Open Culture Foundation deputy executive Wu Ming-hsuan (吳銘軒) told a forum in Taipei on Tuesday that Beijing’s “one China” principle is part of a disinformation campaign directed at harming Taiwan.
This disinformation campaign is just one part of a much larger, extremely well-coordinated, decades-long enterprise known as China’s “united front.”
Governments the world over are increasingly becoming aware of this.
A report by the US-based Hudson Institute think tank, released on Wednesday last week and titled The Chinese Communist Party’s Foreign Interference Operations: How the US and Other Democracies Should Respond, outlines in detail the historical and current activities of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) that fall under the “united front” aegis.
The report classes this basket of activities on a spectrum running from “interference” — including espionage, bribes and overseas party cells — at one extreme, to “influence” — lobbying, party-state media think tanks, student associations and university funding — on the other.
The machinery of the “united front” has the CCP Central Committee and the State Council, or Cabinet, at its center, with a series of concentric circles surrounding it: the ministries of commerce, foreign affairs, education and culture on the inner circle; followed by state-owned media, think tanks and enterprises, and Confucius Institutes; and, on the outermost circle, overseas Chinese associations, Chinese student associations, overseas higher education institutions and overseas Chinese-language media.
Foreign governments are well aware of Beijing’s espionage activities and its attempts to influence policy directions to orientate them to be more favorable to Chinese interests. To this end, the US and Australia has banned the use of Chinese components in US telecommunications equipment.
Australia is in the process of introducing legislation to prevent election campaign contributions from foreign sources.
Taiwanese know of the “united front” in terms of its objective of engineering conditions conducive to eventual unification with China. Its broader aim is being operated globally: to influence the narrative in the eyes of members of the Chinese diaspora and the governments of the countries in which they have settled. The ultimate goal is to shape a narrative favorable to the CCP and commandeer overseas democratic institutions and systems so that they serve this narrative.
The report focuses on “united front” tactics influencing this narrative in the US. It identifies independently owned Chinese-language media, higher education and academic institutions, US companies with ties to China, mainstream media, overseas Chinese groups and US politicians as targets for leveraging this narrative.
Much of Taiwan’s efforts to increase its international profile, retain diplomatic ties and emphasize its value as a democracy are being severely undermined by the “united front” tactics aimed at shaping the narrative in the way Beijing wants it to be seen.
Espionage and influence peddling are dangerous; for Taiwan, Beijing’s shaping of the narrative is subtle and existential, as it seeks to deny Taiwan’s efforts to present the reality of its sovereign existence.
The report made a chilling point when it said: “The traditional assumption was that engaging and trading with China would lead it to become more liberal and even democratic. In 2018, it is clear that such a transformation is not happening.”
It said that the situation is reversed: “Initially, democracies wanted to export liberal values and help build civil society in China. Now we need to defend these values on home ground.”
It seems as if other nations are waking up to a threat that many in Taiwan have been laboring under for years.
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
RSS