The third plenary session of the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) 18th Central Committee may have called for reform, but once the meeting was over, the focus was placed on military expansion. Of the 5,000 characters in the meeting report, a mere 153 were dedicated to military issues, which only goes to show that one should pay attention to what the CCP does and not what it says. It goes without saying that nothing was said about all the military issues involved in setting up a national security council.
The only thing that connected the session to military expansion were the Chinese stock indices. When the session closed on Nov. 12, the Shanghai Composite Index fell 1.83 percent while the Shenzhen Component Index fell 2.03 percent. Despite that, military industry and riot control concept shares kept going up, some of them even rising to the daily limit. At that time, the report had still not been published, but well-connected people had already begun to play the stock market.
As expected, China immediately announced a series of military activities. On Nov. 15, the military drills taking place in the Bohai Gulf and the Yellow Sea were extended from Nov. 14 and Nov. 15 to Nov. 22. This included exercises in Shandong Province aimed at attacking residential areas in cities and towns on islands. It is obvious that these targeted Japan and Taiwan. On Nov. 18, Beijing called an army-wide meeting dealing with logistical preparations for military conflict. Is Beijing preparing for war?
On Nov. 20, Wang Hongguang (王洪光), former deputy commander of the Nanjing Military Region, expressed his animosity to Taiwan in an article in the state-run Global Times newspaper. In response to the delivery of six Apache helicopters from the US to Taiwan, Wang said that the People’s Liberation Army is fully capable of dealing with Apache helicopters.
On Saturday, China’s defense ministry announced the East China Sea air defense identification zone, which includes the Diaoyutai Islands (釣魚台). Called the Senkakus in Japan, the islands are claimed by Taiwan, China and Japan. According to the announcement, aircraft flying over the zone must identify themselves. Failure to do so could result in military action.
Japan, the US and South Korea have reacted strongly to China’s announcement. The US condemned it, saying it upset the “status quo.” China’s foreign ministry responded by saying that it was not allowed to make irresponsible remarks. It also said that it would announce further zones when the time was right. It is easy see that above all, this will affect countries bordering the South China Sea such as Taiwan, the Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei and Indonesia.
China’s military expansion is becoming a serious threat to peace in Asia. According to Leninist theory, the rise of imperialism will lead to war due to demands for a redistribution of resources and redrawing spheres of influence. China’s actions are following in the footsteps of past imperialist countries.
Faced with China’s neo-imperialist military threat, will the US follow in the footsteps of former British prime minister Neville Chamberlain, whose appeasement policies failed to prevent the outbreak of World War II, or will it make a decisive move and nip any conflict in the bud?
Faced with China’s provocations, will President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) continue to talk about “peace dividends” and lull the Taiwanese public and its allies the US and Japan into believing that things are just dandy? Will the lackeys in the Ma administration go along with Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Straits Chairman Chen Deming (陳德銘) and hide China’s ambitions to annex Taiwan behind empty rhetoric?
Paul Lin is a political commentator.
Translated by Perry Svensson
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers