OPINION:
America’s world leadership, and maybe its very survival, is threatened by China’s determination to become the world’s dominant military, political and economic power, subjugating the United States and our allies to its will and upending the world order.
Taiwan, which China claims as its own, is where the issue will come to a head. It could come, and soon, through threats and ultimatums; or satellite jamming, cyber warfare or other asymmetric means; or blockade; or all-out attack. The response for the United States to any of these is either a humiliating acquiescence or armed conflict. If the first response is unthinkable, as it would result in dire repercussions for the future peace and freedom of the world, the second choice might end just as badly due to the relative weakness of the U.S. and allied military power in the region vis-a-vis China.
Alarmist? Yes. But we believe it is realistic that acquiescence or military defeat is Hobson’s choice unless China’s wolf warrior behavior becomes the predominant focus of the administration, Congress, media and public. China can be restrained — the weak almost never attack the strong — but it requires thinking about what no one wants to conjure, especially when easily discernible problems abound.
China’s desire to swallow Taiwan has become an open, spoken obsession under President Xi Jinping, China’s increasingly autocratic ruler.
He has spearheaded such illegal action as appropriating much of the South China Sea despite international court rulings, turning shoals into military airfields and claiming vast ocean areas as Chinese territory. Further aggressions (Hong Kong, Tibet, Uyghur Muslim genocide in its Xinjiang region, other actions at home and abroad) scream out res ipsa loquitur.
China has created the world’s largest navy, largest army and most modern Air Force. It has become the military leader in space. Its massed power in the Western Pacific overwhelms the U.S. and its allies. Yes, the United States vastly outspends China in defense (partially due to the global nature of our defense requirements, the high manpower costs of the volunteer force and high procurement costs vis-a-vis China, whose military costs are not transparent).
But the facts on the ground?
The U.S. Navy has an aging, declining fleet; eight types of Air Force aircraft are now 50-plus years old; the Army and Marines are ground down and disoriented from two decades of counterinsurgency warfare; our nuclear triad is in dire need of upgrade while China builds hundreds of new missile silos, and the new Space Force lacks the hypersonic and satellite-killing capabilities that the Chinese space force has already demonstrated.
How easy for China to act against Taiwan, 100 miles from its shore — and how difficult for the U.S., thousands of miles away (including most of its overseas bases) to counteract.
The Pentagon has conducted many war games involving Chinese aggression against Taiwan — and the U.S. side has lost every time, more overwhelmingly each year. Taiwan is China’s catnip. It is America’s kryptonite.
Also, China is engaged in an increasing alliance with Russia to go along with its alliance with North Korea. If one considers any Russian incursion in Ukraine or a North Korean attack on South Korea before any Chinese action, distinct possibilities not even addressed here, the situation becomes an unmitigated nightmare.
What to do? A holistic approach is required. The China threat should be the most significant issue in the upcoming congressional elections and the subject of considerably more media attention than it has received. It will require economic pain and political courage (both in short supply). Opinion polls already show a strong desire to defend Taiwan and its freedom. Still, mobilizing a combined administration-Congress-media-public consensus on treating the China threat with actions, not just words is a circular chicken-and-egg finger-pointing situation unless there is an external educational, structural and contextual push.
That push might take the form of a new joint military-civilian organization of some kind with real teeth that delineates all the myriad factors involved — from defense needs, cyber security and trade restrictions to home front infrastructure (e.g., U.S. lack of shipbuilding capacity) — and mobilizes national will to act accordingly. The organization cannot just be an administrative or congressional entity — too noninclusive — although the executive and legislative branches need to be a part of a larger group that might include think tanks, defense industry representatives, businesses, foreign policy experts, etc.
Who decides the group’s composition, powers, timetable, staffing and funding? Strategic thinkers abound. Washington think tanks could weigh in. A unified, detailed plan is needed in short order that all Americans can support, offering the best prospect of either keeping China in check or, if that desired outcome fails, could save the U.S. and allies from a capitulation that would result in vassal status and cause the collapse of the world order with horrifying consequences.
The time to mobilize on a holistic basis is long overdue, and even if started today, it would take years to bear fruit. China is very unlikely to wait that long. As American power deteriorates, China’s accelerates, and its ambitions expand accordingly.
• Maj. Gen. A. Bowen Ballard, USAF (Ret.), managed the planning, directing and setting of policies for all Air Force intelligence activities as the assistant chief of staff for Intelligence and worked with the National Security Agency, among his assignments. He now is a consultant in defense matters. Richard H. Amberg Jr. retired as associate publisher and opinion editor of The Washington Times. He is a Captain, USNR (Ret.).
Please read our comment policy before commenting.