From a Taiwanese perspective, the Chinese word tong zhan (統戰) could be interpreted as the war — or effort — to achieve unification. However, this interpretation would have more to do with the unique preoccupations of a threatened nation than with historical accuracy.
The accepted English translation is “united front.” It was born of the collective desire of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) to defeat warlords in China in the 1920s. In its current iteration, it is a network of organizations affiliated with the CCP, engaging in political warfare to promote Beijing’s interests and global narrative, and suppress discussions of ideas it deems unfavorable. It is an organized, comprehensive effort to achieve the CCP’s desired ends.
It is no wonder that Taiwanese might interpret the term as specifically referring to unification, but its scope extends far beyond China’s intentions for Taiwan. It is a global mission that includes industrial espionage, political infiltration, manipulation of academic environments, and the strangulation of freedoms of thought and expression, a task that has only been made easier by technological advances, social media platforms, and the ubiquity of channels to disseminate disinformation and to surveil China’s population, not only within its own borders, but also overseas.
US President Joe Biden has arrived at the conclusion not only that the CCP represents the biggest challenge to US dominance and national security, but that any effort to counter China’s rise would require more than mounting a whole-of-government, united response from the US alone: It would require a united front of global and regional allies, relying on soft power rather than the threat, coercion and manipulation preferred by Beijing.
The Biden administration has hit the ground running to try to achieve that. On Friday last week, the US participated in a virtual summit of the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue comprising the US, Australia, Japan and India, in what was the first-ever leader-level summit of the group. The joint statement at the end of the summit, describing the “spirit of the Quad,” said: “We strive for a region that is free, open, inclusive, healthy, anchored by democratic values and unconstrained by coercion.”
China was not specified in that sentence, but it did not need to be.
On Tuesday, US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin and US Secretary of State Antony Blinken met with Japanese Minister of Foreign Affairs Toshimitsu Motegi and Japanese Minister of Defense Nobuo Kishi for “two-plus-two” talks with an ally the US sees as crucial to shoring up a united show of strength against China in the region.
However, Biden will need a wider alliance, and this is where the challenge of building a united front against China will be. He needs to differentiate the offerings of the US from those of China and to counter the economic reality that China is the principal trading partner for many US allies.
It is a task complicated by doubts planted in capitals worldwide by former US president Donald Trump’s unashamed unilateral and transactional approach to foreign policy, and the possibility of a return to that when Biden leaves office.
If the main purpose of these meetings was discussing how to counter China, Japan is on board for historical and geopolitical reasons; Australia for reasons of national and economic security; and India due to territorial disputes and the risk of China siding with its rivals, in particular Pakistan, but also Sri Lanka.
For Taiwan, the calculus is easy, because the threat posed by China is clear, present and existential. If it comes down to a battle of ideas and values, Taiwan exemplifies an alternative to what the CCP offers — a vibrant democracy committed to human rights and progressive values.
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
It is being said every second day: The ongoing recall campaign in Taiwan — where citizens are trying to collect enough signatures to trigger re-elections for a number of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators — is orchestrated by the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), or even President William Lai (賴清德) himself. The KMT makes the claim, and foreign media and analysts repeat it. However, they never show any proof — because there is not any. It is alarming how easily academics, journalists and experts toss around claims that amount to accusing a democratic government of conspiracy — without a shred of evidence. These
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
RSS