WI Clinton did not send the carriers through the Taiwan straits in 1996?

Without Clinton intervening in Taiwan Straits 1996

  • China would have invaded Taiwan at that time and won

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • China would have blockaded Taiwan at that time and succeeded

    Votes: 1 6.7%
  • Taiwan would elected a different Presidential candidate

    Votes: 3 20.0%
  • Taiwan would have acknowledged subordination or confederation with China in the 90s

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • The intimidation would still fail, but Taiwan would have militarized more than OTL for at 5-10 yrs

    Votes: 13 86.7%
  • Japan and South Korea would have built up their own defenses more than OTL

    Votes: 7 46.7%
  • Japan and South Korea would have aligned with China and distanced themselves from the US

    Votes: 1 6.7%
  • China would have invaded Taiwan at that time and lost, then the US would begin supporting Taiwan

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • China would have blockaded Taiwan at that time and failed, with the US undermining blockade

    Votes: 2 13.3%

  • Total voters
    15

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
In reaction to Chinese missile tests designed to intimidate the Taiwanese in advance of their 1996 elections, the US surged a carrier task force into the western Pacific and transited the Taiwan Straits, signaling it's opposition to the PRC's move. The PRC immediately recognized they had nothing that could match US air and naval power and that a blockade or invasion would be broken.

What if Clinton did no military posturing in this instance, doing no more than diplomatically condemning the Chinese move?

What would have happened in 1996, and in the 20 years since?
 
This is an interesting scenario.

I imagine nothing would happen in the 1990s in terms of warfare between Taiwan and China, China's economy was less than a third of the USA and its power projection capacity was very limited compared to today.

However, the lessons would be learned on both sides, Taiwan would be much more concerned with rearming itself no matter what, and the Chinese may attempt to continue "testing" the USA with such moves throughout the 2000s and 2010s until they find the time suitable to invade Taiwan, should it ever come.

We could easily see any of those Chinese "tests" escalating into serious tension particularly if later on you have somebody sitting in the White House with a much tougher stance on China. (Like, say, John McCain or Mitt Romney)
 

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
I would love to hear more elaboration on the different voting choices.

I'll start by offering some of my views. I voted that all of Taiwan, Japan and South Korea would build up their indigenous defensive capability under the circumstances where the US was less forceful or reassuring. In the case of Taiwan that was a popular choice in the poll (8 votes at this point). I also did *not* vote for Taiwan making concessions in any form or for China going right into blockade or invasion at that point in the 1990s.

Note that a Taiwanese build-up would be the *opposite* of OTL. Taiwan was highly militarized through the 80s and martial law era, and the defense sector has employed a *shrinking* percentage of the workforce as Taiwan has democratized. Even as pro-independence parties have won the presidency at times, Taiwan has become increasingly comfortable with relying on US guarantees for deterrence and defense and not obligated to contribute a rising share itself.

I'm interested in elaboration of some others' votes, for instance, what the distancing of Japan from the US and rapprochement toward China could look like, what a successful blockade would look like, or the vote on how the outcome of the Taiwan election of 1996 would be changed.

Getting back to the OTL situation prior to Clinton's intervention, I understand the Chinese were unhappy with Taiwan having a Presidential election at all, and that they disliked Lee Teng-hui. However, it's puzzling to see how they though threatening Taiwan would make the situation better for themselves. I mean, if they were trying to make Lee Teng-hu, an advocate of sneaky, gradual, de facto independence lose, that does not mean Beijing would win. Lee's main opponent was from the outright pro-independence DPP.

It seems to me that if Chinese pressure succeeded in making Lee lose in 1996, China would just have taken its Taiwan reunification policy out of the frying pan right into the fire.

In 1996 I think there was a third party candidate, opposing independence (the New Party) representing the mainlander constituency, but if Beijing thought intimidating Taiwan would boost that guy's vote it seems like a highly unrealistic calculation for men as astute as Deng Xiaoping and Jiang Zemin.

Thoughts?
 
Top