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.
Taiwanese pragmatism has long been praised when it comes to addressing Chinese attempts to erase Taiwan from the international stage. “Taipei” and the even more inaccurate and degrading “Chinese Taipei,” imposed titles required to participate in international events, are loathed by Taiwanese. That is why there was huge applause in Taiwan when Japanese public broadcaster NHK referred to the Taiwanese Olympic team as “Taiwan,” instead of “Chinese Taipei” during the opening ceremony of the Tokyo Olympics. What is standard protocol for most nations — calling a national team by the name their country is commonly known by — is impossible for
China’s supreme objective in a war across the Taiwan Strait is to incorporate Taiwan as a province of the People’s Republic. It follows, therefore, that international recognition of Taiwan’s de jure independence is a consummation that China’s leaders devoutly wish to avoid. By the same token, an American strategy to deny China that objective would complicate Beijing’s calculus and deter large-scale hostilities. For decades, China has cautioned “independence means war.” The opposite is also true: “war means independence.” A comprehensive strategy of denial would guarantee an outcome of de jure independence for Taiwan in the event of Chinese invasion or
A recent Taipei Times editorial (“A targeted bilingual policy,” March 12, page 8) questioned how the Ministry of Education can justify spending NT$151 million (US$4.74 million) when the spotlighted achievements are English speech competitions and campus tours. It is a fair question, but it focuses on the wrong issue. The problem is not last year’s outcomes failing to meet the bilingual education vision; the issue is that the ministry has abandoned the program that originally justified such a large expenditure. In the early years of Bilingual 2030, the ministry’s K-12 Administration promoted the Bilingual Instruction in Select Domains Program (部分領域課程雙語教學實施計畫).
Former Fijian prime minister Mahendra Chaudhry spoke at the Yushan Forum in Taipei on Monday, saying that while global conflicts were causing economic strife in the world, Taiwan’s New Southbound Policy (NSP) serves as a stabilizing force in the Indo-Pacific region and offers strategic opportunities for small island nations such as Fiji, as well as support in the fields of public health, education, renewable energy and agricultural technology. Taiwan does not have official diplomatic relations with Fiji, but it is one of the small island nations covered by the NSP. Chaudhry said that Fiji, as a sovereign nation, should support