www.China-Defense.com

Much of the PLA's modernization efforts over the past decade have focused on Taiwan. While the PLA has had a sizeable force in the Nanjing Military Region opposite Taiwan since the 1958 Strait crisis, the biggest change during the 1990s involved improving the quality of the PLAAF's equipment. According to the Republic of China: 1998 National Defense Report,

The PLAAF can station 1,200 combat aircraft and maneuver fifty-nine air transports to carry two airborne regiments for operational missions out of the thirteen military-civilian airports within 270 miles of Taiwan proper. The PLAAF stations and deploys its aircraft into three areas based on their distance from Taiwan: first line (270 miles), second line (550 miles), and third line (beyond 550 miles). At present, the PLAAF has 1,300 aircraft stationed on the air bases within 550 miles from Taiwan, of which 600 have a radius of operation over Taiwan proper. The Su-27s,with a combat radius of just under 900 miles, can also cover Taiwan from their bases at Wuhu, Anhui Province, and Suixi, Guangdong Province. (111)

Under current circumstances, once the PLAAF has deployed several hundred aircraft near Taiwan, it must then coordinate an air attack. Although the PLAAF has been practicing this, it is not there yet. The chief difficulty is simply exercising strict ground control intercept (GCI) over large numbers of aircraft simultaneously. According to a US Office of Naval Intelligence briefing, during the 1996 exercises, PLAAF and PLA Naval Air Force fighters and bombers engaged in simulated and live bombing, fighter escort for bombers, air-to-air combat training, and other routine training. The PLAAF's airborne forces were also involved in airdrop activity. (112)

The key to any conflict for the PLAAF is sustained combat, and the PLAAF has not yet demonstrated the capability to conduct sustained, high intensity operations. The PLAAF does not have any real-world experience in planning and executing the kind of high intensity air campaign that has proven so successful in recent US and NATO operations. For example, during the early stages of the conflict in Kosovo, allied air forces deployed approximately 400 aircraft to the area. On the third day of operations alone, allied aircraft flew 249 sorties in one day. By the end of the conflict, the number of US and NATO combat aircraft participating in strike delivery rose from 214 to 590 aircraft. According to Pentagon information, 23,000 bombs and missiles were used. The maximum intensity of operations of Allied Air Forces was reached on 21 May, when 1,000 sorties were flown, 800 of which were combat missions. These figures demonstrate the capability needed to ramp up and maintain high intensity operations, orchestrate operations through a unified daily air tasking order (ATO), and the need to sustain intense air operations when faced with a determined adversary. (113)

Interviews with Taiwan and Japanese officials in early 1999 indicate that the PLAAF has been rotating J-7 and J-8 aircraft from designated rapid reaction units in and out of Fujian Province on six month rotations since the 1996 crisis, in order to conduct area familiarization training. Furthermore, aircraft from Fujian Province have been deploying to and from airbases outside Fujian during the same day, providing them with the ability to move out of the area rapidly if the need arose. In addition, all PLAAF pilots within the Nanjing Military Region have been conducting live air-to-air missile firing over water since 1996. These aircraft have probably been designated as part of the PLAAF's rapid-reaction force for action against Taiwan.

One would expect these aircraft to be deployed to the area en masse if the PLAAF were going to attack Taiwan. For example, during the 1979 border conflict with Vietnam, the PLAAF deployed almost 20,000 aviation, SAM and AAA troops and 700 aircraft to the border area opposite Vietnam over a 45 day period leading up to the start of the conflict. Yet none of these aircraft engaged in any activity across the border so as not to escalate the conflict based on the tacit rules-of-engagement (ROE) for both sides at the time. (114)

There is always the possibility of an accidental shoot down occurring, but there is a low probability, unless it is pre-planned. The reason for this is that each side has established unilateral ROEs. For example, Taiwan's Air Force is under the guidance to "neither avoid the Communist planes nor provoke them. The order to attack an intruder must come from Taiwan's Chief of the General Staff." (115) On the mainland side, the PLAAF probably has specific ROEs as well. For example, during the1958 Strait Crisis, the PRC's Central Military Commission established the following three ROEs: 1) the Air Force could not enter the high seas to conduct operations; 2) if the Nationalist Air Force did not bomb the mainland, the PLAAF could not bomb Quemoy and Matsu; and 3) the Air Force was not allowed to attack the US military, but could defend against any US aircraft entering Chinese territory. (116)

The current aerial cat and mouse game over the Strait actually helps each side prepare for potential conflict, while at the same time helping to avoid conflict. Each side has the opportunity to determine how long it takes for the other side to scramble its aircraft upon detection of an intruder, to reach a specific spot over the Strait, and to determine what altitude and speed these aircraft conduct their missions. Each side can also test the limits by intruding into the other's airspace to see what type of a reaction they get. They also have the opportunity to employ their air intercept radars to detect, track, monitor and shadow opposing aircraft, significantly enhancing their confidence in their defensive capability. Concurrently, these defensive reactions against the probes by intruder aircraft demonstrate and reinforce a vigilant air defense posture to the opposing force.

These types of exercises also afford each side the opportunity to coordinate their flight activity with the ground-based air defense systems, including their radars, antiaircraft artillery, and surface-to-air missile units. For example, one of the biggest problems the PLAAF, and the PLA as a whole, will face if China engages in a conflict with Taiwan is coordination between aircraft and ground-based air defense forces. Ever since the Korean War, the PLA Air Force and Army have had to agree on some basic ROEs, so that the Army's and PLAAF's AAA and SAMs do not shoot down the PLAAF's aircraft. This is even further complicated if they must also coordinate with the Navy.

Today, the primary means of coordination between PLAAF aircraft and ground-based air defense units is airspace differentiation. The PLA's air defense system relies heavily on airspace control measures and procedural control (essentially flying air corridors, adhering to strict altitudes and in-area time limits, or speed controls). Although most, if not all of the PLAAF's aircraft have some type of an identification friend or foe (IFF) system, the best method for coordinating aircraft movement with the ground forces or a ground controller is through the use of a secure and reliable electronic identification (EID), which utilizes a reliable IFF or other means. Moreover, it is not clear whether the older J-6 and J-7 aircraft have adequate navigation equipment (inertial navigation system/INS is desirable because it is an on-board system) to maintain a reasonable adherence to air corridors during flights over water. The FB-7 has an INS and doppler navigation, and most likely has TACAN. The PLAAF recognizes these weaknesses and recent PLA news reports have highlighted the PLAAF's efforts to conduct training over water for their pilots.

In the situation over the Taiwan Strait, just because an aircraft "locks on' to another aircraft with its radar, does not necessarily mean that it is going to fire a missile. Most pilots or ground controllers do not have the authority to fire a missile unless told to do so by much higher authority. In this case, the intruder will most likely have already peeled off and returned to their own airspace. This time provides the opportunity for each side to take a deep breath and cool down. In the current situation, I would say that the probability of an accidental firing is fairly minimal. However, if the PLAAF begins to deploy several hundred additional aircraft opposite Taiwan, along with other ground and naval forces, then the probability of a pre-planned incident increases dramatically.

If war does break out, there will be more than just aircraft involved. The mainland will most likely begin the attack on Taiwan with ballistic missiles in order to degrade Taiwan's command and control capability, as well as to try to destroy aircraft on the ground before they can take off. Although PLA writers have advocated a quick strike on Taiwan to achieve victory within two weeks so that the United States cannot come to Taiwan's aid, this is easier said than done. There will be definite political, as well as military signals, coming from the mainland that should provide enough time for all parties, including the United States, to try to achieve some type of political settlement and/or pre-position military resources in the region before war breaks out.