I think he is correct about the fact that the quantity of amphibious landing ships is not important. But he seems way too credulous about the possibility of China securing ports with 50,000 air assault or airborne troops. Russia couldn't even secure a single airport.
I concede that in the long run China could take Taiwan, but the reason they probably won't is that it would impose lots of other risks an costs that China won't want to bear. I may be wrong about their appetite for such costs, but that's the nature of rational deterence -- you impose those costs and move on if the enemy is willing to bear them.
That is effectivly what happened in Afghanistan. Our commitment was got good for 20 years (pretty credible to most prospective future adversaries!) but it was not infinite. And, opponents of the withdrawal notwithstanding, there is no way for the US to make such a commitment credibly under any circumstances.
Interestingly, this is also the reason the US could push for a facesaving (for both sides) peace in Ukraine at the current frontlines (with a US/European commitment to protect those borders) without a loss of credibility. No one can think of this as a Russian victory when its military capability has probably been halved by this "special military operation."
I think he is correct about the fact that the quantity of amphibious landing ships is not important. But he seems way too credulous about the possibility of China securing ports with 50,000 air assault or airborne troops. Russia couldn't even secure a single airport.
I concede that in the long run China could take Taiwan, but the reason they probably won't is that it would impose lots of other risks an costs that China won't want to bear. I may be wrong about their appetite for such costs, but that's the nature of rational deterence -- you impose those costs and move on if the enemy is willing to bear them.
That is effectivly what happened in Afghanistan. Our commitment was got good for 20 years (pretty credible to most prospective future adversaries!) but it was not infinite. And, opponents of the withdrawal notwithstanding, there is no way for the US to make such a commitment credibly under any circumstances.
Interestingly, this is also the reason the US could push for a facesaving (for both sides) peace in Ukraine at the current frontlines (with a US/European commitment to protect those borders) without a loss of credibility. No one can think of this as a Russian victory when its military capability has probably been halved by this "special military operation."