日經亞洲：中國若侵台恐演變為持久戰 對美國較有利 中央社 20231130

【雙魚之論】英文拷到 G / D 找中文翻譯
According to a report from NIKKEI ASIA, political science scholar Iskander Rehman, whose new book "Planning for Protraction[1]" received partial funding from the U.S. Defense Department's Office of Net Assessment, suggests that a potential invasion of Taiwan by China could lead to a prolonged conflict. This endorsement implies a possible alignment with the views of the U.S. military.
Rehman's perspective is insightful: in the event of a conflict in the western Pacific Rim, China's crucial coastal economic zones become susceptible to vulnerability and devastation. Such a scenario could set back China's economy by half a century. The same vulnerability applies to the Korean peninsula, Japan, and Taiwan, as evident from the recent war in Ukraine.
The only entity potentially avoiding severe consequences might be the United States, which is why the author arrives at this conclusion. However, predicting the outcome is challenging due to China's possession of vehicles like intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBM) capable of projecting nuclear warheads towards North America.
While a pattern of prolonged conventional conflict seems more likely on the military aspect, the economic toll would be devastating for all parties involved.  Peace is everything.

據《日經亞洲》報導，政治學者伊斯坎德·雷曼在他的新書《為持久作戰做規劃》中預測，如果中國入侵台灣，可能將導致戰爭的拖延。該書部分由美國國防部網絡評估辦公室提供資金，這意味著作者的觀點可能得到美軍的支持。
這是一個深思熟慮的觀點：一旦西太平洋沿岸爆發戰爭，中國沿海的關鍵經濟區域將變得脆弱且毀滅性，將中國經濟拖回半個世紀前。同樣的情況也適用於朝鮮半島、日本和台灣，這一點在烏克蘭戰爭中得以證實。
唯一可能逃脫嚴重後果的可能是美國，這也是作者得出此結論的原因。然而，由於中國擁有洲際彈道導彈等載具，能夠將核彈頭發射到北美，預測結果仍然很難。
雖然在軍事方面持久的傳統衝突模式似乎較有可能，但對於所有參與方來說，經濟的代價將是毀滅性的。和平仍是無價的。

日經亞洲：中國若侵台恐演變為持久戰 對美國較有利   中央社 20231130

日經亞洲（Nikkei Asia）報導，專家分析，有愈來愈多的美國政治決策者意識到，中國如果侵犯台灣，美國與中國的對抗可能曠日費時，而這種情況對美國有利。

政治學者雷曼（Iskander Rehman）在剛發布的新書「替持久戰準備」（Planning for Protraction，暫譯）中預測美中衝突時間將會拉長。他的研究部分由五角大廈淨評估辦公室（Office of Net Assessment）資助。

他在書中寫道，「儘管冷戰後的軍力規劃和防衛理論更傾向於時間較短、更強烈，且更局部的戰爭，但有愈來愈多觀察家警告，面對中國這樣一個如此龐大、富有且軍力強悍的歐亞巨人，武裝衝突可能會演變成持久戰，也會是一場艱苦的消耗戰。」

雷曼告訴「日經亞洲」，這種持久戰的結果將取決於3個核心要素：軍隊的戰鬥力與適應力；國家的社會經濟實力與彈性；以及這個國家的盟友經營和大戰略。他表示，「基於這3個核心要素，針對華府和北京詳細比較分析下來，美國似乎處於比較利於最終獲勝的地位。」

日經亞洲指出，由於五角大廈資助雷曼的研究，顯示美國也在考慮出現持久戰的可能性。

保守派智庫美國哈德遜研究所（Hudson Institute）高級研究員克拉克（Bryan Clark）表示，美國政府內部針對與中國的持久戰有愈來愈多討論，以及相比於北京，持久戰在多大程度上會對美國有利。

克拉克說，「這大概會對美國比較有利。」他補充道，「最近數十年來，持久戰已經變成美國軍隊的常態。一但我們開始戰鬥，往往會一直持續下去，直到20年後有一方放棄為止。」

他表示，中國沒有辦法維持正在烏克蘭進行的那種戰爭。

克拉克表示，「中國的工業或許可以，但政治和經濟體系行嗎？雖然這和遠在1萬英里之外打仗相比是另一回事，但對中國來說，這會影響他們貿易所需要的海上運輸，他們能夠忍受外海如此混亂多長時間？」

他也表示，如果這是預期的路線，那麼美國應該打造機制來支持長期行動，削弱北京擊出的第一拳最為關鍵。「我們必須有能力立刻阻止他們發動侵略。」

諷刺的是，「持久戰」或者稱「人民戰爭」是中國共產黨開創元老毛澤東當年在抗日戰爭與國共內戰時的標誌性戰略。不過，雷曼表示，現在的中國面臨嚴峻的經濟逆風，包括人口等結構性挑戰，使得中國難以維持對政權合法性極為重要的經濟成長水準。

他表示，與此同時，美國從「有利的地理位置、豐富的自然資源、相對健全的人口結構、在全球難以與其相比的盟友和基地網絡，加上最新出現的能源出口者地位」，都證明了美國的實力。

但雷曼表示，在中美競賽當中，有2個面向需要華府給予極大且立即的關注，首先是中國原始的工業實力，以及龐大的軍事建設規模；其二是不斷進展的中俄協約關係。

另一個外卡則是美國的國內政治。美國外交政策智庫戰略與國際研究中心（Center for Strategic and International Studies, CSIS）今年一份台海戰爭兵推顯示，共軍如果2026年犯台，美國在3週作戰裡會陣亡約3200人，相當於在伊拉克與阿富汗作戰20年的一半人數。

CSIS表示，「這種突然且龐大的損失，將會使不習慣有重大軍事損失的美國民眾感到震驚。」

退休美國情報官員、喬治華盛頓大學教授沙特（Robert Sutter）則表示，2024年美國大選的共和黨可能總統候選人、前總統川普提出的「美國優先」（America First）可能對台灣構成一大風險。

他在一場研討會上表示，「他們不喜歡有人搭便車，而台灣過去被很多人認為是搭便車的。」如果美國在2024年選出一個喊著「美國優先」的總統，將使台灣面臨風險。

 

A protracted Taiwan war likely to favor U.S. over China, analysts say    NIKKEI ASIA 20231130

But an election win by Trump, who advocates America-first policy, seen as risk to Taipei

WASHINGTON -- There is a growing recognition among American policymakers that a potential conflict with China over Taiwan could become protracted and that such a war likely would favor the U.S., according to experts who are following the issue.

Political scientist Iskander Rehman projects an extended U.S.-China conflict in a just-published book, "Planning for Protraction," whose research was partly funded by the U.S. Defense Department's Office of Net Assessment.

Though post-Cold War force planning and defense doctrines tilted toward shorter, sharper and more localized wars, an increasing number of observers "warn that armed conflict with a Eurasian behemoth as large, wealthy and militarily redoubtable as China could morph into a protracted struggle that also evolves into a grueling war of attrition," Rehman writes.

Rehman told Nikkei that the outcome of such a drawn-out conflict would rest on a combination of three core factors: the military's effectiveness and adaptability; the country's socioeconomic power and resiliency; and its alliance management and grand strategy.

"A detailed, comparative analysis of Beijing and Washington based on these three factors has shown that Washington seems quite well positioned to ultimately prevail," Rehman said.

He is a fellow with the Kissinger Center for Global Affairs at Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies. Funding of his research by the Pentagon signals that its war planners are looking at the possibility of an extended war.

Bryan Clark, a senior fellow at the conservative think tank Hudson Institute, said a prolonged war with China is increasingly being discussed within the U.S. government, and to what degree it would benefit Washington versus Beijing.

"Arguably it's better for the U.S.," he said, adding that "protracted war has become the norm for the U.S. military in recent decades. Once we start fighting, we tend to be in it for forever, until someone gives up 20 years later."

China is not in a position to sustain the kind of war being fought in Ukraine, Clark said.

"Its industry might be, but is its political system and is its economic system?" he said. "It's one thing to have a fight happening 10,000 miles away, but for China, this is impacting the ocean access that they need for trade. How long can they sustain that level of chaos happening off the shore?"

If this is the envisioned path, then the U.S. should create mechanisms to support a long-running campaign, Clark said. Blunting Beijing's first punch is crucial.

"We've got to have the ability to stop the invasion from succeeding right away," he said.

Ironically, protracted war, or "people's war," was the signature strategy of Communist China's founding father, Mao Zedong, when fighting Japan and during the Chinese Civil War. The concept was to unify the public and draw the enemy deep into the countryside for a guerrilla war.

But China today faces increasingly severe economic headwinds, including structural challenges such as its demography, that make it difficult to sustain the levels of economic growth essential to the regime's legitimacy, Rehman said.

Meanwhile, American power is undergirded by "its favored geographical position, its abundant natural resources, its relatively healthy demographic profile, its unparalleled network of allies and bases across the globe and its newfound status as an energy exporter," Rehman said.

Two aspects of the Sino-U.S. competition, however, should foster grave and immediate concern in Washington, Rehman cautioned. One is China's raw industrial might, and the sheer scale and scope of its military build-up, which is in many ways historically unprecedented. The second is the evolving Sino-Russian entente, Rehman said.

One wild card may be American domestic politics. A wargame conducted this year by the Washington think tank Center for Strategic and International Studies noted that in a potential war with China, the U.S. would sustain as many casualties in a month as it did during 20 years of wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

"The scale and suddenness of such losses would shock a U.S. population unaccustomed to significant military losses," the think tank said.

Robert Sutter, a retired U.S. intelligence officer and a professor at the Elliott School of International Affairs at George Washington University, said the "America First" movement in the U.S. spearheaded by Donald Trump -- the former president and Republican front-runner for the 2024 presidential election -- represents a major risk for Taiwan.

"They don't like free riders, and Taiwan has been widely seen in the past as a free rider," he said at a seminar on Monday. Sutter cited the discussion among Taiwan's presidential candidates regarding conscription.

Last year, the administration of President Tsai Ing-wen increased the required military service from four months to a full year, effective Jan. 1, 2024. Opposition candidate Hou Yu-ih originally vowed to reverse Tsai's decision, but has since walked back his statements.

"A conscription for one year, it's better than three months, but it's certainly ridiculous from the American point of view," Sutter said. Taiwan must do more to avoid the perception of a free rider, he added.

Such sentiment could impact the outcome of a protracted war.

The election of an "America First" president in 2024 would put Taiwan at risk, Sutter said.

"The people in Ukraine are fighting, and we now have some doubts about supporting them," he said.

 

 

---

[1]  "protraction"被用來暗示有意識地延長或拉長衝突的可能性，可能出於戰略或故意的原因。而"prolonged"則是用來描述衝突的整體持續時間，而不一定意味著有意識地延長。