On Tuesday, the Ministry of National Defense published the 2021 People’s Liberation Army [PLA] Capability Report, its annual assessment of the Chinese military’s capabilities. This year’s report struck a notably more alarming tone than in previous years and included the stark warning that the PLA possesses the ability to paralyze Taiwan’s anti-air and anti-surface systems, as well as to neutralize its ability to launch countermeasures by means of “soft and hard electronic attacks.”
The report anticipates that the PLA would in 2025 receive delivery of its third aircraft carrier, the Type 003, which would further bolster its area-denial capabilities, hindering foreign intervention, and enhancing its ability to project naval and air power beyond the first and second island chains.
As in previous years, this year’s report said that the PLA lacks sufficient transport assets and the logistical capability to launch an amphibious assault against Taiwan, but added that China is making progress toward rectifying these deficiencies. Additionally, the report stated that the PLA is no longer focused primarily on beach landings and is developing the capability to air drop troops.
The report’s downbeat assessment has drawn criticism in some quarters. Former National Assembly member Huang Peng-hsiao (黃澎孝) criticized the outlook and wording of the report, labeling it “terrifying.”
Huang added that, at first glance, it reads like a propaganda piece by Hu Xijin (胡錫進), editor-in-chief of China’s state-run Global Times tabloid, who is known for his nationalistic rhetoric.
Huang’s criticisms are wide of the mark. The function of the annual report is not to paper over deficiencies in Taiwan’s defenses or to boost the morale of service personnel and the wider public, but to present an unvarnished analysis of the threat posed by China and honestly appraise the nation’s capabilities. A cursory look at recent operations by the PLA demonstrates the vital importance of transparent analysis given the constantly evolving threat from China.
Last week, the PLA conducted the first-ever incursion of Chinese military helicopters into Taiwan’s air defense identification zone. It was the first recorded incident of intrusions by Chinese helicopters since the defense ministry began reporting Chinese aerial incursions in September last year. Taiwanese military analysts believe the PLA could be probing the capabilities of Taiwan’s defense system to study how it responds to different aircraft types.
Japanese media on Monday reported that a PLA warship has been stationed 24 hours a day in waters between northeast Taiwan and Yonaguni Island, the westernmost of Japan’s Ryukyu Islands. The waterway is a strategic chokepoint, and China is attempting to limit the movements of Taiwanese and Japanese naval vessels in the area.
Russian state broadcaster RT published an opinion article on Wednesday claiming that Taiwan had cynically overstated the threat of “paralysis” posed by a Chinese cyberattack for the purposes of increasing support from foreign nations. While this possibility cannot be completely ruled out, Japan’s annual defense white paper, published in July, painted a similarly stark picture of the threat posed by China’s rapid military buildup.
Moreover, it is well documented that the PLA has already developed, or is in the process of developing, sophisticated electronic and cyberwarfare capabilities, including the ability to launch electromagnetic pulse (EMP) attacks. The PLA’s EMP capability was detailed by former CIA officer and US Task Force on National and Homeland Security Executive Director Peter Pry, in a report published in June last year.
In reality, nobody knows how a modern state-on-state war would play out in the digital age; how well military systems can hold up under the onslaught of an EMP attack.
We are in uncharted waters. The military is right to take the threat seriously.
On Sept. 3 in Tiananmen Square, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) rolled out a parade of new weapons in PLA service that threaten Taiwan — some of that Taiwan is addressing with added and new military investments and some of which it cannot, having to rely on the initiative of allies like the United States. The CCP’s goal of replacing US leadership on the global stage was advanced by the military parade, but also by China hosting in Tianjin an August 31-Sept. 1 summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which since 2001 has specialized
In an article published by the Harvard Kennedy School, renowned historian of modern China Rana Mitter used a structured question-and-answer format to deepen the understanding of the relationship between Taiwan and China. Mitter highlights the differences between the repressive and authoritarian People’s Republic of China and the vibrant democracy that exists in Taiwan, saying that Taiwan and China “have had an interconnected relationship that has been both close and contentious at times.” However, his description of the history — before and after 1945 — contains significant flaws. First, he writes that “Taiwan was always broadly regarded by the imperial dynasties of
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) will stop at nothing to weaken Taiwan’s sovereignty, going as far as to create complete falsehoods. That the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has never ruled Taiwan is an objective fact. To refute this, Beijing has tried to assert “jurisdiction” over Taiwan, pointing to its military exercises around the nation as “proof.” That is an outright lie: If the PRC had jurisdiction over Taiwan, it could simply have issued decrees. Instead, it needs to perform a show of force around the nation to demonstrate its fantasy. Its actions prove the exact opposite of its assertions. A
A large part of the discourse about Taiwan as a sovereign, independent nation has centered on conventions of international law and international agreements between outside powers — such as between the US, UK, Russia, the Republic of China (ROC) and Japan at the end of World War II, and between the US and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) since recognition of the PRC as the sole representative of China at the UN. Internationally, the narrative on the PRC and Taiwan has changed considerably since the days of the first term of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) of the Democratic