Boots on the ground within a week: Japan issues warning on Taiwan conflict

Few flashpoints have the potential to bring about the beginning of the Third World War and risking the future of human civilisation itself quite like a potential confrontation over Taiwan.

For Beijing, the continuing survival of the breakaway renegade island democracy is a powerful and humiliating reminder of the rising superpower’s troubled and “embarrassing” history during the 19th and early-20th century.

The survival and expulsion of Chinese Nationalist leader Chiang Kai-shek’s routed forces to the island of Taiwan survived further attempts to root them out by Mao’s triumphant Communist Party, thanks in large part to the protection of the United States.

For the United States, the enduring support for the self-governing Taiwanese people stands out as one of the last remaining ideological battlegrounds of the Cold War between Marxist Communism and liberal democracy and, in many ways, marks a moment of recognition by the United States that even it has limitations.

In an effort to rectify this humiliation, Chinese President Xi Jinping has set a “deadline” of 2027 to “reunify” the mainland and island democracy, raising the temperature of relations between the two and potentially bringing the United States and allies, like Australia, into direct conflict with the People’s Republic of China.

While an uneasy peace continues to hold in the region, for many analysts and even casual observers, it is easy to understand why many believe it is only a matter of time before a miscalculation or accident spirals into full-blown conflict between the United States and the People’s Republic of China.

Not adding any confidence to the situation, the Japanese government has released a report detailing their concerns about the capacity of the Chinese People’s Liberation Army to effectively launch a coordinated invasion of the island democracy and land troops on Taiwan to prosecute their “reunification” efforts.

VIEW ALL

Boots on the ground in a week

It is well known that for Beijing to succeed without incurring significant costs in the face of overwhelming US retaliation, it has to move quickly to secure Taiwan and its major population centres while dealing decisive damage to any intervening US and allied forces in the region that would give the allied leadership food for thought.

Bringing us to the Japanese analysis of Beijing’s ramping up of military exercises around Taiwan during 2023, which revealed some truly startling and concerning realities for Indo-Pacific.

Reported by The Japan Times’ The Yomiuri Shimbun, the Japanese government stated, “The [Japanese] government had previously estimated Chinese forces would require about one month before putting troops ashore in an invasion of Taiwan, and it is increasingly concerned that the Chinese military is envisaging a very short military operation that would exploit the period before the US military and other forces could respond to such an incident.”

Unpacking the key data points used to inform the analysis, The Japan Times’ revealed, “The findings were based on an analysis of Chinese military exercises that were conducted over about one month in the summer of 2023. These drills practiced manoeuvres involving warships and other equipment, and missiles were launched at various locations within China and its nearby waters.”

Based on similar preconditions to the wargaming proposed by The Centre for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) in early 2023, the Japanese analysis begins with a concerted effort by Beijing to conduct a naval and air blockade against Taiwan, establishing the cordon to allow a follow-on ground invasion prior to intervention by forces of “mass” from the United States and its allies.

The analysis stated, “analysis of the series of exercises revealed that if various Chinese military units conducted operations in parallel, Beijing’s forces could land vast ground forces on Taiwan within a few days of imposing a maritime and air blockade around the island. The analysis findings were reported to Prime Minister Fumio Kishida early this year.

“A Chinese invasion of Taiwan is predicted to begin with a maritime blockade enforced by naval vessels. This would be followed by missile attacks on Taiwan’s military facilities and the insertion of military units by landing ships and transport helicopters to establish beachheads, and then the insertion of troops and tanks by landing vessels and large commercial cargo ships,” the analysis explained further.

Hybrid warfare to ‘cut the head off’ the Taiwanese resistance

As previously mentioned, Beijing’s presumed planning heavily emphasises being able to secure critical objectives in and around Taiwan prior to the arrival of reinforcements led by the United States from Japan, potentially South Korea and across the Indo-Pacific.

While geography favours the Chinese blockade and invasion efforts given the proximity of the island to their staging grounds in mainland China, it still has to confidently achieve maritime and air dominance prior to the arrival of the allies; the Japanese analysis believes that Taiwanese resistance would present some resistance, but it wouldn’t be enough to turn the tide.

Importantly, Beijing’s invasion will be a truly multi-domain affair, with the rising superpower leveraging its specialisation in “grey zone” and “hybrid” warfare capabilities to provide the tactical and strategic advantage ahead of the allied response.

The Japanese analysis stated, “Such an operation could run into difficulty in the face of counterstrikes from the Taiwan side and US military intervention, so Chinese military forces apparently intend to seize control of the island before the United States’ main forces could get involved. It is possible China could attempt to delay any intervention involving US and other forces by launching ‘hybrid warfare operations’ that involve a combination of armed attacks and cyber attacks on vital infrastructure.”

This approach would effectively seek to decapitate the Taiwanese attempts at resisting the Chinese onslaught, while broader non-kinetic attacks would be used to complicate and delay US-led responses without drawing the wrath of the United States should it face a more “traditional” pre-emptive strike from the People’s Liberation Army.

Ultimately, this would seek to complicate US response decision making by effectively taking physical US “skin” out of the game, combined with unreliable and conflicting data and information flowing through to both decisionmakers and combatant commanders, sowing further confusion and disarray giving Beijing further time to achieve its broader tactical and strategic objectives on the island.

Final thoughts

Australians are going to be asked to accept a number of uncomfortable realities in the coming years. First and foremost, we will have to accept that while the world is increasingly becoming “multipolar”, the Indo-Pacific, in particular, is rapidly becoming the most hotly contested region in the world.

Second, both the Australian public and our policymakers will have to accept that without a period of considered effort, investment and reform, or as I like to colloquially refer to it, our Rocky montage moment, current and future generations of Australians will be increasingly impoverished, living in a nation pushed around by the region’s now rising powers.

Recognising this array of challenges and opportunities, both the Australian public and its policymakers need to look beyond the myopic lens of short-termism that has traditionally dominated our diplomatic, strategic, and economic policy making since Federation.

The most important questions now become, when will we see a more detailed analysis and response to the challenges and opportunities facing Australia and when will we see both a narrative and strategy that better helps industry and the Australian public understand the challenges faced and opportunities we have presented before us?

As events continue to unfold throughout the region and China continues to throw its economic, political, and strategic weight around, can Australia afford to remain a secondary power, or does it need to embrace a larger, more independent role in an era of increasing great power competition?

Get involved with the discussion and let us know your thoughts on Australia’s future role and position in the Indo-Pacific region and what you would like to see from Australia’s political leaders in terms of partisan and bipartisan agenda setting in the comments section below, or get in touch at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. or at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..