’s counterattacks were too few and too weak; the key research projects of National Chung-Shan Institute of Science & Technology had not yet been completed.

Objectively speaking, Taiwan’s military and scholars advocated attacking the Three Gorges Dam on the Yangtze River in China, attacking airports in Shanghai and Guangzhou, attacking important infrastructure in China, and blocking China’s coastal ports by laid mines. All counterattacks are backed by mature technologies. Taiwan’s supporters of national unity believe that these ideas are a fantasy, and mainland experts, scholars and military enthusiasts ridicule Taiwan’s counterattack ideas as ridiculous. The self-proclaimed group always hopes that others will rest on their laurels. What is the reality? In 2008, China struggled with landing operations. At least until the Spring Festival of 2018, the Chinese military, scholars and nationalists are still perfecting landing operations programs. （孙子）Master Sun said: The side that scores many points will win; the side that scores few points will not win, let alone the side that scores on points at all. No consideration or very little consideration is due to ignorance, and they are not known that this will lead to serious consequences. Many people on both sides of the Taiwan Strait have ridiculed because of ignorance. Will Taiwan therefore give up its counterattack idea? （孙子）Master Sun said: War is a vital matter of state. It is the field on which life or death is determined and the road that leads to either survival or ruin, and must be examined with the greatest care! The real way to win is to objectively assess the strength and potential of all attacks and counterattacks of both sides, and to have a plan to respond to each other’s plans with mature technology support. While allowing the other party to pay a significant price, one must also be prepared to bear the cost, so that a winning plan can be worked out.

Taiwan’s counterattack is limited in strength and Taiwan’s counterattack has unlimited potential. In order to alleviate the damage caused by Taiwan’s counterattack to mainland China, there are three measures that can be taken in mainland China. First, we must prepare appropriate defense plans and crack Taiwan’s counterattacks. Second, preemptive strikes have made Taiwan suddenly realize that it is too late to prepare for counterattack. Third, the Sherman-style economic warfare and psychological warfare intimidated Taiwan to give up the counterattack.

Employing economic sanctions against individuals and companies that support the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) and strongly support Taiwan independence

The DPP’s support mainly comes from those wealthy members of the DPP. After using ballistic missiles to rapidly recover Taiwan, the rich DPP members must pay a one-time penalty of 80% of all personal property. Enterprises that donated to the DPP must pay a one-time fine of 90% of the average annual turnover in the past five years. The purpose is to keep them in mind when it comes to supporting the secessionist behavior. All individuals and companies that firmly support Taiwan independence will also receive the same economic penalties.

War is the showdown of strength, potential and perseverance between the two sides. When one side runs out of strength or has the potential to erode, one must also lose its willpower to yield. The limit of the war is a large-scale humanitarian disaster. In times of war, destroying each other’s war potential or paralyzing each other’s war potential will lead to a humanitarian disaster and the other party will have to yield. If China understands the above laws, China could easily recover Taiwan in 2008.

Ⅳ.The mainland’s landing operations across the Taiwan Strait have long since passed

The military on both sides of the Taiwan Strait has been dominated by the “Army Thinking” for decades. The joint landing operation plan is the main plan or even the only plan for the Chinese military to recover Taiwan by force. The anti-landing combat plan is the main plan for Taiwan’s military to defend Taiwan, and it is even the only program. The highest-ranking Chinese-to-Taiwan combat programs collected by the Taiwan military over the past decades have been joint landing operations. China’s military deployment, training, weapons and equipment procurement programs, and Taiwan’s military defense plan all focus on landing and anti-landing operations. The existing joint landing operations program with Taiwan is not sudden. The sandbox simulations on both sides of the Taiwan Strait show that in order to prevent amphibious landing operations from becoming a disaster, the Chinese military has had to postpone the landing operations across the sea.

Under normal circumstances, the party preparing for the landing operation has mastered the initiative to select the landing site and landing time, making the landing operations abrupt, concentrating on superior strength, and successfully landing. However, Taiwan Island is not large enough, and the location suitable for landing is mainly on the West Coast. Taiwan’s military has built permanent construction and deployment of saturated firepower at possible landing sites. As a party to the anti-landing, Taiwan’s military has the advantage of being idle and extremely difficult to shake.

Air Force and Rocket Army Are Difficult to Destroy Taiwan’s Permanent Preparations

The Kosovo War proved that the Serbian army, which cleverly disguised itself or was hiding in underground fortifications, has experienced NATO’s high-strength air strike. At the end of the war, the loss rate of Serbian army personnel and equipment was only 7%.

For half a century, under the guidance of the principle of “maintaining combat power underground and exerting firepower on the ground”, the Taiwanese military has built a circular defense system that is arranged in depth and step-by-step, taking the fortification as the backbone, reinforced concrete as the main body, solid core position and fortress as the support.

Taiwan is the region with the highest density of air defense missiles on the planet. As long as the US Air Force’s early-warning aircraft supports Taiwan’s military at an altitude of 10,000 meters above Japan’s Yonaguni Island, 180 kilometers away from Taiwan, Taiwan can maintain the effective operation of air defense systems. The digital artillery in Taiwan’s fortifications can effectively destroy the landing force. In particular, long-range rockets launched from underground or mountain tunnels can allow landing operations to exit the war stage.

Low-cost, Low casualties (even zero- casualties) recovery of Taiwan is in the best interest of the Taiwan Strait. Failing landing warfare can lead to domestic and international political crises. It is difficult for top leaders to make decisions. Using a short-range ballistic missile attack, destroying the target is successful. If it is not destroyed, it is a warning shot and it moves forward and back freely.



Taiwan has devoted decades of anti-landing warfare. It has not built underground transmission grids, and has not built underground nuclear power stations. It has been unable to withstand direct attacks on the power system. However, there are three ways to fight back, namely, „Hsiungfeng-2E“ cruise missiles, speed boats for laying mines at sea and attacking civilian vessels at sea.

The main attack program of rocket army can minimize losses on both sides of the Strait, complete the main attack task within 10 minutes, and can also minimize the uncertainties, so that the international community has no time to respond. While implementing the main attack program of rocket army, it is necessary to simultaneously suppress the three countermeasures adopted by the Taiwan military.

According to Taiwan’s interior ministry data, at the end of 2014, the population of Taiwan was more than 23.43 million. There are 780,000 rural households in Taiwan, and the agricultural population is more than 4 million, accounting for 19% of the total population.

After the main attack program of rocket army disrupted the supply of water, electricity and gas, Taiwan’s 19 million urban residents was unable to properly process food, refrigerators stored food rots, and industries and service industries were paralyzed. One week after the interruption of water, gas and electricity supply, the will of Taiwan’s urban residents will collapse and they will launch large-scale demonstrations, forcing the Taiwan authorities to give up their resistance.

It is not an undeclared war. The first element of the main attack program of rocket army is not to declare war!

If, as a matter of practice, the mainland gradually reaches a point in the media wars (If this can be tolerated, what cannot), and at the same time assembling forces and carrying out live ammunition exercises, Taiwan’s military will be on high alert and take emergency measures; the United States will also take emergency measures in order to contain the military actions on both sides of the Taiwan Straits, they arrived at the scene of the conflict within a few hours.

Because Taiwan and the United States have already initiated challenges, China does not need to declare war. On February 27, 2006, as the leader of Taiwan, Chen Shui-bian officially announced the termination of the „National Unification Commission,“ and announced the termination of the application of the „National Unification Program.“. From then on, as long as China have the technical means and find a winning plan, China can attack at any time. The „Taiwan Travel Act“ was formally signed and entered into force in the United States on March 16, 2018. The United States has flagrantly violated the one-China policy. China no longer has to deal with the United States. China should take military action to recover Taiwan early. (Sorry, no professional analysis can ignore the U.S. position)

Ten minutes attacking! all attacks will be completed within 10 minutes.

Twenty-seven targets means 27 large-scale power plants were identified (Accounted for 94.1% of Taiwan’s electricity supply).

Responding to the US intervention plan: The United States dispatched six aircraft carriers and all Stealth aircrafts could not do anything. Because ballistic missiles are difficult to intercept after launch, the United States must intervene to destroy only ballistic missile launch vehicles. China can move its short-range ballistic missile launch position back 200 kilometers; China can use the „Dongfeng-16“, „Dongfeng-21D“ and „Dongfeng-26“ medium-range and long-range ballistic missiles to commit US troops.

Sea and air tight man-to-man defense!

When the Rocket Army launched an attack, the Eastern Theater and other services in the Southern Theater entered a tight man-to-man defensive position.

The Mainland’s South China Sea Fleet deployed surface warships and conventional diesel-electric submarines from the Ryukyu Islands’ Miyakojima Waterway to the vast waters of the Bashi Strait and the southern mouth of the Taiwan Strait.

The airspace on the west side of the Taiwan Strait has S-300 and S-400 air defense missile system defenses. AWACS and maritime patrol aircrafts of the Eastern Theater and the Southern Theater Air Force shall be closely monitored for 24-hour continuous airspace and sea areas in eastern Taiwan within 14 days of the attack.

The above deployment is a necessary way to counter the Taiwan military’s „Hsiungfeng-2E“ cruise missiles, speed boats for laying mines at sea and attacking civilian vessels at sea, and closely monitor the source. After the Taiwan military sent out speed boats for laying mines at sea and large-scale surface warships, it was discovered by an Airborne Early-Warning Aircraft and a maritime patrol aircraft. The nearby South Sea Fleet surface warship will immediately attack. After the two submarines of the Taiwan military went out into the sea, they will be immediately destroyed by the conventional submarines of the AIP-assisted power submarine of South Sea Fleet that are lurking in the nearby. AIP-assisted power Conventional submarines carry a lot of liquid oxygen and can lurk underwater for 2 weeks. After the Taiwan military launched the „Hsiungfeng-2E“ cruise missile from the east coast of Taiwan, the Mainland’s Early-Warning Aircraft in the air immediately notified the surface ships of the South China Sea Fleet in the nearby sea to launch interceptors. The „Hsiungfeng-2E“ cruise missile that has survived the interception will also be continuously tracked by the Airborne Early Warning Aircraft and will be continuously intercepted by other air defense systems.

U.S. trade embargo

After the Chinese mainland used the main attack program of rocket army to cut off Taiwan’s electricity supply in 10 minutes, the first option for the United States to intervene in the Chinese military’s unification of Taiwan was the trade embargo. Even a few weeks of trade embargo will cause irreparable losses to the leading US industry, and will certainly bring great difficulties to China. Specific results: China’s traditional industries will suffer major losses, and chips and other high-tech industries will gain development opportunities, winning in the chip industry to replace imports; the United States double-dip, low-end industries to replace China by other countries, the chip industry will lose the Chinese market, Chinese chip companies will also enter other countries after the import substitution.

Coping with offshore blockade

The precision of the medium and long-range ballistic missiles has been improved step by step, and has the ability to attack large-scale maritime mobile targets. The reliability of the US sea-based anti-ballistic missile system is only 50%. If the incoming ballistic missile releases a false target, it can force the defense side to launch an expensive interceptor. Only 20% of large US surface ships have anti-ballistic missile capabilities. China can give priority to attacking US surface ships without anti-ballistic missile capabilities. The United States is unable to impose a sea blockade on China.

Efficient removal of mines deployed in China’s coastal areas

U.S. military experts have noticed many times the fatal weaknesses of China: The coastal continental shelf is easily blocked by mines, and it is recommended that Taiwan fight the mainland with mine warfare.

Indeed, mines are the lowest cost and most effective naval weapon. The most vulnerable country to the mine blockade in the world is China, followed by Germany. Mine warfare is characterized by the ease of mine-laying and the low cost of mine-laying. De-mining is time-consuming and troublesome. De-sweeping costs are also high. Even if the mines are cleared, the navigation channel suffers from the blockade. The main role of mines is to blockade, and it is not important whether merchant ships are sunk.

The Chinese mainland can purchase 20 old ships (10,000-ton bulk carriers, aged over 10 years), dismantle the power system, and use electric propulsion to move the large-scale diesel engine out of the bottom of the cabin. The cabin is divided into countless compartments. Even if there are more than a dozen bays on the bottom of the ship that are bombed by mines, it will not affect the normal operation of the ship. This type of ship is equivalent to a mine-clearance tank with a mine sweeper. The tonnage is large enough that the water pressure and magnetic field can detonate all the mines where it passes; it is fast enough to remove mines at high speed; satellite positioning can be used to accurately exclude all specified waters. The shipyard’s workers quickly repaired the damaged large minesweeper, and the repaired minesweeping ship continued to participate in the mine clearance work. This kind of large-scale minesweeper can even carry out unmanned operations.

High-speed, large-scale mine-sweeping ships allow mine warfare to exit the war stage.

Ⅵ.The peaceful reunification plan that convinces the people of Taiwan

The two sides of the Taiwan Strait have not been unified so far. There are two main reasons. First, the Taiwan military has overestimated its own defense capabilities and believes that it can resist reunification by force; the mainland military is trapped in the thinking of landing warfare and ignores the strategy of winning by the Rocket Army. Second, Taiwan believes that the political systems and judicial systems on the two sides of the strait are too different to be unified; the mainland’s political system is different from Taiwan’s, and the mainland is not good at expressing the political system’s confidence. As long as the mainland’s judicial system is slightly adjusted, the cross-strait political and judicial systems will reach a basic balance of governance. The difference can be properly resolved through „one country, two systems.“ There are no obstacles to the reunification of the two sides of the strait in terms of living habits, economic systems, and economic development levels.

Taiwan’s military innovation/asymmetry thinking – forcing Beijing to decide

The defense cost of the mainland is 14 times that of Taiwan’s defense, and Taiwan’s defense capability has reached its limit. Taiwan will only use offense as a defensive strategy in the future. Offense is the best defense.

In 2008, Taiwan did not have a „Patriot III“ air-defense missile. The „Hsiungfeng-2E“ cruise missile with a range of 600 kilometers was formally put into active service and mass production in 2011. The mainland did not seize the best opportunity to use force to attack Taiwan.

In 2018, the mainland had „J-20“ stealth fighters, „Su-35“ multi-purpose fighters, S-400 air defense missiles, aircraft carriers and more ballistic missiles.

After the Taiwan military is forced to turn to „innovative/asymmetric thinking“, the mainland can destroy Taiwan’s high-value targets and Taiwan can also destroy mainland high-value targets.

Taiwan’s military has three asymmetric operational plans that require the attention of the mainland. First, the “Hsiungfeng-2E” cruise missile has been improved in stealth and further increased its range to 2,500 kilometers; the second is to obtain seawater-extracted uranium and laser uranium enrichment technologies from Japan. The third is to rapidly increase the current model of „Hsiungfeng-2E“ cruise missiles.

This book only evaluates Taiwan’s asymmetric combat thinking and equipment that have been announced. It does not make any suggestion to avoid changing the existing military structure on both sides of the strait.

As far as the think tanks in Taiwan and the United States generally believe that mine warfare is the mainland’s Achilles‘ heel, this book has announced cracking solutions.

The pattern and form of war are moving toward a low-cost, unmanned, intelligent war era. The military strengths and military advantages of large countries will quickly disappear. A high-tech company with only a few dozen scientists can defeat any big country. It belongs to the mainland in 2018 and Taiwan in 2020. It is uncertain in 2019!

In the 39 years before March 16, 2018, the United States did not support Taiwan’s independence. On March 16th, 2018, the United States took the initiative to support Taiwan’s independence forces because the United States officially used China as a competitor and revisionist of international rules. Competition, containment, and confrontation will become the normal state of Sino-U.S. relations.

This book analyzes various cross-strait unifying plans: diplomatic and logistics sanctions, dual pensions to persuade Taiwanese military personnel to hand over defense, amphibious landing wars, the main attack program of rocket army, and mainland political reforms to influence Taiwan and Lee Teng-hui’s national unifying plan. The book also analyzes five major reforms on the mainland. This book also makes a special study of the Sino-U.S. trade war or trade embargo, as well as the pelagic embargo that the United States may impose on China.

The 7250-word book review written by Professor Liu Mingfu of China National Defense University was also published with the book. National unity is the first goal of the Chinese dream. The book reveals that China will recover Taiwan within one year and achieve national unity.

The United States used civil war to end the political opposition between the South and the North. China is no exception. China will decide on its own time and methods for regaining Taiwan. If the separatist forces in Taiwan cannot accept the principle of „one country, two systems“ within three months, the main attack program of rocket army will be the only choice.


Chen Guodong is a Chinese independent scholar without party affiliation and a pioneer of the new military revolution, worked in the Chinese Aerospace System for 10 years. He is good at cracking various military impasses. He is a columnist of Defence Science & Technology Industry by the State Administration for Science, Technology and Industry for National Defence. He has published his book Will the U.S.A. be Replaced by Japan? in the United States.

Mr. Chen seems to be a warmonger strategist who believes that China should start a short war against Taiwan with short range rockets within 1 year as this would be the last window of opportunity. A war with Taiwan would be short, included a low political risk and the USA wouldn´t intervene.Therefore Xi Jinping should use the opportunity and dare to start this reunification war.He wrote me in an e-mail:

Dear Ralf Ostner,


Best wishes from Nanjing

Chen Guodong

I made the following comments in return:

Dear Mr. Chen,

maybe a war between China and Taiwan would be more a cyberwar than a traditional or a rocket war. Maybe we will see the first cyberwar in history between Israel and Iran.Today´s war scenarios should include cyberspace and space. And:Are you sure the US wouldn´t intervene after such a rocket war? As recommendation an interview with TX Hammes with our blog Global Review:

A quotation from TX Hammes in our interview:

„I think a Sino-American war is very low probability. But never underestimate the ability of leaders to make really dumb decisions (WWI). Like WWI, a Sino-American war will collapse the global trading economy as soon as the war starts. The most worrying possibility is a misjudgment that leads to an incident at sea or in the air or that China mistakenly believes it can win a “short war” and thus make fairly painless gains. This is one of the key deterrent aspect of OC. It states up front that a US-China war will be a long, difficult war.“

And please also don´t underestimate the possibility that beside the CP China Trump could also make „really dumb decisions“.

Best wishes

Ralf Ostner


However, Mr. Chen replied and our Chinese Douhet told me that a war with Taiwan would be short, that  economic sanctions, a maritime blockade as Offshore Controll wouldn´t work and that the USA wouldn´t intervene as the Americans would be afraid of a nuclear war and a nuclear bomb on New York:


Dear Ralf,


Best wishes



Here TX Hammes`comment which doesn´t focus on the military details, but on the historic examples which he thinks are flawed. He also points out that in military history no wars were won by a pure air bombing campaign, even as the inventor of air campaign wars Douthet thought it would be the case.


It is certainly a bold plan. Unfortunately, it mostly ignores history and the history it does use (Kosovo and the U.S. Civil War) contains deeply flawed analyses of those actions.
 Most analyst point to several factors in addition to air power that led to the end of the Kosovo campaign. Specifically — Russia withdrew its support of the Serbs; the insurgent army (the tigers I think they were called) were gaining capability; US Army attack helicopters were slowly getting in to position; and the Serbs had achieved their strategic goal of ethnic cleansing.
Sherman’s March to the Sea did cause massive damage but it was a strip roughly 20-40 miles wide from Atlanta to Savannah (about 300 miles).  He laid waste to about 12,000 square miles. The Confederacy contained 770,000 square miles. The damage was not physical but psychological.  The south still didn’t quit until its field armies were destroyed or captured.
I am not an expert on China so cannot give you an opinion on whether China would try something like this.  But as a historian I would caution against optimistic plans that envision short wars.
All sides thought the European allies would easily crush the French Revolutionary Armies.  That conflict lasted 23 years.  Both sides thought the US Civil War, World War I, World War II, the Korean War, and the U.S. invasion of Iraq would be short. None were.  Even the 6-Day war between the Arabs and Israel is really still going on. Nations are tough. Douhet first published the concept of strategic bombing winning a war in 1920.  So far no one has been able to do it.
The US had to virtually flatten German and Japan before those nations quit.  Does the author think Chinese are not as tough as Germans or Japanese?

Dear TX,

you wrote as central argument:


However I think that some Chinese strategists will doubt your comparison.
First, Taiwan is a little island and in the perception of Mainland China not a „nation“, also with an identity conflict which splits the society and undermines its willingness to defend itself or to fight a long war. Therefore they perceive WW1, WW2, the Korean war, the Vietnam, war, Iraq as different examples as all these were nation states, mostly not democracies or not tiny islands. The American counterparts in these wars were tough fascists, SS-Nationalsocialists with most of a conquered Europe as their battlefiled, Communists, a Japanese dictatorship with an occupied Asia and Islamists or Arab nationalists with big territories as battle field and and not „weak“and soft democrats on a tiny island.
Secondly, the CP Ch thinks that Taiwan is a democracy, therefore has no real political unity and has no real fighting spirit and wouldn´t be as tough as the Germans and the Japanese. The CPCh perceives its dictatorship as tough and willing to sacrifice and to fight while they perceive democracies as weak and soft and unwilling to defend themselves or to sacrifice a lot.
Thirdly, below an article by Radio Free Asia about China´s new approach to subvert the Taiwanese democracy from within–therefore Xi Jinping gave the United Front a more important role to do so.Chinese strategists think that the combination by an short rocket attack from outside and the subversion of Taiwanese society from within will produce an unwillingness of the Taiwanese to fight a long war and make them capitulate at an early stage.
Fourth, some Chinese think that the USA wouldn´t intervene and that even that Offshore Controll wouldn´t workl (compare Chen´s book).
Best wishes



Unable to Charm Taiwan Into Reunification, China Moves to Subvert Island’s Democracy

A commentary by Dan Southerland

China recently has been threatening Taiwan with artillery drills and bombers flying near the self-governing island.

But according to some analysts a more serious threat to Taiwan may turn out to be Beijing’s attempts to subvert democracy there.

This would involve, among other things, encouraging splits among the island’s people that would work to China’s advantage.

  1. Michael Cole, chief editor of the Taiwan Sentinel, summed this up well when he wrote that “instead of trying in vain to win the hearts and minds of the Taiwanese as part of its effort to engineer the unification of China, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has…abandoned that strategy.”

Instead, Cole said, the CCP is “now intensifying efforts to corrode and undermine Taiwan’s democratic institutions, create social instability, further isolate Taiwan internationally, and hollow out Taiwan’s economy by attracting its talent.”

Beijing regards democratic and self-governing Taiwan as part of its territory, a breakaway province that must return to the motherland.

According to Cole, the key reason for China’s shift to a subversion strategy is the failure of an eight-year-long attempt by China “to shape Taiwanese self identification and support for unification through various economic incentives and various acts self-described as ‘goodwill.’”

That approach had the counterproductive effect of strengthening a trend in Taiwan for its people to identify themselves as Taiwanese rather than Chinese, an identity that has been highlighted repeatedly in public opinion polls in Taiwan.

And in elections for both the executive and legislative branches of government 2016, Taiwan’s voters came out in favor of a return to power of what Cole calls the “Taiwan-centric” Democratic Progressive Party (DPP).

China’s unhappiness with Taiwan’s new president

For eight years, from 2008 to 2016, Taiwan’s President Ma Ying-jeou pursued a policy of rapprochement with Beijing.

So China was clearly unhappy when Taiwan’s new president Tsai Ing-wen took power in May of 2016.

Beijing sees Tsai as a proponent of independence for the Taiwan and its more than 23 million people.

Though Tsai has been careful not to speak openly about independence, she hasn’t supported the conciliatory China policy pursued by her Nationalist Party predecessor, Ma Ying-jeou.

Tsai’s ruling DPP has also declined to endorse a so-called consensus reported to have been agreed to in 1992 by China and Taiwan when the island was ruled by the Kuomintang (KMT), or Nationalist Party.

DPP supporters contend that there’s little documentation to show that any consensus was agreed upon.

At the same time, Tsai has taken a pragmatic approach by calling for a continuation of the status quo with China.

Beijing has cut off contacts with Taiwan that had been established during Ma Ying-jeou’s presidency and has been using a variety of means to pressure its government and, sometimes under cover, to influence its people.

In 2017, China intensified its efforts to get nations that have diplomatic relations with Taiwan to break off their ties with Taiwan.

These efforts had ceased when Ma Ying-jeou was in power under a kind of tacit agreement by China to ease pressure in the diplomatic realm.

How PRC subversion works

Russell Hsiao, executive director of the U.S.-based think tank Global Taiwan Initiative, has outlined how a policy of subverting Taiwan’s democratic system might work.

In testimony last month before the congressionally funded U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission (USCC), Hsiao said that China had already adopted subversion tactics in the 1980s, when Taiwan began moving from a dictatorship under martial law to a democratic system.

He described such tactics as part of the Communist Party’s United Front policy of “forming alliances with non-communist masses against a common enemy” that dates back to the 1920s.

According to New Zealand scholar Anne-Marie Brady, “United Front activities incorporate working with groups and prominent individuals in society; information management and propaganda; and it has also frequently been a means of facilitating espionage.”

China’s leader Xi Jinping gave a speech in 2014 on the importance of United Front work, calling it one of the Communist Party’s “magic weapons.”

As Hsiao explains it, given the history of the Chinese civil war between the Communists and Nationalists and the strategic importance of Taiwan for the Communist Party’s leaders, Taiwan remains “the United Front’s number one priority.”

After the People’s Republic of China (PRC) took the Republic of China’s seat in the United Nations in 1971, Beijing’s objective evolved into the incorporation of Taiwan into the PRC under a formula described as “One Country, Two Systems.”

That formula, rejected at the time by the Nationalist government, was applied to Hong Kong and remains until today the blueprint for the Communist Party since it was first proposed by China’s supreme leader Deng Xiaoping in 1979, says Hsiao.

In the meantime, Hsiao says, nonmilitary actions by China that take place in a “grey zone of conflict falling beneath the level of warfare” possess the “most coercive potential against Taiwan.”

China’s nonmilitary tools include economic coercion, political influence, clandestine measures, information operations such as propaganda and disinformation, and the use of noncommunist proxies in Taiwan who act motivated by self interest rather than ideology.

China’s efforts to get Taiwan’s diplomatic allies to break their ties with the island and switch their recognition to Beijing can have a psychological effect.

Since the election of Tsai Ing-wen as president of Taiwan in 2016, China has intensified its anti-Taiwan diplomatic offensive.

On May 24, the West African nation of Burkina Faso cut its ties with Taiwan, ending a 24-year-long relationship with Taipei only a few weeks after the Dominican Republic severed its relations with Taiwan.

Taiwan now has only 18 diplomatic allies around the world compared with 22 when Tsai was elected president.

In a televised statement, Tsai criticized Beijing for its “dollar diplomacy” and said that Taiwan would “no longer be forbearing” and would instead become more determined in seeking international partnerships.

But as Hsiao explains, “the continued bleeding of diplomatic allies could lead to lower public confidence and morale in Taiwan.”

Beijing is also using its influence to exclude Taiwan from international organizations, such as the World Health Organization and the International Civil Aviation Organization.

Recruiting Taiwan’s young people

According to Russell Hsiao, the student-led “Sunflower Movement” on Taiwan in the spring of 2014 caused a rethink in Beijing’s approach to United Front work against Taiwan.

Student protesters occupied Taiwan’s Legislature for 23 days in opposition to a trade agreement which the island’s government had drawn up with China without what many considered to be adequate consultation.

Beijing found that high-level exchanges with Taiwan had done little to change pro-independence views on the island. Therefore, Hsiao says, China shifted its United Front strategy to focus on targeting small and medium-sized enterprises, middle to low income people, regions outside of the capital Taipei, and Taiwan’s youth.

Targeted groups also included aboriginals, distant relatives, fishermen’s associations, religious organizations, pro-China political parties, Chinese spouses, and retired Taiwan Army military officers, some of whom have been willing to provide sensitive military information in return for bribes provided by Beijing operatives.

In a report written for the U.S.-based Jamestown Foundation, China scholar Peter Mattis wrote that in 2009 then President Ma Ying-jeou “opened the flow of people and businesses across the strait without consulting security officials on how to manage the risks.”

This brings up another issue: An estimated 300,000 Chinese wives in Taiwan with passports from China are reported to include many who are associated with pro-unification groups.

Chinese businesses go through local pro-China legislators in Taiwan to purchase local fish products, making some local industries beholden to China and its interests, according to Russell Hsiao.

In an effort to attract Taiwanese high school graduates, China offers them subsidies to study at Chinese universities and to stay on and work there if they like.

This can be particularly appealing at a time when wages remain stagnant in Taiwan and openings for well-paying jobs are limited.

At the same time, China’s economy has been growing much faster than Taiwan’s in recent years, thus opening up more opportunities to start up small businesses in China.

Michael Holtz of The Christian Science Monitor reported last month from China’s southeastern city of Fuzhou on Beijing’s efforts to win over young Taiwanese.

Fuzhou is located on the western side of the Taiwan Strait and only 155 miles from Taipei, Taiwan’s capital.

According to Holtz, in February Beijing introduced 31 new policies aimed at making it easier for Taiwanese to invest, study, and work on the mainland.

The U.S. Connection

As Russell Hsiao notes, Beijing attempts to use United Front activities to weaken Taiwan’s relationship with the United States, its main security partner.

Chinese propaganda presents China as Taiwan’s natural partner for cultural and ethnic reasons, despite the fact that Taiwan and the U.S. share an interest in supporting democracy and human rights.

On March 17, President Donald Trump angered Beijing by signing legislation known as the Taiwan Travel Act, which encourages U.S. officials to visit Taiwan.

The U.S. has unofficial ties with Taiwan and provides the island with defensive weapons.

Trump also upset Beijing by authorizing U.S. companies to sell to Taiwan technology needed to renovate the island’s aging submarine fleet, the oldest such submarine fleet in the world.

Perhaps more importantly, U.S. technology will now support Taiwan’s development of new submarines.

Dan Southerland is RFA’s founding executive editor.


Mr. Chen Guodong replied to TX`and my comments as follows:


Dear Ralf,

Mr. TX thinks that the historical examples I mentioned are flawed. This is caused by the different perspectives of both parties. First, during the American Civil War, the United Kingdom, the North of the United States, and the Confederacy of the South were all democratic countries. Civil war between democratic countries or the opposition is easily accepted. Second, 150 years have passed since the end of the American Civil War. The United States’ anger with Britain has been forgotten.

The end of the Kosovo war involves many aspects. This is a fact, but the key factor is that the U.S. air strikes have caused a humanitarian catastrophe in Serbia and Serbian people no longer support the war.

When General Sherman marched to the sea, the Confederate army had lost many control zones. I agree that the psychological blow is greater, but this is caused by the destruction of living goods.

Best wishes

Chen Guodong



Dear Ralf,

Thank you for forwarding Mr. TX’s four points. I basically agree with Mr. Ralph’s analysis. Taiwan has no potential for war and it is a highly urbanized area that is very fragile. If the Chinese government continues to use the united front strategy, it will not be able to govern the unified Taiwan. Undoubtedly, the mainland has many problems with democracy and the legal system. I put forward five mainland social reform programs in my book. In the area of governing the unification of Taiwan, I stated in the book that the Chinese government must choose third-party non-partisan scholars to take charge of Taiwan affairs. This is a correct and feasible management method.

Best wishes

Chen Guodong


Dear Ralf,

I think the fighting spirit is not important. Technology has replaced the spirit. As long as there is a technical plan to paralyze the other party, the other’s tenacious spirit will not help. Precision-guided weapons replaced the fighting between soldiers. If precision-guided weapons are long-range and difficult to intercept, the other peoples will lose confidence.

Best wishes

Chen Guodong


Dear Chen,


the fighting spirit might not that unimportant as you perceive it. As German we had the air campaigns of the USA and GB (Bomber Harris) which wanted to break the fighting will of the German people which it didn´t .It was the Sovjet offensive and the American and British „boots on the ground“which decided WW2, not the air campaigns and the bomber raids.However the difference might be that in Germany you had a lot of hinterland and evacuation zones on the countryside Taiwan as an tiny island hasn´t. Don´t forget the role of fighting spirit in guerilla wars – in the Chinese civil war and during  the Japanese occupation, in the Vietnam war  Mao´s Red Army and Ho Chinminh´s Vietcong had technological inferiority, but the will of its people to sacrifice and to fight. Even the USA with its superior technology today has big problems with the Taliban in Afghanistan. However, a war with Taiwan wouldn´t be a guerilla war–therefore this comparison is flawed. You are right that one should not overestimate the role of fighting spirit. Japanese military dictator Tojo also overestimated the role of the Bushido, the fighting spirit of the Germans and the Japaness which he thought would be decisive and could replace technology. Tojo visited Germany many times before the war and was impressed by the military culture the German state and its civil society had. Tojo also visited the USA before the war and his impression was, that this democracy was a hedonist, weak, fragmented society which could generate no real fighting will like the Germans and the Japanese which was an underestimation. However, WW2 was mostly won by the superior USamerican technology, but also by the fighting spirit of the Sovjet people and the American soldiers. And today´s industrial societies are more hedonistic, nihilistic and consumeristic than in the past–especially the younger generation. If the Taiwanese sunflower movement really cares about Taiwan democracy or more about the possession of a smartphone, future will show.

Best wishes



Dear Ralf,
In 1942, Soviet troops had already failed on the battlefield. The huge amount of aid from the United States saved the Soviet Union. The United States, Britain, France, the Soviet Union,  the four major powers unite against Germany. If one-on-one, they are not Germany’s opponents.The art of command of the German army and the tenacious spirit of the soldiers are very important. Germany’s weapons and equipment during the early days of the war were also very good, but the equipment was lagging behind.
Best wishes
 Chen Guodong
Dear Ralf,
I agree with you that tenacious resistance will make any big country helpless. Therefore, while the mainland is unifying Taiwan, it must implement social reforms. Otherwise, it will lead to endless political protests.
Best wishes
Chen Guodong

Dear Chen,

this sort of overestimation is mostly  an indicator for „voluntarism“. Where is a will, there is a way. Hitler and Tojo were very voluntaristic, Tojo in the tradition of the Samurai´s Bushido, Hitler in his book „My Struggle(Mein Kampf) or when Leni Riefenstahl produced the film „Triumph of Will“for him.  On the one side this leads to a massive mobilization of the masses and this sort of fighting spirit is not unimportant, however it also leads to a misperception of reality and the relation between will and technology. Comparable with Mao. His voluntarism was positive in his fight against Japan and the KMT, but afterwards voluntarism and his mass movements lead to voluntaristic experiments like The Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution. Mao thought that tiny backyard steel ovens and the will of the masses could replace technology and leapfrog the Chinese economy in front of the USA. As a Chinese you know how these voluntaristic experiments ended. Same with Hitler. He overestimated the role of the fighting spirit and at the end of the war he became totally insane and crazy, had illusion about the power relations and the avaiable technology and weapons, believed in wonder weapons and good fortune (Rossevelt´s death) that could change the desperate situation on the battlefield. Goebbel´s film „Kohlberg“ which praised the fighting spirit of the masses and the total people´s war, ignoring the role of technology and the military is an good indicator for that. As China is developing from a one-party-dictatorship to a one-man-dictatorship under Xi Jinping, there also might be the danger that Xi is surrounded by yes-sayers and opportunists that might bring him to misreceptions of reality and voluntarism. In Trump-USA we see the same phenomen.

Best wishes



Dear Ralf,
I agree with all your analysis. The biggest enemy of Germany under Hitler’s rule and China under Mao’s rule was not the United States but the supreme leader and supreme dictator. The United States and Britain are democracies. During the Second World War, they did not make big mistakes in their strategic and operational command.
Hitler lost a lot of opportunities. This was caused by his arbitrariness.
My book belongs to the style of German Marshal Manstein. Marshal Manstein played the maximum potential under the existing conditions and worked out a successful battle plan, which other people thought was impossible. There is a military principle that technology determines tactics. Today, there is also a new principle in politics: Technology determines politics.
In the new war mode, fighting power does not belong to the soldiers who are loyal to the leader, but to scientists and engineers. So, I am not very worried about Trump’s political strongman. Because technology is more powerful. However, who controls the technology?
Best wishes
Chen Guodong
Dear Chen,
„There is a military principle that technology determines tactics. Today, there is also a new principle in politics: Technology determines politics. In the new war mode, fighting power does not belong to the soldiers who are loyal to the leader, but to scientists and engineers. So, I am not very worried about Trump’s political strongman. Because technology is more powerful. However, who controls the technology?“


Maybe this is an overestimation of the role of technology on the contrary. Still, the decisions and strategies in a war are decided by the political leadership. The party controlls the guns and not the guns the party–old slogan of the CP China. However, if Artifical Intelligence and algorithms become more important, a lot of the decision making will be automised and not in the hand of generals and politicians. TX wrote an article about drones in which he sees the future: Masses of drones at sea,  underwater, in the air and at land which replace F-15, battle groups, submarines,etc. If this would become the tendency, you cannot operate all these masses of drones by a manned central command, but only by computers ; AI and algorithms have to decide who got killed and what operations these drones will execute. But who deides and controlls the algorithms? However, I don´t think that the CP China will leave the decision to counter US military strikes with conventional and nuclear weapons or cyberweapons to AI and algorithms.

Best wishes



Dear Chen,

a lot of Manstein´s ideas originated from Charles De Gaulle who wrote a book during the First World War about tank warfare and decisive tankbattles by Blitzkrieg. Manstein read that book and transfered De Gaulle´s ideas in German warfare. While the German military discovered that these were brilliant ideas, De Gaulles didn´t find supporters in the French Army which relied on the old warfare and the Magioniotline–the central weakness Manstein and his tanks could exploit with his Blitzkrieg.What an irony of history.

Best wishes


Dear Ralf,
Victory countries usually bear the burden of victory and reject new military ideas. This precisely provides other countries with room for development.
Best wishes
Chen Guodong




Über Ralf Ostner
