The Prospects for War with China

> unrelated to China and Taiwan

Yes. Foreign nationals operating on what PRC considers to be Chinese territory under rival governemnt without CCP assent. Many of whom working in NGOs/agencies specifically to undermine PRC interests. I don't how international law will categorizes them, but PRC has good argument for "not civilians".

> give them ample time prior ... > sinks an actual PLAN vessel

There's going to be time/opportunites assuming graduated escalation process, but TBH I presume chance of inciting spark that pushes things to 100% more likely and preferrable for PRC. Even in a blockade scenario I think PRC will preemptively destroy major TW military targets that could threaten back, which PRC can do so without much telegraphing via air/rocketry. Lesson from RU/UKR is no half measures. Blockade = PRC is starving the island and not invading, but doesn't mean it won't defang TW first, PRC won't give TW the chance for fair fight or maintain ability fight back. As far as taking hits, it would be resumption of civil war and losses would be expected including mainland strikes by TW missiles.

> delicate diplomatic situations ... > undoing diplomacy

Look at RU vs LIO relations now, it's unsalvageable regardless of how mild the war started. And with respect to PRC/TW the countries that plan to sanction PRC are simultaneously trying to increase TW cooperation to undermine PRC interests while their genpop perception of PRC is already in gutters, so even less reason the cooperate, regardless of why shitshow started (i.e. LIO MSM will fault PRC even if PRC responding to provocations). And third parties that cultivate relationship with TW inspite of PRC warnings are in better position to compel TW into concessions anyway. IMO another lesson from RU/UKR war is just how little diplomacy is possible between active belligerants when strong outside actors are involved, i.e. RU isn't going to convince UKR to talk, but US might.

This is false. And the US also promised to remove all military forces and installations, which they have never done. There are today US troops in Taiwan. The constant lying to China by the U.S. matches the lying about the Minsk 2 agreements to Russia, and this has created a huge blow to American credibility as a negotiating partner.

Here is the Shanghai communique:

https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Shanghai_Communiqu%C3%A9

"11. The Chinese side reaffirmed its position: the Taiwan question is the crucial question obstructing the normalization of relations between China and the United States; the Government of the People's Republic of China is the sole legal government of China; Taiwan is a province of China which has long been returned to the motherland; the liberation of Taiwan is China's internal affair in which no other country has the right to interfere; and all US forces and military installations must be withdrawn from Taiwan. The Chinese Government firmly opposes any activities which aim at the creation of "one China, one Taiwan", "one China, two governments", "two Chinas", an "independent Taiwan" or advocate that "the status of Taiwan remains to be determined".

12.The US side declared: The United States acknowledges that all Chinese on either side of the Taiwan Strait maintain there is but one China and that Taiwan is a part of China. The United States Government does not challenge that position. It reaffirms its interest in a peaceful settlement of the Taiwan question by the Chinese themselves. With this prospect in mind, it affirms the ultimate objective of the withdrawal of all US forces and military installations from Taiwan. In the meantime, it will progressively reduce its forces and military installations on Taiwan as the tension in the area diminishes. The two sides agreed that it is desirable to broaden the understanding between the two peoples. To this end, they discussed specific areas in such fields as science, technology, culture, sports and journalism, in which people-to-people contacts and exchanges would be mutually beneficial. Each side undertakes to facilitate the further development of such contacts and exchanges."

It feels like any sort of restrictive foreign-policy promise is a no-win. A "no invasion" promise would be a license for every seperatist element to push their agenda, which feels like losing a huge amount of influence. It also seems like it could tie their hands in an actual crisis (i. e. a terrorism scenario where the Taiwanese government refused to cooperate in investigation/prosecution)