Von zerrütteten Halbleiter-Lieferketten bis hin zur globalen Rezession würde ein Konflikt in der Taiwanstraße einen wirtschaftlichen Schock auslösen, der seinesgleichen seit dem Zweiten Weltkrieg sucht – und die Welt ist nicht darauf vorbereitet. Das ist keine Worst-Case-Randschätzung. Es ist der Mainstream-Konsens der Federal Reserve, des Pentagons, des Council on Foreign Relations und aller großen Wirtschaftsforschungsinstitute, die dieses Szenario einem Stresstest unterzogen haben.
The $10 Trillion Fault Line: What a Chinese Attack on Taiwan Would Do to the World Economy
4 Kommentare
Yea, 60% of the market share for semiconductors is on Taiwan and 92% of the „cutting edge“ top of the line semiconductors are on Taiwan. An attack that halts these or worse, destroys them, would be cataclysmic. Can guarantee the US would go to war over it
This is exactly why I’ve always believed that China will not directly attack Taiwan until they have developed a domestic capability for semiconductor manufacturing that’s equal or similar to what Taiwan produces at the same time. We need to all remember that the Chinese government makes 50 year plans unlike the Western world which deals in presidential terms and elections.
China is already very heavily invested in developing domestic semiconductor manufacturing. My opinion is that in 5-10 years they will be on par (or close enough) to Taiwan to no longer worry about semiconductor supply. That’s when we really need to start worrying, especially if at that point China can secure its status as the world’s semiconductor manufacturer by removing Taiwanese capabilities.
To quote myself from a week ago:
Why China Won’t Attack Taiwan:
-Any invasion would be noticed months in advance. The largest invasion force since Operation Barbarossa cannot be hidden in any way.
-Landing at a known time, at a known place, on limited beaches, in the middle of a big city with mountains behind it, without air superiority, is the most difficult military operation imaginable. Any and all militaries in the world history would consider it the most difficult possible task.
-The Chinese armed forces have no experience in real warfare, and all their homegrown weapons industry is untested. China has no officers who have fought in war and almost no light military operations in 20 years. That is not to say that Chinese military is a paper tiger, it most likely isn’t, just that no Chinese soldier of any rank has ever been at real war, and real war is very different from any exercise.
-Taiwan’s armed forces are no small force. 300,000 professional soldiers and 2.3 million reservists are a mass capable of a major war, and it should not be forgotten that the United States has been giving and selling them the best possible equipment for a long time. Two and a half million troops in fortified positions to repel the landings and landings would require an absolutely enormous number of troops from China for the invasion to succeed. If China wants to have 5:1 advantage in numbers, they would need some 12,5 million men in arms. That size is possible, but would take a lot of time to form, equip and train, especially for such an enormously difficult task.
-China is hyper-dependent on imports and exports, and has no ability to keep the sea lanes open, and no ability to produce the food or energy it needs itself. A naval blockade of China can be done quite easily by the United States and its allies, and the quantities China needs cannot be transported by land. Sea blockade can be done on Singapore straits and Arabian Sea, and Chinese navy doesn’t have the capability to operate that far from the mainland.
-China simply doesn’t have enough landing ships, even when using civilian vessels. A narrow strait is a shooting gallery where a lot of the ships will go down with all hands, and every ship that makes the trip one way, has to return with wounded etc, and then come back again with new shipment of cannon fodder, munitions, food, fuel and other supplies. All the while being targeted by torpedoes, missiles, drones and mines.
-Taiwan may have the ability to destroy the Three Gorges Dam, the largest dam in the world, and the destruction of which would destroy millions of Chinese people and a huge part of China’s industry. Regardless of whether the probability of successfully destroying the dam is 5% or 50%, the PRC does not dare to look at that card. If I were Taiwanese defence minister, I’d invest in some military capability that has a small chance of destroying that dam.
-China cannot maintain a credible naval blockade of Taiwan, because the United States could easily call its bluff. First, by sending an unarmed civilian ship under US flag full of medicine and food, and sinking it looks extremely bad, and that is an armed attack on the United States, and then the actual Navy, maybe starting with unarmed Navy ship delivering weapons and ammunition.
-As long as Taiwan exists, China can use it as a pawn to stoke nationalism at home and keep the people loyal. There’s nothing like an external „enemy“ to keep the population focused on non-domestic matters.
-A war on Taiwan would largely destroy what makes it so economically valuable, the semiconductor technology and industry. Those equipment and factories can’t withstand a moment’s bombing, Taiwan might destroy them itself, and an invasion could lead to a mass exodus of skilled labor from the island if the siege isn’t watertight. The Chinese economy would also suffer enormously by losing its vital trade with the free world, both exports and imports. By far the biggest trade partners of China are ASEAN, EU and US in that order, followed by Japan, South Korea and India, in that order. All of those nations have huge reasons to punish China if it attacks, bring back manufacturing, „correct their balance of trade“ and even if the wanted to trade, others would lay secondary sanctions on them.
-A vast majority of Chinese soldiers are only children of their families. No army anywhere ever has had a similar situation, and it’s a unique weakness. For two parent and four grandparents that boy is their only legacy and hope for future, and millions of casualties could very quickly launch never before seen social upheaval against the state that has sent them to be slaughtered needlessly for vain ideas. Chinese police and paramilitaries have suppressed protests violently before, but hitting grieving grandmas with batons looks very, very bad.
-China can’t use more than a million men on an invasion that has a huge chance of failure, and they would need at least ten to one advantage in numbers to have a chance of winning. I’m repeating myself, but combined naval landing and paratroop operation on limited beaches, on known time, without surprise against well motivated and well armed enemy is the most difficult military operation imaginable. Not just the landings, but maintaining constant supply across the sea, fighting in dense cities and mountains is a nightmare, especially when done with totally unexperienced troops led by officers who have never seen combat either. All the way being attacked at sea by drones, missiles and torpedos.
Why China Might Still Attack Taiwan:
-US has the weakest government in living memory, and current US regime might easily be bought to not interfere with just a few billions sent to right bank accounts. Maybe China offers to build a huge Trump Tower in Beijing at their cost and gift it to Trump, maybe they just transfer money directly to his bank account.
-A prosperous, free and democratic Chinese state right next door raises uncomfortable questions in the population. „If they are so rich because of their freedom, why shouldn’t we be.“
If China decides to start a war, it must choose from four scenarios:
1. An initial attack on Taiwan, and leaving the US Pacific forces alone. In this case, there is a high risk that the US will get involved with intact equipment and troops, but a small chance that the US will not take part in the entire war. Japanese and Korean forces might still aid Taiwan to deter further Chinese imperialism in their region.
2. An attack not only on Taiwan but also against US forces and equipment right away, the so-called New Pearl Harbor option. This will make some of the US forces and equipment go to hell in one fell swoop, but after that it is pretty much a 100% certainty that the US, and any allies, will join the war right away, and the air force, navy, and especially submarines and naval aviation will make China’s landing logistics quite impossible.
3. An attack not only on Taiwan and the US, but also on Japan and possibly South Korea, Australia and New Zealand. A real major war is at hand right now, and France and the UK could also participate at least in some capacity. China’s war against everyone alone is a doomed endeavor, but not an impossible idea.
4. Naval blockade and minimal use of kinetic force. Least risky option, but could force China to surrender or escalate if the blockade is broken.
Makes sense but there would be a major difference. The west would experience an economic shock from which it would slowly recover, whereas China would take a major shock that would not end with wars end. China will not come out of it as powerful economically as it was simply by virtue of the economic damage it would take in the war itself, even if it prevailed. If the U.S. and China start a full on slugging match it will hurt China long term. There have been economic forecasts for just this scenario done modeling an all out war with China, Taiwan, U.S., Japan, and Australia which show, besides Taiwan, China taking one of the biggest hits with an expected 15-20% contraction in their economy while the U.S. is anticipated to be one of the least at 6% contraction. Europe does worse in this scenario than the U.S. and are largely not even involved but are not dramatically worse. Others taking big hits are Asian economies and Australia. But after Taiwan, China is hit hardest. But for China there will be continuing economic disruption for a long time compared to more of an economic shock that will subside in the world economy, which will subside. China would be blockaded so their economy is going is going to remain crippled for a long time while others will recover. Trade will not return to China once the war ends and China will never grow to its former economic size and with terrible demographics will simply slide into being a poorer country over time.
It is instructive that during WW2 the U.S. studied invading Formosa (Taiwan) on its way to a Japan invasion. At that time there were 100k Japanese troops there and the U.S. was at the zenith of its naval power. From this it is clear China’s navy is not capable of taking Taiwan and would need to be ten times larger to at least have a chance. From the U.S. military assessment at the time:
„Washington undertook a staff study of the Formosa problem. Service leaders gave it the name Operation Causeway, and the plan today offers important insights into the inherent military challenges an invasion of Taiwan poses. Operation Causeway called for a force of nine Marine Corps and Army divisions. Including all of the air and naval supporting forces, a total of 424,436 people were expected to participate. A fleet of more than 4,000 ships and landing craft would have been used to carry men and supplies to the invasion beaches. The scale of the planned invasion force illustrates the operational challenges. At the time in late 1944, the planners believed the Japanese held Formosa with a force just under 100,000 people.“
„When Roosevelt made his decision regarding Operation Causeway in 1944, the U.S. military was approaching its absolute zenith of strength and experience. The U.S. Navy had grown from 790 ships to 6,768 by the end of the war.[^(45)](javascript:void(0))The Navy, Marine Corps, and Army had already teamed up to conduct amphibious landings at Guadalcanal, North Africa, Sicily, Anzio, Saipan, Tinian, Guam, and other scattered places around the globe. The expected participants of Operation Causeway included the most experienced military commanders in modern history, yet they ultimately recommended against invading Taiwan in favor of other targets, underscoring the challenge.“
And China’s very limited experience with amphibious landings does not inspire confidence they are up to it and basically lack any applicable experience. From the same article:
„Three weeks after proclaiming the creation of the P.R.C.’s People’s Liberation Army, C.C.P. leaders ordered the army to capture the islands of Quemoy (alternatively known as the Kinmen islands) and Xiamen. The latter island sits only a mile off the mainland coast and the P.L.A. successfully captured it on October 15, 1949. Less than two weeks later, the P.L.A. attempted to capture the Kinmen islands only a few miles farther off the coast. The P.L.A. deployed 9,048 soldiers to accomplish the mission.
Every Chinese soldier were either killed or captured in the attempt. The K.M.T. suffered 1,267 men killed and 1,982 wounded. Other attempts were made to recapture the Quemoy/Kinmen islands throughout the 1950’s, as they sit only six miles off the mainland, yet they remain under the R.O.C.’s control to this day.“
[https://www.stimson.org/2025/rethinking-the-threat-why-china-is-unlikely-to-invade-taiwan/](https://www.stimson.org/2025/rethinking-the-threat-why-china-is-unlikely-to-invade-taiwan/)
China could not capture an island 6 miles off its coast. This is reminiscent of the „great“ Russian military and their invasion of Ukraine. They pushed in some 40km, were stopped and are even losing ground now. No amphibious landing required and were considered the worlds second most powerful military by some. And the losses have been catastrophic for such meager gains. I do not expect China’s military to perform any better than Russia’s and both are deeply riddled with corruption and are set up in a way not ideal for fighting wars, but instead to keep them from toppling their regimes. They don’t even have optimal organizations for the difficult task at hand and a navy ten times too small.
Taiwan also has U.S. weapons. If recent events have shown anything, it is that U.S. weapons work very very well and sometimes are better than claimed. China’s navy would suffer heavy losses in an invasion and would likely lack sufficient naval forces for the massive logistics required. It is not clear the Chinese weapons work like they have claimed. They had an opportunity to help the multi national naval efforts to maintain commercial shipping get past the Houthi’s when they blocked commercial ships for the Suez canal, many of which carried Chinese goods. There was probably a good reason they didn’t. They would have to demonstrate their navy and their associated weapons could swat down Houthi cruise, ballistic missiles fired at them, and both air and sea drones. I bet they did not go because they know their weapons would be shown for what they are, not nearly as good as claimed. There has been no demonstration of the Chinese military or weapons being on par with western ones. You can claim your weapons are the greatest thing ever, but you can claim whatever you want, for people to believe you you have to show they work. The U.S. has shown their weapons work exceptionally well. And that means the Chinese navy will likely experience a blood bath trying to cross the 120 miles of ocean to Taiwan and failing to take the island even without the U.S. involvement. After such a failure, the economic decoupling would not be reversed as it would be clear doing so is only helping them rebuild, which would mean very long term economic contraction, smaller economy and less influence in the world. China would lose a lot in such an effort, economically in particular and long term. The west would experience a shock, followed by recovery, and after that they are not going back to buying from China after such military actions. It took the fall of the USSR for significant trade to occur with Russia and the world learned once again, that was foolish. But Xi is a fool on a mission and he may do it anyway. Just shows it is not good to surround yourself with sycophants who tell you what you want to hear rather than reality. You do thinks like Putin did, invading Ukraine expecting it to last three days. Look how well that worked. China is set up much like Russia in both leadership and military. A similar demonstration of an incapable military is what I would expect to see from China.
So the world will suffer economically for a while, China will suffer economically and not recover to its former size.