Over the past year, the world has observed what many of us in the US Congress have warned about for years: The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is an unreliable partner intent on chasing its ambitions to be the world’s superpower at the expense of its people, its partners and the international community at large.
In December last year, the CCP had evidence that a new strain of the coronavirus was infecting and killing Chinese citizens at an alarming rate. Their response was to censor medical professionals and lie to their own people out of fear of tarnishing China’s global image, and then to allow millions to travel outside Hubei Province to the rest of China and throughout the world.
The resulting COVID-19 pandemic has decimated the economies of nations worldwide, infected millions and so far killed more than half-a-million people.
In the late spring, the CCP announced its intentions to impose national security legislation on Hong Kong, a then-autonomous territory of China that was guaranteed control over its domestic security and judicial matters until 2047.
Despite an international backlash and a tanking domestic economy, the CCP pushed forward in consolidating control over Hong Kong, brutally suppressing peaceful protests through violent police crackdowns and contravening binding international agreements.
Evidence has surfaced that the CCP subjected Uighur and East Turkic minorities in the Xinjiang region to forced sterilizations and population control, in addition to imprisonment in mass concentration camps, where inmates were subject to brainwashing, rape and torture. This is an ongoing genocidal campaign implemented on a national scale and yet the CCP regime acts with impunity.
Clearly, the People’s Republic of China (PRC) values its nationalistic objectives and consolidation of power more than its global image or its international partnerships. How then should the state of play between the PRC and Taiwan be viewed?
Over the past six months, the PRC has used the destruction wrought by COVID-19 as a cover to stage increasingly provocative military maneuvers and live-fire drills in and around the Taiwan Strait. This has been accompanied by a rapid buildup of People’s Liberation Army (PLA) forces along the Chinese side of the Taiwan Strait, situated in a way that seems strategically positioned to take by force some of Taiwan’s outlying islands.
The US has an obligation to ensure that the future of Taiwan — a vibrant, Mandarin-speaking democracy that has made immeasurable contributions to global health and the international community — is decided by peaceful means, not by intimidation or military force. For these reasons, I introduced the Taiwan Invasion Prevention Act, which would strengthen the defense commitment of the US to Taiwan and bolster overall US-Taiwan ties.
Since the late 1970s, the US’ approach to Taiwan’s defense has been defined by a policy of strategic ambiguity, whereby Washington has maintained the stance that the future of the relationship between Taiwan and China should be determined by peaceful means, but not by committing US forces to defend Taiwan in the event of an armed attack.
This legislation ends that ambiguity by giving the US president limited authorization to use military force in the event of an armed attack on Taiwan, by demanding that the PRC renounce the use or threat of force in attempting to unify with Taiwan, and by strengthening the US’ defense coordination with Taiwan’s armed forces.
These actions are consistent with US obligations as established under the Taiwan Relations Act of 1979 and do not contravene any red lines of conferring official diplomatic recognition on Taiwan.
In this balancing act of deterrence between the US and China over Taiwan, the US cannot afford to remain content with half measures and ineffective rhetoric. Deterrence through an aggressive and forward-projecting military posture might be the only effective measure that the US and its allies have left in containing the territorial ambitions of the communist regime led by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平).
If the US loses the battle of deterrence over Taiwan, then it has lost the war. Therefore, the US’ response must be immediate, strong and overwhelming.
The ideals of the US require it to defend a strong democracy like Taiwan against outside communist antagonism. If the CCP’s campaign of aggression is to be stopped, then it must be stopped here.
The time has come for the US to pick a side. I urge Congress and the administration to recognize the crossroads we are at and to choose wisely.
Ted Yoho is the US representative for Florida’s Third Congressional District and is the ranking Republican member of the US House of Representatives Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Asia, the Pacific and Nonproliferation.
Chinese state-owned companies COSCO Shipping Corporation and China Merchants have a 30 percent stake in Kaohsiung Port’s Kao Ming Container Terminal (Terminal No. 6) and COSCO leases Berths 65 and 66. It is extremely dangerous to allow Chinese companies or state-owned companies to operate critical infrastructure. Deterrence theorists are familiar with the concepts of deterrence “by punishment” and “by denial.” Deterrence by punishment threatens an aggressor with prohibitive costs (like retaliation or sanctions) that outweigh the benefits of their action, while deterrence by denial aims to make an attack so difficult that it becomes pointless. Elbridge Colby, currently serving as the Under
The Ministry of the Interior on Thursday last week said it ordered Internet service providers to block access to Chinese social media platform Xiaohongshu (小紅書, also known as RedNote in English) for a year, citing security risks and more than 1,700 alleged fraud cases on the platform since last year. The order took effect immediately, abruptly affecting more than 3 million users in Taiwan, and sparked discussions among politicians, online influencers and the public. The platform is often described as China’s version of Instagram or Pinterest, combining visual social media with e-commerce, and its users are predominantly young urban women,
Most Hong Kongers ignored the elections for its Legislative Council (LegCo) in 2021 and did so once again on Sunday. Unlike in 2021, moderate democrats who pledged their allegiance to Beijing were absent from the ballots this year. The electoral system overhaul is apparent revenge by Beijing for the democracy movement. On Sunday, the Hong Kong “patriots-only” election of the LegCo had a record-low turnout in the five geographical constituencies, with only 1.3 million people casting their ballots on the only seats that most Hong Kongers are eligible to vote for. Blank and invalid votes were up 50 percent from the previous
Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi lit a fuse the moment she declared that trouble for Taiwan means trouble for Japan. Beijing roared, Tokyo braced and like a plot twist nobody expected that early in the story, US President Donald Trump suddenly picked up the phone to talk to her. For a man who normally prefers to keep Asia guessing, the move itself was striking. What followed was even more intriguing. No one outside the room knows the exact phrasing, the tone or the diplomatic eyebrow raises exchanged, but the broad takeaway circulating among people familiar with the call was this: Trump did