National security entities in Taiwan and the US — including the National Security Bureau and the Institute for National Defense and Security Research — have in the past few weeks sought to raise awareness within their respective armed forces and the wider public about indications and analyses that China is waging “cognitive warfare” against its adversaries.
China’s efforts were born out of, and still closely emulate, Russian cognitive warfare. During the 2014 Ukraine crisis, the Kremlin employed cognitive warfare tactics, including military subversion, disinformation and “mind control” to annex Crimea. The Kremlin’s successes in this field increased Beijing’s appetite to annex Taiwan.
Russia had deployed political, economic and military coercion against Ukraine long before the crisis unfolded.
After former Ukrainian president Viktor Yanukovych took office in 2010, he signed an agreement with Russia to exchange supplies of Russian natural gas for an extension on the annual lease of the Sevastopol Naval Base on the Crimean Peninsula for use by Russia’s Black Sea Fleet until 2014 and beyond. The agreement allowed Russian forces to continue operating within Crimea and made it easier for Russia to infiltrate public opinion in Ukraine.
Next, the Kremlin spread disinformation, and carried out psychological and public opinion attacks within Crimea to implant a positive perception of Russia in people’s minds. Having employed cognitive warfare to “soften up” its residents and instill cognitive bias, the Kremlin was able to annex the area.
China has been using the cognitive bias of its “one China” policy as a diplomatic tool to restrict Taiwan’s representation on the international stage and thwart Taiwan from developing friendly relations with other nations.
The policy is complimented by the normalization encirclement “exercises” by People’s Liberation Army (PLA) aircraft and ships.
The intention is to gradually whittle away the Taiwanese military’s alertness and vigilance.
As part of this tactic, PLA aircraft have begun to regularly flout the tacit agreement not to cross the median line of the Taiwan Strait.
Taiwanese military personnel are becoming increasingly worn out by the tangible show of force and the psychological warfare aspect.
At the same time, disinformation tactics are also being employed by the PLA to sow division and chip away at morale within Taiwan’s armed forces.
Each of these are examples of cognitive warfare tactics, with the ultimate goal to produce an environment conducive to a successful military invasion of Taiwan.
While a country might possess a large military force and considerable resources, the foundation for victory in battle rests in the stability of its leadership, morale and logistics — an idea endorsed by British military theorist B.H. Liddell Hart in his book Strategy and Chinese philosopher Mencius (孟子).
It is crucial that Taiwanese are aware of China’s true intentions, that trust in government institutions is enhanced and more support is found to bolster national defense.
This would prevent Taiwan from falling into the trap of China’s cognitive warfare, act as a bulwark against PLA psychological warfare and defeatism, and help the nation keep its precious sovereignty and democracy.
Hou Hsin-tien is an instructor at the National Defense University.
Translated by Edward Jones
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
Every day since Oct. 7 last year, the world has watched an unprecedented wave of violence rain down on Israel and the occupied Palestinian Territories — more than 200 days of constant suffering and death in Gaza with just a seven-day pause. Many of us in the American expatriate community in Taiwan have been watching this tragedy unfold in horror. We know we are implicated with every US-made “dumb” bomb dropped on a civilian target and by the diplomatic cover our government gives to the Israeli government, which has only gotten more extreme with such impunity. Meantime, multicultural coalitions of US