Friedman’s point is that surprise is crucial to success in war, and surprise will be impossible for China to achieve vis-a-vis invading Taiwan. In order for this to be correct, for China to be essentially bluffing, it requires that China agree with Friedman that surprise is both crucial and unobtainable.
I ask, what if China believes otherwise? What if they believe the U.S. is bluffing, if our aid to Taiwan will not extend to actual counterattack but is limited to provision of supplies and weaponry? What if they are poker players and believe they’ve spotted a presidential “tell” that telegraphs we won’t go to war over Taiwan? To me, that seems equally likely.
----------
Imagine that in 1865 the retreating Confederacy had decamped to Cuba, approximately the same distance from the U.S. as Taiwan is from China. Imagine they’d established a largely successful regime there, got rid of slavery on their own terms, made alliances with whoever was the U.S.’s current major opponent, and never surrendered.
The result would be a “frozen” civil war, which is what exists between Taiwan and China. Now, standing in China’s shoes, how would we feel about Confederate Cuba, in many ways an ‘enemy’ base 90 miles off our coast?
Probably about the way we now feel about Cuba, antagonistic but unwilling to invade. Except with Cuba we don’t have that sense that our civil war is on “hold,” as the Chinese apparently do with Taiwan. That difference could be crucial.
