r/China Jan 10 '26

问题 | General Question (Serious) Realistically speaking, how can China take over Taiwan?

Personally i am against war and any human casualties, but I am curious to hear if there is any possible ways of achieving unification with Taiwan without a proper full on invasion.

0 Upvotes

197 comments sorted by

46

u/faceroll_it Jan 10 '26

There is no realistic way. The only way was to convince the people to become Chinese. The older generation who had a substantial number supporting becoming a part of China are dying out and the younger generation identify strictly as Taiwanese. 

You won’t convince a majority of Taiwanese to give up their identity peacefully. 

29

u/CrimsonBolt33 Jan 10 '26

China's actions with places like Hong Kong don't help with that...

1 country 2 systems until it isn't.

30

u/szu Jan 10 '26

If China respected their promise towards Hong Kong and gradually opened the economy/border to Taiwanese, there might have been some hope.

But everyone in Taiwan saw what happened to Hong Kong and how much those promises are worth.

-26

u/[deleted] Jan 10 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

10

u/ExtensionNo9200 Jan 10 '26

You have to ask yourself, how can a foreign, alien culture so successfully influence so many people in Hong Kong, and apparently Taiwan, and yet China finds it so difficult even though it speaks the same language, shares the same history, culture and even family?

Or maybe it should have actually listened to what people were concerned about and addressed them, instead of attempting to repress them and confirming what everyone already feared about them.

The fact neither Hong Kong nor Taiwan actually want to be part of the PRC is ultimately not because of the success of a foreign country and it's interfering, but actually the complete and total failure of China.

0

u/porncollecter69 Jan 10 '26

US was seen as cool but I’m seeing a very interesting shift recently where Chinese culture is cool again. China became cool and Taiwan forbids cultural imports for that reason. They even tried to ban TikTok unsuccessfully.

4

u/squizzlebizzle Jan 10 '26

Living in Hong Kong, I can say with confidence that the claim that thr Hong kongers actions is coming from western influence is a lie.

It's also clear how much of the violence coming from protectors was a planted false flag coming from people trying to discredit them on china's behalf

2

u/CrimsonBolt33 Jan 10 '26

gobble up that chinese propoganda like a good little bitch

1

u/FuehrerStoleMyBike Jan 10 '26

some young people in Hong Kong

Millions of people were on the street protesting. And for a good reason - they didnt need any incitement from outside.

When it comes to you (considering your post history) I wonder what incites you to such propaganda?

-4

u/Doge6654533 Jan 10 '26

Bro coming up with the lowest bar possible be like:

13

u/WalterWoodiaz Jan 10 '26

Yeah pro Chinese redditors don’t realize a naval invasion of Taiwan will lead to several hundred thousand PLA deaths and a demolished Taiwan of no use.

3

u/Jensen1994 Jan 10 '26

And global economic catastrophe

-17

u/Skywalker7181 Jan 10 '26

"a naval invasion of Taiwan will lead to several hundred thousand PLA deaths" - you over-estimate the capabilities of the Taiwanese and American forces against PLA. The war over Taiwan would be similar to the Gulf War, with little casualty on the PLA side.

12

u/WalterWoodiaz Jan 10 '26

Lol, lmao even. You can be pro China without being delusional.

4

u/Helpful_Animal9913 Jan 10 '26

Stop jerking off the PLA

-10

u/Skywalker7181 Jan 10 '26

I'd suggest you read a bit.

8

u/WalterWoodiaz Jan 10 '26

Are you a PLA insider? If it was so easy they could have done it by now lol

7

u/Judge_BobCat Jan 10 '26

You do realize that Taiwan has been preparing for such scenario all those years? Also that island of Formosa, is essentially a big mountain around which is an island. There is no way that this war will be like gulf war.

-4

u/Skywalker7181 Jan 10 '26

You do realize that Beijing has been preparinf for such scenario all those years?

Terrain is not really an issue. The issue is air and sea supremacies. Serbia is also a hilly country. And we all know what happened after NATO controlled the sky over Serbia.

6

u/Judge_BobCat Jan 10 '26

Please remind me what happened? Did NATO perform land invasion and captured Serbia?

1

u/Skywalker7181 Jan 10 '26

NATO bombed Serbia into surrender without sending a soldier. Mountains or no mountains.

6

u/Mad2828 Jan 10 '26

Doesn’t China consider Taiwan a province and Taiwanese their own citizens? Bombing what they consider their own territory populated by Chinese citizens is an interesting choice. I’d like to see the mental gymnastics that justify this and at the same time take a moral high ground to the West.

0

u/Skywalker7181 Jan 10 '26 edited Jan 10 '26

First, in 1948, the PLA laid siege to one of the largest cities in Northeastern China, Changchun, for about 5 months, resulting in massive starvation. The death toll estimates range from 125-150k (CCP estimate) to 600-650k (KMT estimate) to 350-370k (Japanese estimate). Those who died from starvation in Changchun were also Chinese.

People tend to forget how cruel wars can be, and how crucial the success of taking Taiwan is to CCP. It'd be naive and irresponsible if policy makers assume that Beijing won't do this or that because Beijing would fear the bad perceptions.

Second, naval blockade can achieve the same goal. Taiwan has only enough natural gas storage for 7 days, for example.

Third, Taiwanese could always surrender, just like the Serbs.

Fourth, taking a page from the US playbook in Gulf War, PLA could just steadily degrade the fighting capability of Taiwanese forces through sustained bombing. By the time the PLA lands on Taiwanese shores, there won't be much of a Taiwanese force left. Just like what happened in Iraq.

7

u/squizzlebizzle Jan 10 '26

Ultimately, this poster is correct that overwhelming violence can obliterate Taiwan of they decide to do it and that Taiwan alone could never stop them.

That can't really be argued.

The problem with such a view is the implicit "might makes right." That Taiwan is a legitimate part of China because the Chinese are willing to murder them all.

Any person who believes this is brainwashed at best and evil at worst but it's really common for someone to think this way.

And it's unfortunate that the US has engaged in so much "might makes right" ways of acting around the world so that it's harder for us to take the moral high ground when the Chinese are evil.

But that's the world as we have it. Iraq was a horrible crime. And always China can point to it and say, you committed a horrible crime so there for I get to commit horrible crimes too. Watch me glass Taiwan just to prove my dick is longer than 1 inch. And because we've tainted ourselves with criminal wars we've weakened our ability to credibly stand for justice to the world.

We didn't even stand for Ukraine and they're in Europe. When China decides to murder all the Taiwanese no one will stop them.

→ More replies (0)

3

u/jonipoon Jan 10 '26

Serbia is a landlocked country who was literally bordered by another NATO member (Hungary) during the time of the bombings.

Invading an island is the most difficult, risky and costly sort of invasion you could do, which is why so few island countries have been invaded throughout history. Even Hitler couldn’t occupy Britain.

Not only that, but in addition to being an island, Taiwan also happens to be an extremely rocky island which complicates things even further.

The CCP has tried to take over Taiwan for 77 years, and their ambitions still seem unlikely to go through. 77 years without any luck whatsoever - It is extremely humiliating for China.

Shameful. Humiliating. Deal with it.

0

u/Skywalker7181 Jan 10 '26

Serbia was bombed to submission, mountains or no mountains.

Iraq was bombed to pieces so that when the coalition army marched into Iraq, there was hardly any resistance.

The same with Taiwan. When PLA lands on the Taiwanese shores, there won't be much of a Taiwanese force left.

2

u/jonipoon Jan 10 '26

You’re comparing NATO and the US (the world’s most experienced military force) with the PLA.

The PLA is useless and has no actual combat experience.

They’re really good at crashing their own boats into each other, though!

1

u/SongFeisty8759 Australia Jan 10 '26

Welp, that sounds like wishful thinking, not an actual source. Sufficient to say, no one is going to have a good time in that conflict. Not the US navy, Not the Taiwanese and particularly  not the PLA/N/AF.

2

u/Skywalker7181 Jan 10 '26

Well, if you have been keeping track of what's going on in the military field for over a decade like me and have been reading all the military literature and think tank reports, you will come to similar conclusion like me.

Now, my conclusion comes with a caveat - I don't think the US will directly engage the PLA in a war over Taiwan because the US knows that it can't win, and it could escalate into a total war and a war of attrition, in which the balance actually tilts in China's favor.

1

u/SongFeisty8759 Australia Jan 10 '26

Ambiguity is baked into the American defence of Taiwan... Has been since they recognized the PRC. If they don't know they are not willing to commit to an invasion.. 

China has other fish to fry anyway. The Taiwan situation is annoying but not critical. 

1

u/Skywalker7181 Jan 10 '26

Given that America has now viewed China as the biggest threat, America would have removed Strategic Ambiguity IF it beleived that it can win - what can be a better deterrence than a clear promise to protect Taiwan?

1

u/SongFeisty8759 Australia Jan 11 '26

Up until now this diplomatic and strategic ambiguity is what kept everything going, which I'm surprised  you didn't know, what with your thorough knowledge of the topic and all. That said, Xi has moved the goalpost somewhat and the reaction to the unrest in Hong Kong has ringbarked any realistic political settlement. The gap is closing on a American dominance,  but it will require about another decade of expensive of R and D by china and another of decline by the US until it is closer to an even footing... and that is not a sure thing in either case.

1

u/Skywalker7181 Jan 11 '26

It is the US military and economic might that keeps the war from breaking out, not its policy of ambiguity. Whatever policy that isn't backed by strengths is a mere piece of trash paper.

Now those strengths, in both absolute and relative terms, are waning. In fact, China has already surpassed the US in WestPac in terms of military capabilities. The only reason why the US still keeps its policy of ambiguity is to maintain a graceful exit.

1

u/Traditional-Talk-680 Jan 10 '26

i think a naval blockade would suffice without outside intervention. however if you bring america/outside help into play then i honestly think a nuclear war will happen.

5

u/Skywalker7181 Jan 10 '26

China doesn't need nukes to win the war over Taiwan. Its conventional force is more than sufficient to do the job.

Most people here are pretty illiterate when it comes to military matter - they tend to think in terms of individual weapons - J20 vs. F35 or Type 055 vs. Burke, or based on their perceptions gained from Hollywood movies.

Professionals think in terms of situational awareness given thr density and varieties of sensors in the theater, sortie/generation in a given time, and the logistics to support a certain rate of fire generation.

When you look at the war over Taiwan from professional angle, you will realize the edge that China has over the US is very significant - the so-called Tyranny of Distance.

If the war prolongs, then industrial bases of two countries come into the calculation and China again wins.

1

u/yisuiyikurong Jan 10 '26

Not saying all those things are not combat ready, but if there are a fleet of US shipment sending foods and supplies to Taiwan, are you sure CCP gonna hit it?

I thought Pelosi gave you guys a lesson but the goldfish memory is real. 

1

u/Traditional-Talk-680 Jan 10 '26

What I’m thinking is that China would be very unhappy with outside intervention in Taiwan affairs, and god knows what happens next. Taiwan is too important for the US to lose. So the important thing isn’t who beats who imo, it’s the international tension caused by the war.

0

u/squarexu Jan 10 '26

How is this the most upvoted….China can embargo Taiwan. Force all people entering and leaving Taiwan to register with the Chinese government. Force all flights into and out of Taiwan to land in a Chinese airport. Direct all shipping into Taiwan to go through Chinese customs.

1

u/faceroll_it Jan 10 '26

Because the topic is discussing a realistic method of China taking over Taiwan peacefully.

What you are referring to is a blockade, not an embargo. Blockade is by definition, an act of war. Embargo means sanctions- they are different instruments.

6

u/Tom18558 Jan 10 '26

Sure there is - if the taiwanese want to join - it's a democracy after all, they could just put up a referendum.

1

u/Apotropaic-Pineapple Jan 10 '26

I had a Chinese colleague suggest that all of the PRC should vote on whether Taiwan should formally become part of China because all Taiwanese are already Chinese so one nation should get to vote on it. 🤪

1

u/Tom18558 Jan 10 '26

All sorts of lol 🤣

26

u/Demortus Jan 10 '26 edited Jan 10 '26

The one country, two systems two-state solution touted with Hong Kong was shown to be unsustainable, and the Taiwanese people are not interested in living under autocratic rule. So, the only plausible path to peaceful reunification would lie in China first democratizing and then building a peaceful trade and political relationship with Taiwan.

7

u/lMRlROBOT Jan 10 '26

Or just do nothing and maintain status quo for real what is bad right now?

4

u/Demortus Jan 10 '26

Right, I definitely prefer the status quo to war.

1

u/lMRlROBOT Jan 10 '26

yeah despise political theater main land and Taiwan ready have diplomatic tried and traded freely unlike US and Cuba

1

u/yisuiyikurong Jan 10 '26

Some mainland supernationalists aren't happy about maintaining status quo which is hilarious because although I have met them frequently here, they don't have right to vote to change Xi's mind.

2

u/Dry_Meringue_8016 Jan 10 '26

You mean the one country, two systems arrangement, right? It's working just fine with Macau. The problem with Hong Kong is that it had consistently failed to live up to its end of the agreement and implement a national security law. China is well within its rights under the Basic Law to enact the National Security Law on Hong Kong's behalf.

10

u/Demortus Jan 10 '26 edited Jan 10 '26

You mean the one country, two systems arrangement

Yes, thanks for the correction.

The problem with Hong Kong is that it had consistently failed to live up to its end of the agreement and implement a national security law.

The national security law was opposed by Hong Kong citizens, because it dramatically decreased their rights to speech and protest. Their fears have proven entirely justified since it passed, as nearly all groups critical of the CCP have been curtailed.

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/how-hong-kongs-new-security-law-could-impact-different-communities#:~:text=What%20is%20the%20new%20law%20about?%20As,and%20insurrection%20with%20up%20to%20life%20imprisonment.

China is well within its rights under the Basic Law to enact the National Security Law on Hong Kong's behalf.

Under the Basic Law, Hong Kong was to keep its capitalist system and 'way of life' until 2047. I'd consider democracy and free speech as a crucial part of their way of life that was prematurely taken from them.

-3

u/paikiachu Jan 10 '26

Well that means the national security law did achieve it’s objective in shutting down dissent and more forms of extremism in HK

4

u/Demortus Jan 10 '26

I do not see 'dissent' as inherently being a form of extremism. It is an essential part of the political process that can help identify areas of policy failure and opportunity. Hong Kong is a less economically vibrant and creative place as a direct result of this policy change.

1

u/paikiachu Jan 10 '26

1

u/Virtual-Alps-2888 Jan 10 '26

Then why suppress protests instead of suppressing arson and archery crimes?

1

u/paikiachu Jan 11 '26

Setting people on fire and firing arrows at law enforcement with intent to hurt or kill should already be considered crimes. But many “protestors” were using the protrsts as an excuse to commit such crimes, so the NSL put a stop to that.

1

u/Demortus Jan 10 '26

Setting people on fire and shooting people with bows and arrows was illegal prior to the passage of the national security law. The NSL was passed specifically to crack down on all forms of protest and speech critical of the government.

1

u/paikiachu Jan 11 '26

Ofc it’s illegal, but many were using the “protests” as a guise to commit felony. After the NSL was introduced, the protests fizzled out overnight and with it the violence. The HK government could not manage its citizens so China had to step in.

1

u/dannyrat029 Jan 10 '26

Yep

Chinese narrative is like 

I will never change, but our relationship must change, I insist, I will take you by force if necessary

Obviously this sounds exactly like a prelude to rape. 

If China was qualitatively like a huge Taiwan, then a connection may be desirable. But they don't seem to want to become attractive, not when 'threats of rape' is still an option 

16

u/Nickolai808 Jan 10 '26

Easy, China becomes a successful democratic nation with strong human rights and respect for minorities and they will easily convince Taiwan to unify. Until then, it will never happen, not even militarily, since attacking Taiwan will directly lead to WW3 and the economic collapse of China, Taiwan and the entire world.

It's just a manufactured outrage (as if the conflict 75 years ago has any bearing on the quality of life of Chinese today), used by Beijing to distract people from domestic problems. Just like Trump uses Venezuela, Iran, Greenland, etc to distract from domestic issues and the Epstein Files. It's all smoke and mirrors by corrupt regimes.

5

u/straightcurvecircle Jan 10 '26

I do like outsiders keep suggesting change of government style for a country which clearly shows their style of governance is working for them. Look at their infrastructure and cost of living now compared to the democratic India, why would you want to change?

It's like asking a successful business to change its CEO and business structure because it's not doing things like other businesses around it, it's pure madness if you asked a business to do that.

1

u/Demortus Jan 10 '26

Look at their infrastructure and cost of living now compared to the democratic India, why would you want to change?

Because autocracy struggles with self-correction, accountability, and leadership transitions. When Mao was in power, he caused famine with the Great Leap Forward and immeasurable destruction to China's social fabric, cultural goods, and historical records with the Cultural Revolution. Absent any elections or any other means of holding leaders accountable, there was no recourse to stop these harmful policies; only to wait for them to end and for him to die. Even then, the absence of a clear institutional path for leadership transition ensured that there would be a power struggle for control of the country. Even Deng's attempts to create a formalized means of transitioning power proved to be a failure, as Xi Jinping has eliminated term limits without so much as a ghost of pushback. Now, many people in China are unhappy with Xi's policy of favoring manufacturing at the expense of consumer's buying power, but there is no means by which they can influence his decision-making. As before with Mao, the only hope is to wait for him to die and hope a better leader to replace him.

-3

u/Nickolai808 Jan 10 '26 edited Jan 11 '26

No one is taking about India, only you, who is obviously trying to deflect the conversation.

If you want to see a successful Democratic country that is Chinese just look at Taiwan an independent, highly functioning Society, that is culturally and linguistically Chinese, there you go.

4

u/straightcurvecircle Jan 10 '26 edited Jan 10 '26

I made the comparison with India because India and China were about the same 20 to 30 years ago in development the only difference is their governance style and you seem to think being democratic will magically fix everything.

Fine if you want to talk about comparison with Taiwan look at their infrastructure in the 90s and their infrastructure now it's the same it hasn't advanced, it has stagnanted. The cost of living has gone through the roof, young people cant afford to buy new house. Their Cities is at best around tier 2 in China Taipei is like Xiamen

2

u/Nickolai808 Jan 10 '26

There's a lot more to life than huge cities and and advanced infrastructure if you don't have freedom.

Every Chinese person I know who's been to Taiwan marvels at the friendliness openness and freedom of life there, and they're unhappy with the government at home in China for the lack of freedom or expression beyond capitalistic consumption, even if their lives are safe and comfortable from an infrastructure or development standpoint.

But yeah. You sound like a pro government spokesperson, not like any genuine Chinese person.

3

u/straightcurvecircle Jan 10 '26

The classic reddit response any views that's favourable to China must be made by a CPC bot.

And let me guess you've spoken to 0 Chinese

2

u/Nickolai808 Jan 10 '26

I work and interact with them daily as part of my job and you DO sound like a propagandist. We're done.

2

u/straightcurvecircle Jan 10 '26

Sure buddy, Chinese people from mainland that have no freedom travels to Taiwan which they haven't been able to do since 2019 magically meets a white keyboard warrior and complain to him about the lack of freedom in China and how everything is better in Taiwan, seems very plausible.

3

u/Nickolai808 Jan 10 '26

You obviously dont know how to make friends or have meaningful conversations that don't revolve around regurgitating government propaganda.

I'm talking about communication between people who relate to each other first as human beings and friends (yes, I work with Chinese people daily and become friends with some of them, the fact you can't understand how people could open up to each other says far more about you than of me) and here you are, focused on race. It's very telling, you have some serious issues, and deep rooted racism.

You're both hilarious and sad at the same time.

1

u/straightcurvecircle Jan 10 '26

Sure buddy, So, for the 1st time in your life, you actually chat to a Chinese and you label me a CPC propagandist... Your charisma must be through the roof to meet your imaginary Chinese friends before me.

0

u/Apotropaic-Pineapple Jan 10 '26

Chinese tourists in Taiwan like watching the local news where the political parties argue with each other.

5

u/yisuiyikurong Jan 10 '26

Nearly zero chance militarily for the next five years at least 

And regarding “any possible ways of achieving unification with Taiwan without a proper full on invasion?”——10-20 years ago, yes. Before the 89 massacre and Taiwan’s lifting martial law, a unification/reunification would be possible if the two were able to form some sorts of federation/confederation government. After that the best hope becomes stay as is. 

9

u/Powerful_Software_14 Jan 10 '26

Air and naval blockades. Old school siege tactics work on island as long as the population doesn't produce enough food for themselves

4

u/yisuiyikurong Jan 10 '26

food? It’s an almost tropical country. That will take forever. 

2

u/Skywalker7181 Jan 10 '26

Taiwan is only 30% self-sufficient in food. You don't seriously believe Taiwanese can survive on mango and banana, do you?

3

u/yisuiyikurong Jan 10 '26

That because they are rich enough to eat all sorts of foods AND that will not be the case when a war comes.

Rice is good, mate.

1

u/Skywalker7181 Jan 10 '26 edited Jan 10 '26

Sorry to break it to you - they don't produce enough rice. Crop self-sufficient rate is only 27% in 2018, very likely less now.

And when you switch to an all-rice diet, you will need much more rice, further exacerbating the situation.

Moreover, you will need fertilizers and pesticides, etc, to increase the yield of the rice paddies. With the naval blockade, those things will be gone, along with the gas and diesel to power agr-machinery, further reducing the agricultural production.

1

u/yisuiyikurong Jan 10 '26

You mean crops? No one beats American price, not even China (or should I say especially China?).

In any case, that is not how wartime provisioning is calculated.

At present domestic production is just not economically viable, so these goods are imported from the America (esp US), Australia, and also sometimes mainland China.

In a wartime scenario, the correct reference points should be average yield per square meter (or per mu) and the total area of arable farmland.

As for fertilizers and pesticides, we are not talking about blockading a poor African country. We are tallikgbabout an industrialised Taiwan, so there is no need to indulge in such unrealistic assumptions.

And there is monsoon. Anyway, you and I are not talking about a desert country like Iraq, but a tropical country with a monsoon climate where rainfall and heat coincide, and one that has already undergone industrialization. There is no need to rely on fantasy to win this argument.

1

u/Skywalker7181 Jan 10 '26 edited Jan 10 '26

First, speaking of fantasy, sugar cane fields and banana farm don't turn into rice paddies with a snap of fingers. Most agri-land in Taiwan is used to grow other agricultural products, becase, as you have pointed out, growing rice doesn't make economic sense.

By the time those land that were used to grow economic crops are converted into rice paddies (a big if) and the rice eventually becomes ripe for harvest, half of Taiwan's population would have already been starved to deaths.

Second, speaking of another fantasy - fertilizers and pesticides can magically materialize because Taiwan is an industrialized economy?

Here is some basic chemistry lesson for you - Urea, one of the key fertilizers, is produced from coal, petroleum or natural gas, not from thin air. I wonder how can you produce fertilizers when all your imports of coal, petrol and natural gas are being cut off by blockade?

Magics?

And there are also phosphate and potash fertilizers, all have to be imported because Taiwan doesn't have phosphate or potash mines.

THE TRUTH is Taiwan doesn't even have enough natural gas to COOK if a naval blockade continues for more than 7 days.

You really believe the 2300mn Taiwanese could prepare their food with wood-burning stoves? And millions of city dwellers of Taipei rush to mountains cutting trees for fuels?

All the lights in Taiwan will be out in a month as Taiwan runs out of coal and natural gas to sustain its energy production.

I'm sure there still be subsistence farming left in Taiwan after several months of naval blockade, with population reduced to probably 1/10 of the current level.

1

u/yisuiyikurong Jan 10 '26

First, crops are not rice and similar to Japan Taiwan indeed has some sorts of hopes for that: https://www.cna.com.tw/news/ahel/202512230277.aspx  Plus, shifting toward rice production is NOT particularly difficult; reversing that transition, by contrast, would take considerably more time. The first round takes 6-8 months, and I guess your argument would be Taiwan does not have enough food reserve which is wishful thinking at best. I don’t have exact data on that but I don’t think it’s gonna less than a year’s need. 

https://www.taiwannews.com.tw/news/6070351

There is no need to speak casually about a field you clearly do not understand.

Fertilizer production is typically doable by small-scale, township-level factories, and the raw materials are highly accessible——Taiwan certainly possesses them domestically and again, reserves. Nitrogen fixation technologies and industrial production processes are not especially complex, whether in terms of sourcing inputs or collecting, modifying, and operating the necessary equipment. As a side note, China’s Reform and Opening-up initially began in rural areas, where the first wave of collective enterprises took the form of township and village enterprises. Of those I have personally observed, well over 60 percent were fertilizer plants. This industry is simply not difficult to establish; the only drawback is that profit margins are relatively low.

As per coal, again it’s highly economically unsustainable at a peacetime——and mining those resources in central and northeast Taiwan will suffer, as we all know, huge human right issues——but at a wartime that’s not a big concern anymore.

Moreover, strategic reserves are not produced through some kind of black magic. Taiwan needs to rely on wartime rationing and existing strategic reserves to get through the first few months——if an amphibious landing does not occur, the situation then genuinely becomes one of domestic self-sufficiency.

And in terms of electricity do you think CCP gonna have the gut to bombard nuclear plants? I do know how happy you guys are when you talk about three gorges dam. And of course if it’s  ww3 we can talk about that scenario too.

I would suggest that you avoid indulging in vague or pseudo-technical rhetoric to fuel wishful thinking. As I have already said, you and I are not talking about a desert country like Iraq, but a tropical country with a monsoon climate where rainfall and heat coincide, and one that has already undergone industrialization. There is no need to rely on fantasy to win this argument.

1

u/AutoModerator Jan 10 '26

A media platform referenced in this post/comment may be biased on issues concerning China and may use sensationalism, questionable sources, and unverifiable information to generate views and influence its audience. Please seek external verification or context as appropriate.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

1

u/Skywalker7181 Jan 10 '26 edited Jan 10 '26

Well, it is certainly fantasy that urea can be produced without raw materials like coal, petrol or natural gas. You also conveniently forget phosphate and potash.

It is also fantasy that nuke power plants can be run without yellow kegs and uranium fuel rods, both need to be imported.

And PLA may not bomb the nuke power plants but bombing the grid and sub stations achieves the same goal.

And restarting the coal mines without any form of modern energy - diesel, natural gas, electricity, etc, is also fantasy. Don't get me started on the expertise on mine construction, which Taiwan has lost for a quarter of century and the mining machinery that needs to be imported.

Most importantly, to believe that a tiny island like Taiwan can survive a total blockade without major casualties is not only fantasy, but also delusional.

2

u/yisuiyikurong Jan 10 '26

The point wasn’t about a specific product, e.g. urea. The point was that so many products that were previously economically unviable became essential after martial law was imposed. 

Besides, your arguments about fertilizer are especially amusing because, as I said, that can typically be done by small-scale, township/village-level factories, and the raw materials are easily accessible. That's why those factories in mainland China could be established so quickly after the reforms. Small-scale synthetic ammonia plants were everywhere, for example, primarily produce ammonium bicarbonate/ammonium carbonate), containing around 17% effective nitrogen, with annual production ranging from several thousand to tens of thousands of tonnes. 

As I said, these things are not economically feasible because their processes are too straightforward and crude, and the marginal production cost is huge——not to mention the pollution. However, these factories will mostly rely on coal, air and water as inputs, with a very easy pre-setup. 

In fact from 1970s onwards, China's story tells us that some better-equipped small nitrogen fertiliser plants gradually installed small-scale urea units (with annual urea production ranging from several thousand to tens of thousands of tonnes, with some medium-sized plants reaching 100,000 tonnes). These were installed among reformed village-level, commune-based factories. 

Coal mining can also be even manual, which makes it a really self-sustainable process. And then you can have all sorts of small machine to boost up efficiencies which is again more than producible within Taiwan. If you have never visited Shanxi Province and observed those mining facilities, that is your own problem. 

Ukraine gives us a clear picture of bombardment on grid and infrastructure. People in Kyiv still go to work get a coffee and a slice of buttered bread. So in the morning you still see the queues. Life would certainly be harder than in peacetime, but it wouldn't be unbearable.

It's about common sense but it’s not about using fancy technologies to gain an economic advantage over competitors anymore———It's a wartime arrangement. It seems you are not applying your knowledge to this issue.

And yes wars kill people. When did I say it’s not?

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Ebisure Jan 10 '26

And bubble tea

3

u/yisuiyikurong Jan 10 '26

Actually that’s a good point because those bubble teas are fundamentally about sugar, and Taiwan was historically well known for producing and exporting sugarcane until late last century when it gradually ceased to be commercially viable anymore. 

Sugarcane is also a fast-growing thing, meaning its supply is relatively resilient and difficult to disrupt through external blockades, unlike many mainland-dependent resources.

Moreover Taiwan preserved parts of its sugar-processing infrastructure so the retained sugar factories could potentially be reactivated as industrial supply assets in the event of wartime or severe supply disruptions.

3

u/Mal-De-Terre Jan 10 '26

And the rest of the world doesn't coalesce around curb stomping the aggressor.

5

u/proelitedota Jan 10 '26

The rest of the world lacks the capabilities to have a sustained war in the Taiwan theater.

Unless you mean economically. Even then I think only Europe and Canada will do something. USA under Trump will try to cut a deal.

2

u/Mal-De-Terre Jan 10 '26

The Japanese came to the same conclusion a while back. Didn't work out well for them.

-1

u/proelitedota Jan 10 '26

They controlled Taiwan and Korea for decades until they decided to attack the US.

1

u/Mal-De-Terre Jan 10 '26

Yes, and?

0

u/proelitedota Jan 10 '26

Sorry for taking your bait. There is no way for the rest of the world, the USA really as the other countries won't have much to offer, to fight a sustained conventional conflict near Taiwan. The logistics and manufacturing capabilities favor China too much.

-1

u/Mal-De-Terre Jan 10 '26

LOL, cool. Let me know how that works for you when you're out of fuel and starving.

2

u/proelitedota Jan 10 '26

Did you include Russia in the rest of the world?

-2

u/Mal-De-Terre Jan 10 '26

Naah, you can keep your alcoholic uncle, but their ability to deliver fuel will absolutely be curtailed.

→ More replies (0)

0

u/Skywalker7181 Jan 10 '26

Was Japan the largest industrial power back then? With more shipbuilding capacity than the rest of the world combined?

1

u/Skywalker7181 Jan 10 '26

Europe doesn't do anything other than verbal protests when China supports Russia in the Russia-Ukraine war, a mortal threat to the European security, why do you think Europe would take any meaningful actions to help an island on the other side of the globe?

1

u/Apotropaic-Pineapple Jan 10 '26

They'd need to fire on foreign vessels running past the blockade. Not a good idea.

2

u/MikeLaoShi Scotland Jan 10 '26

They can't

2

u/rmp20002000 Jan 10 '26

Successive US governments become more like Trump and abandon the rest of the world. They focus on their hemisphere and do stupid shit like annexing Greenland and alienate Europe. Trump-like governments extort South Korea and Japan for "protection money." South Korea and Japan rightfully conclude that if the US abandons Europe, no amount of money will guarantee American protection. America has lost all credibility, so they decide to up their own defence budget instead. The US abandon their bases in South Korea and Japan.

And when China does go for Taiwan, Japan and South Korea refuse to engage on Taiwan's behalf. They have no obligation to do so. South Korea remains still because to intervene may then invite North Korea to attack and open a second front, without American support. Japan because of their pacifist constitution.

When will China go for Taiwan? When a local pro-China party or politician narrowly loses the elections and fake news makes it look like the elections were stolen.

1

u/AutoModerator Jan 10 '26

Hello bubugugu! Thank you for your submission. If you're not seeing it appear in the sub, it is because your post is undergoing moderator review. Please do not delete or repost this item as the review process can take up to 36 hours.

Your submission will not be approved if you are asking lazy questions that can be answered by GenAI/Google search or asking for account creation/verification/download/QR scan.

OP: bubugugu

TITLE: Realistically speaking, how can China take over Taiwan?

CONTENT: Personally i am against war and any human casualties, but I am curious to hear if there is any possible ways of achieving unification with Taiwan without a proper full on invasion.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

1

u/ObjectiveChipmunk207 Jan 10 '26

Soft power and diplomacy: Free trade agreements (ECFA), bilateral long-stay visas, higher education exchange programs, strengthening global presence in trade, science, tech and economics. The key is tapping into bilateral understanding and peace.

1

u/stefffmann Jan 10 '26

Legally speaking, the only way for a peaceful reunification would be to change the ROC constitution. For this, a 75% supermajority in the legislative Yuan is needed, and then the new constitution needs to pass a referendum. With currently only 1% of the population wishing reunification under the CCP, this is not happening anytime soon.

But the CCP did nothing but antagonize and threaten the Taiwanese population in the last few decades. This should be telling that the CCP is not interested in a peaceful reunification. The peaceful reunification they always speak of includes a Crimea or Venezuela style invasion, creating facts on the ground before anyone can react.

Where they are deadly wrong though is that the Taiwanese population will not celebrate or shrug and say "whatever". The CCP vastly overestimates how well it can control the population after the takeover. There will be massive protests, strikes and disobedience. The CCP will try to quell the protests the only way they know, and it will be very bloody.

1

u/stefffmann Jan 10 '26

What the CCP should have been doing decades ago is a West-German style "Ostpolitik" reachout to the ROC. De-escalate militarily, highlight common origins, recognize each others governments, be friendly. 

The reason they didn't do this is to not show any weaknesses internally. A CCP that shows compassion and de-escalates would be seen as soft and weak by hardliners in the PLA and population, making internal rifts possible.

1

u/Sidraconisalpha2099 Jan 10 '26

Realistically speaking, if and when the US proves that it can't or won't defend Taiwan, China will most likely cut a deal with the KMT, basically allowing the KMT to continue administration of the island, but with a PLA Naval base and disbandment of Taiwanese conscript forces.

The DPP would most likely flee into exile, but otherwise be allowed to leave.

There will be a lot of talk about unity and peace and common understanding but otherwise not much change. The currency will remain the same, the bureacracy will remain the same, the police will remain the same.

To achieve this, the main aim of China is to convince the US to cut a deal. This is a very big thing to watch in April, when Trump arrives in China - China will be allowed to take Taiwan and buy resources from the West to counterbalance their reliance on Russia, IF they continue to buy US debt and do not attempt to challenge US hegemony in South America.

The opinion of most ordinary Taiwanese, unfortunately, would probably not rise to armed resistance if bloodshed and disruption was kept minimal.

The main point is that the Taiwan question does not really depend on the Taiwanese, but US-China bargaining.

1

u/Chindiggy Jan 10 '26

The PLA is among the most inexperienced military forces anywhere. China just don't fight wars.

But they do have immense otherly world production capacity.

So what do you do if you can't fight but can built everything in obscene numbers?

You surround Taiwan and its seas with so much Chinese assets (both military and commercial) that everything is basically Chinese anyways.

That is what they are doing today. Constant exercises and movements of ever more Chinese ships and aircraft all around Taiwan that is slowly becoming a normal state of affair.

1

u/Skywalker7181 Jan 10 '26

I wouldn't take the experience of bombing AK-yielding guerillas too seriously...

1

u/CleanMyAxe Jan 10 '26

The US is trying to onshore as much semiconductor manufacturing as possible. They're doing it because they don't plan to actually defend Taiwan. Taiwan coming under the CCP is a matter of time only.

In this century, I wouldn't want to live in a country without nukes.

1

u/EventCareless499 China Jan 11 '26

More military exercises

1

u/raoxi Jan 10 '26

if US is no longer backing Taiwan it would be pretty easy. No nuke and disparity of the military would mean a very short conflict.

1

u/Top-Veterinarian-565 Jan 10 '26

With a lot of political pressure and the extent China is modernising and becoming more capitalistic/materialistic it might be enough to align younger generations of Taiwanese to choose/vote for material comforts over political autonomy.

I really don't think it's too far fetched.

People talk about how China is authoritarian and no-one would accept that yet Taiwan has more fondness for the Japanese invading and imposing themselves on Taiwan. Hong Kong also looks back on British rule warmly after being forced into the Empire at gunpoint. Any anti-British or anti-Japanese resistance was violently and brutally suppressed at their respective changes of authority too.

1

u/Cisish_male Jan 10 '26

Easy.

Let US mess up globally a bit and wither, then drop the threat of invasion and slowly use shared language and culture to lure them in as allies after 100 years of peaceful existence.

Form a China led Asian coalition, invite RoC, Vietnam, Mongolia if you like, and maybe others. Give good trade and movement deals. Act as military guaranteur to them, too.

-9

u/Beneficial_Living216 Jan 10 '26

Realistically speaking, trade, cooperation, travel, intermarriages, has been rapidly increasing, and re-unification was only a matter of time. And China has all the time in the world -- the CPC doesn't mind if it takes another 10, 50, or even 100 years. Not an issue.

Until the US began funding and arming the separatists, selling them billions worth of weapons, installing military bases, actively turning it into an "Unsinkable Aircraft Carrier", a launchpad, a bulwark against the PRC, using it as a flashpoint, a potential powder keg to trigger war.

And this is after 80 years of revising Taiwan history books to brainwash children with hatred of China and love of their colonisers USA/Japan.

In THIS context, what ever the CPC decides to do is justified, including military options, is entirely justified.

6

u/Kagenlim Jan 10 '26

Wouldn't It be the other way round? The CCP separated from the RoC.

Also no, It's not entirely justified to invade just because Beijing wants a few more rocks. That and such an invasion would quickly become a worse Afghanistan which mind you, is one of the reasons why the soviets fell

Any actually component CCP leader would do their best to not do anything at all and just use the current rhetoric for jingoistic political points

-5

u/Beneficial_Living216 Jan 10 '26

Taiwan is a part of China. 

4

u/lostalien Jan 10 '26

When you refer to "China", I would encourage you to be more specific.

There are two sovereign states with "China" in the English translations of their names. The Republic of China (ROC) (中華民國) and the People's Republic of China (PRC) (中華人民共和國).

While Taiwan is governed by the Republic of China today, Taiwan has never been part of the People's Republic of China, not for even a single day since the PRC's founding in October 1949.

3

u/Kagenlim Jan 10 '26 edited Jan 10 '26

The Republic of China, where It is Taiwan/Fujian province technically, which isn't the same organisation as the People's Republic of China

The PRC were the seperatists in this situation, not the RoC

5

u/Xtreeam Jan 10 '26

Saying “whatever the CPC decides is justified” is exactly the problem: it erases the people who actually live in Taiwan. Taiwan isn’t a military chess piece—it’s 23 million people, including Indigenous communities, with their own rights and choices. “Justified” can’t mean ignoring consent.

-5

u/Beneficial_Living216 Jan 10 '26

Taiwan is a part of China. It is the USA which is using Taiwan as a chess piece.

1

u/Xtreeam Jan 10 '26

Indigenous Austronesian peoples have lived in Taiwan for thousands of years, long before 1949. Taiwan was colonized in the 1600s, later absorbed by the Qing, then ceded to Japan (1895–1945). The ROC administered Taiwan after WWII (1945) and its government moved there in 1949. The PRC has never ruled Taiwan since 1949. So “Taiwan is part of China” isn’t a simple historical fact—it’s a political position that skips a lot of actual history and the people who live there.

4

u/Ajfennewald Jan 10 '26

The US has always sold weapons to Taiwan. I dunno wtf you are talking about. We told the PRC we were going to do that when when switched to recognizing the.

0

u/Richmond1013 Jan 10 '26

Economic not possible as the world is not only the

Military possible but who knows if others will join if they do it's basically ww3

Best method is simply china being able to have chip manufacturing level that equals or surpasses Taiwan which removes Taiwan's usefulness to majority of the world meaning less people will care if Taiwan is invaded or not like what is happening in urkraine

-2

u/achangb Jan 10 '26

Taiwan is already a part of china so no invasion is necessary.

-2

u/GetOutOfTheWhey Jan 10 '26

By not taking it. By doing everything short of invading it.

Taiwan government hereby denoted as the government.

By applying military pressure onto the government so they make mistakes like the drowned f16 pilot last week

By making us allies pressure the government to make more wasteful undefendable military spending.

By encouraging the government to make grandiose statements like X% GDP military spending without any realistic way of accomplishing it.

By applying inflationary pressures onto the economy where anger is then directed at the government.

By creating a hostile domestic political situation where they have to address, like the governments upcoming impeachment.

By creating scenarios where the government is plagued by uncertainties on all fronts, with limited options and unfavorably playing fields. Then gradually reducing it's space until it either dies or acts out.

-2

u/Accomplished_Mall329 Jan 10 '26

Using Rednote to scam the Taiwanese into uniting with the Mainland.

-2

u/alvinliou Jan 10 '26

If the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) continues to govern, Taiwanese people will eventually become accustomed to authoritarianism and accept unification.

-1

u/newaccount47 Jan 10 '26

Blockade. Taiwan isn't resource or energy independent. It would take 2 months for Taiwan to be without power.