(Preview) Questions for BRICS and the NPC; PRC Nuclear Arsenal and Ambitions; Taiwan's Energy Security; Heightened Scrutiny on TSMC and the Biden Admin

Summary

Sharp China with Bill Bishop – Episode Summary

Episode Title: (Preview) Questions for BRICS and the NPC; PRC Nuclear Arsenal and Ambitions; Taiwan's Energy Security; Heightened Scrutiny on TSMC and the Biden Admin
Date: October 23, 2024
Hosts: Andrew Sharp (A) and Bill Bishop (B, Sinocism)

---

Overview

This episode dives into heightened messaging from Xi Jinping around military readiness and the ongoing modernization of China’s nuclear arsenal, the strategic implications for US-China relations (particularly regarding Taiwan), and Taiwan’s energy security vulnerabilities. The hosts analyze the nuanced meanings behind Xi’s rhetoric, discuss a recent Atlantic Council report on China’s nuclear ambitions, and pivot to recent commentary on Taiwan’s preparedness for a blockade.

---

Key Discussion Points and Insights

1. Xi Jinping's Rhetoric on PLA Combat Readiness

• Both hosts reflect on Xi’s recent statements calling for the PLA to be prepared for actual combat and the Western tendency to over-interpret such messages.
• Quote:
  “He said they need to be prepared for war. You know, prepared for combat. Well, okay, what, what are you going to tell your army? No go play video games?”
  — Andrew Sharp [00:34]
• This type of rhetoric is common among leaders—historically for both PRC and other superpowers—and is not necessarily a literal harbinger of war but neither is it just background noise.

Nuance in Military Signaling

• Xi’s language reflects both internal (professionalizing and motivating troops) and external (signaling to adversaries) audiences.
• Bill notes:
  “I think you can overread the... Oh, she's holding. Prepare for combat. Oh, my God. That means, you know, going to war next week. But I don't... I think taking a binary approach...is also a mistake.”
  — Bill Bishop [01:18]

---

2. China’s Nuclear Arsenal: Recent Developments and Report Insights

• Bill references Xi’s focus on “speeding up the development of strategic deterrence forces” — i.e., the PLA’s nuclear forces — as stated during the July Third Plenum [02:29].
• A striking image circulating is Xi posing with PLA Rocket Force units and missiles, reminiscent of “rocket man” rhetoric, but with much greater firepower [02:45-03:11].

Discussion of the Atlantic Council Report

• Bill reads out a key passage, highlighting the rapid pace and expanded scale of China’s nuclear build-up and the US’s need to reassess its assumptions.
  “China's rapid expansion of strategic war fighting capabilities represents tremendous discontinuity in the pace, scope and scale of the PLA's transformation, necessitating a major US reassessment of Chinese strategy, doctrine and war fighting operations...”
  — Bill Bishop (reading) [03:35]
• The report argues that China’s previous characterization of “running faster to stay in the same place” (i.e., moderate, defensive modernization) has evolved—China may now more actively use its nuclear posture to deter or even compel adversaries.

Capacity and Motivation

• Andrew summarizes:
  “PRC has just been engaged in a rapid buildup of their nuclear arsenal and there’s not really an explanation to other countries of why they’re doing it?”
  — Andrew Sharp [04:43]
• Bill explains acceleration is due to improved resources, technology, and perceived security needs; however, even with expansion, China’s arsenal remains smaller than US/Russian levels [04:43-05:12].

Reassessing US Institutional Assumptions

• The report estimates China may possess at least 1,000 deliverable warheads by decade's end (citing US Nuclear Posture Review) and warns that US analysts may be underestimating shifts in Chinese doctrine [05:12-06:06].
• Surprises have frequently come from underestimating Chinese technical progress:
  “They usually end up surprising on the upside. Well, upside for them, downside for others.”
  — Bill Bishop [05:27]

---

3. Implications for Taiwan and Crisis Scenarios

• US debates about returning to “stable equilibrium” with China should factor in these strategic changes. The nuclear buildout is a “relevant data point” even if little discussed [06:06].
• Comparing Russia’s nuclear brinkmanship in Ukraine, Andrew asks:
  “Why wouldn’t that be one of the lessons for Xi? If they come to a Taiwan contingency, they'll just do the same thing.”
  — Andrew Sharp [06:41]

Risk of Nuclear Threshold in a Taiwan Crisis

• Bill highlights the Atlantic Council report's concern:
  “A failed PRC invasion of Taiwan without a credible off ramp for China to claim victory could threaten Xi's reign ... the need to prevent such failure would likely justify the use of any and all measures, including nuclear employment, once the invasion is underway.”
  — Bill Bishop (reading report) [07:09]
• Both hosts stress the need for US/Taiwan contingency planning to encompass credible off-ramps, allowing Beijing to save face and avoid catastrophic escalation [08:40].

Growing Pessimism about Peaceful Outcomes

• Andrew reflects on “kicking the can down the road” as the long-time strategy but is increasingly skeptical it will hold indefinitely, especially given China’s more hardline posture and shifting “off ramp” locations:
  “It’s harder and harder to be optimistic about how there’s a good outcome here.”
  — Andrew Sharp [09:52]

---

4. Taiwan’s Energy Security and Vulnerability

• Transition to a recent Doomberg article re: Taiwan's dependence on imported energy, painting a troubling picture of Taiwan’s preparation (or lack thereof) for a blockade [10:33].
• Quote:
  “According to data from the Statistical Review of World Energy, Taiwan relied on fossil fuels for 91% of last year’s primary energy needs, and virtually all of the oil, natural gas, and coal it consumed was imported.”
  — Bill Bishop (reading Doomberg) [10:55]
• The hosts worry Taiwan’s policy/behavior doesn’t reflect sufficient urgency in preparing for potential PRC blockade scenarios.

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On Xi’s Military Language:
  “What are you going to tell your army? No go play video games?”
  — Andrew Sharp [00:34]

• On Significance of PLA Modernization:
  “This is what a leader of a military with superpower aspirations and specific plans or contingencies like Taiwan, of course that’s what they’re going to tell their troops.”
  — Bill Bishop [01:18]

• On China’s Nuclear Transformation:
  “China now has a higher likelihood of using its newfound nuclear power to more actively deter or compel its opponents and safeguard its core interests.”
  — Bill Bishop reading report [03:35]

• On US Policy Blindspots:
  “Flawed US institutional assumptions regarding China's strategic decision making calculus must be checked...”
  — Bill Bishop reading report [07:09]

• On Taiwan’s Risks:
  “They don’t look like they’re planning for contingencies that involve, say, a blockade.”
  — Andrew Sharp [10:35]

---

Timestamps for Key Segments

• 00:05-01:18: Interpreting Xi’s rhetoric on military readiness
• 02:00-03:11: Rocket Force, domestic and foreign signaling
• 03:29-06:06: Atlantic Council report on Chinese nuclear build-up
• 06:41-08:40: Nuclear deterrence lessons and the Taiwan scenario
• 09:23-10:16: “Kicking the can” on Taiwan and growing risks
• 10:33-10:55: Taiwan’s energy dependency and vulnerability

---

Tone & Style

The conversation is pragmatic but tinged with sober realism—both hosts focus on empirical analysis, policy implications, and the difficulties of predicting (or influencing) high-stakes outcomes.

---

Bottom Line:
This episode underscores the accelerating modernization of China’s nuclear arsenal under Xi, the strategic dilemma posed to the US and Taiwan (especially in crisis scenarios), and the warnings implicit in PRC’s policy and rhetoric. The hosts advocate for more clear-eyed and contingency-based policy thinking in Washington and Taipei alike, with particular concern regarding Taiwan’s energy security and the lack of credible off-ramps in any cross-strait conflict.

Transcript

[A]

Foreign.

[B]

Welcome to Sharp China. I'm Andrew Sharp, and you are listening to a free preview of today's episode. Yeah, I mean, how do you evaluate Xi's rhetoric in a meeting like this? Because, like, when he meets with the military, he's often talking about actual combat readiness and delivering messages to that effect. And then he, in turn, you'll have various people in the west who read that and interpret it literally to mean that, like, war is imminent.

[A]

So that's a great question. And I think, you know, you see people, he said they need to be prepared for war. You know, prepared for combat. Well, okay, what, what are you going to tell your army? No go play video games. I mean, who.

[B]

You know, he's also saying very similar things several times since I've been hosting.

[A]

This podcast and his predecessors have. And so. So it is. They clearly have undertaken a massive project to reform and professionalize the PLA armed forces to be able to fight and win wars. Right. But that is what any government who builds an army wants to do, like a. Right. I mean, the US doesn't have a army because they want to hang out.

[B]

Yeah. And US Leaders are not saying, just practice. We're never actually going to use any.

[A]

Of this stuff, even though we fight lots of wars. It's not clear how many of the US has actually won recently, unfortunately. But so, So I think you can overread the. Oh, she's holding. Prepare for combat. Oh, my God. That means, you know, going to war next week. But I don't. I think it make sort of taking a binary approach. Oh, he doesn't really mean. He said it before. Is also a mistake. It's. This is what a leader of a military with superpower aspirations and specific contin. Specific plans or contingencies like Taiwan, of course that's what they're going to tell their troops. Yeah, right. Doesn't mean that they're going to go to war tomorrow. But it also doesn't mean that it's just background noise.

[B]

Right. Well, and then there are potentially little deviations from, you know, past messages where it's like, okay, so what does this mean? It just, it occurred to me that it's sort of an impossible task to try. Try to decipher what exactly is going on with visits like this. But I think the one takeaway that's clear is that the Rocket Force is now back in good favor with Xi and trending in the right direction. Or at least it seems like that's.

[A]

Well, it seems like that. And I just, while we were talking, just Went back. So when you go back to the third plenum from July, in that third plenum, they talk about we will speed up the development of strategic deterrence forces. That's nuclear forces.

[B]

Interesting.

[A]

Right. And so, so again, I, you know, I think you, I pull the screen capture from cctv. You know, it's sort of, you remember Trump used to call Kim rocket man. I mean, she's rocket man with bigger rockets. Yeah, right. I mean, he's sitting there posing, posing with the members of the brigade and what is it? 1, 2, 3, 5, erect missiles behind him.

[B]

It's. That's. I saw the screenshot and it was a little bit unsettling.

[A]

There's no question. Right. I mean, there's definitely that visit has a, you know, has its, has messaging for domestic audience, for inside the pla. But, you know, there's also a external signaling too, and it is a. I think we'll put a link in the show notes. There was a great report by. Out of the Atlantic Council by.

[B]

Oh, yeah, yeah, I have it here. Let me read it because I was reading it before we really, really important.

[A]

I think disturbing report.

[B]

So they write in part and it's a long report. So again, if people are interested, they should go consult the show notes. We'll link there. But they write, China's rapid. China's rapid expansion of strategic war fighting capabilities represents tremendous discontinuity in the pace, scope and scale of the PLA's transformation, necessitating a major US reassessment of Chinese strategy, doctrine and war fighting operations. The commonly accepted notion that deliberate Chinese nuclear force modernization is characterized as, quote, unquote, running faster to stay in the same place is assessed to have evolved. China now has a higher likelihood of using its newfound nuclear power to more actively deter or compel its opponents and safeguard its core interests. So am I correct in summarizing the status quo, saying that the PRC has just been engaged in a rapid buildup of their nuclear arsenal and there's not really an explanation to other countries of why they're doing it?

[A]

Yeah, there's been a pretty significant buildup and it seems like it's been accelerating under Xi. Part of it, I think, is they just have more resources and more capabilities, better technology. Part of it is also that, you know, the world has been changing and she sees bigger need for a better, larger strategic deterrence. But also they look at, you know, they look at the size of the US arsenal or the Russian arsenal, and they're still small.

[B]

Right. Well, and the report assess that Beijing will possess at least 1,000 deliverable warheads by the end of the decade and they were citing the 2022 United States nuclear Posture Review. So all of it is unsettling.

[A]

But, and I think, you know, there as the report talks about, I think there's been some analytic misses in terms of how sort of Xi's views of strategic nuclear forces have changed. And so I would not at all be surprised if those estimates get revised upward as has happened often and sort of miss you know, we've seen that a fair number of times in terms of looking at the play where there have been projections about what they would have or what they could do and it turns out that they usually end up surprising on the, on the upside. Well, upside for them, downside for, for others.

[B]

Yeah, I mean one, all these efforts are relevant to the conversations about the US China relationship and particularly some of the debates that have been happening on the Dem side, Democrat policy side with regard to like what China wants and the idea of returning to a stable equilibrium etc and where we were 10 years ago. Like, I'm not saying the nuclear build out should be determinative of those questions, but it's a relevant data point that we don't talk about very much on the show because there's not that much to say beyond the fact that it's happening and it's concerning.

[A]

I mean, one thing that I, you know, different scenario, but one thing I have struggled with understanding is when you look at, you know, Putin invades Ukraine, pretty clear signaling that if NATO gets involved, he could cross a nuclear threshold and then, you know, the Biden administration really took that signaling seriously and held back on a bunch of things. Why wouldn't that be one of the lessons for Xi? If they come to a Taiwan contingency, they'll just do the same thing.

[B]

Yeah, I would imagine it has been a lesson and that was there was another item in that Atlantic Council report that I found really interesting which, and they talk about the Taiwan scenario and they write flawed US institutional assumptions regarding China's strategic decision making calculus must be checked, particularly on Beijing's likely approach to a perceived zero sum near existential threat to Xi's reign. A failed PRC invasion of Taiwan without a credible off ramp for China to claim victory could threaten Xi's reign. Even if the Chinese Communist Party and its rule over China persist under difficult conditions, the need to prevent such failure would likely justify the use of any and all measures, including nuclear employment, once the invasion is underway. So that's directly on point with what you just said.

[A]

Yeah, no, it's a, it's a pretty sobering, I should say it's a very sobering report by, you know, the, one of the authors, John Culver, was a longtime CIA analyst to, I forget what his last job was, but he was, he was, he's very well respected and he spent a long time looking at the pla. And then the other, one of the other authors, Dan Schulman was at the Atlantic Council and he's now back just in the last couple weeks. He's now the national Intelligence officer for East Asia back at CIA. And so they are credible people. Well, people who spend a lot of time looking at the best information the US Government has about these issues.

[B]

Well, and the point on Taiwan, I mean it's definitely obvious to anybody who's actually building out policy scenarios for a Taiwan conflict. Or maybe it's not obvious given the talk there about flawed institutional assumptions, but I think it's worth being clear eyed about the need for any successful Taiwan strategy to include an off ramp for the PRC that allows the PRC to save face and look semi victorious in some way and not feel compelled to use a nuke or anything that catastrophic. I mean, I, I don't know whether that's at all possible, but it seemed to me to be a clearer articulation of like the precise challenge.

[A]

Well that, I think that, that and the sort of kick the can down the road was always the, has, has basically been the driving hopes of how to approach Taiwan. And you know, unfortunately I think the road probably ends sometime before Xi's out of power, certainly I think before 2049, the 100th anniversary of the founding of the PRC. And two, the Chinese have moved the off ramp to sort of a far less desirable neighborhood than what it used to be for parts of Taiwan.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

And so it's, it's the, that's just again, it's, it's one of those situations that is, it's, it's harder and harder to be optimistic about how there's a good outcome here.

[B]

Right.

[A]

Deeply other than, other than just somehow keep kicking the can down the road and hope the road doesn't end in, you know, at the end of she's last term or 2049. But there's a way to keep that road.

[B]

Yeah, well, kicking the can down the road is certainly the best short term solution that we have right now because any sort of conflict or intervention scenario doesn't seem like it would end well for anyone involved. So.

[A]

But I know that we want to talk about another Doomberg article.

[B]

There you go. It's related.

[A]

I'm practicing my podcast segue. This is good. But. But I think that, you know, for all this discussion, you know, Taiwan has to, you know, Taiwan is the one who has to take things the most seriously. And I think, you know, we can talk about this Doomberg article, but when it comes to things like energy dependence, they don't look like they're planning for contingencies that involve, say, a blockade.

[B]

Yes. So Doomberg wrote about Taiwan over the weekend, and it was just a quick article, but I'll read from this dispatch here. According to data from the Statistical Review of World Energy, Taiwan relied on fossil fuels for 91% of last year's primary energy needs, and virtually all of the oil, natural gas, and coal it consumed was imported. All right, and that is the end of the free preview. If you'd like to hear the rest of today's conversation and get access to full episodes of Sharp China each week, you can go to your Show Notes and subscribe to either Bill's newsletter, Cynicism, or the Strathecary Bundle, which includes several other podcasts from me and daily writing from my friend Ben Thompson. I'm an incredibly biased news consumer, so I think both are indispensable resources, but either way, Bill and I are going to be here every week talking all things China, and we would love to have you on board. So check out your Show Notes, subscribe, and we will talk to you soon.