An article titled “Preparing a Post-Invasion Taiwan for Insurgency” was published in this month’s issue of the US Naval Institute’s monthly journal Proceedings. The article proposes that if there is a military conflict across the Taiwan Strait, the US should destroy Taiwan’s infrastructure to prevent the Chinese People’s Liberation Army from using it.
This proposal has sparked a great deal of discussion, with some commentators saying that the article exposes a new US strategy toward Taiwan. The previous theory that the US would abandon Taiwan is being replaced by a new theory that it would destroy Taiwan. Such commentators are casting doubts on US strategies toward the Indo-Pacific region in general, and Taiwan in particular.
The article does not represent official US attitudes. Proceedings is not an official journal, and the US Naval Institute is not an official US department. The institute states that it is a non-profit, non-partisan, non-corporate and non-governmental institution. Consequently, its articles are not constrained by the perspectives of official standpoints. For this reason, unusual opinions are frequently put forward in the journal, such as that the US armed forces should counter communist China’s ever-expanding maritime militia by reviving the practice of issuing letters of marque to authorize privateers. It goes without saying that this proposal does not represent official US attitude and strategies.
Nonetheless, some people with dubious intent have started using the ideas proposed in the article in their efforts, via various media platforms, to promote the theory that the US plans to destroy Taiwan. This viewpoint is serving as the raw material for cognitive warfare, especially against the current background of the war between Russia and Ukraine, and US President Joe Biden’s recent trip to Japan and South Korea.
After fighting broke out between Russia and Ukraine, the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) initial attempts to mold public opinion were generally in the direction that, as with Ukraine, the US would not send troops to defend Taiwan, and that it would abandon Taiwan’s security. This is reminiscent of similar ideas that were spread around following last year’s complete withdrawal of US troops from Afghanistan.
Soon after the war between Russia and Ukraine broke out, comments such as “yesterday Afghanistan, today Ukraine, tomorrow Taiwan” started doing the rounds. However, Russia did not achieve the quick victory that had widely been expected. Instead, NATO, led by the US, has been providing Ukraine with large amounts of intelligence gathered through electronic surveillance, along with all kinds of light and heavy weapons, which has caused the war to turn into a deadlock. Meanwhile in the Indo-Pacific region, the US has been showing its concern for the region through visits by politicians, as well as military activity by its air force and navy. All these things have caused a change of direction in the CCP’s efforts to mold public opinion.
The CCP has begun to say that the US is manipulating the world situation by turning Ukraine into a pawn against Russia, pushing Ukraine into the flames of war and dragging Russia down with it, suggesting that Taiwan is the US’ next target for this kind of treatment.
As soon as the Proceedings article appeared, certain people immediately started saying that it represented the views of the US military and that the US Naval Institute had been “upgraded” from semi-official to official status. They also say that Taiwan’s media have been blocking this news, but none of these things are true.
This incident shows that the tactics of cognitive warfare with regard to public opinion have been refined. The new tactics are to use specific facts, such as the publication of this article, as raw material, then match them up with current events and spread this processed information around through digital technology. If we in Taiwan are unaware of what is being done, we will fall into the trap of cognitive warfare. It also shows that, as well as conventional military confrontations, the invisible battlefield of cognitive warfare must not be ignored. In this day and age, national defense, civil defense and psychological defense are all essential.
Lin Ying-yu is an adjunct assistant professor at National Sun Yat-sen University’s International Master Program in Asia-Pacific Affairs and a researcher at the Association of Strategic Foresight.
Translated by Julian Clegg
Yesterday’s recall and referendum votes garnered mixed results for the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). All seven of the KMT lawmakers up for a recall survived the vote, and by a convincing margin of, on average, 35 percent agreeing versus 65 percent disagreeing. However, the referendum sponsored by the KMT and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) on restarting the operation of the Ma-anshan Nuclear Power Plant in Pingtung County failed. Despite three times more “yes” votes than “no,” voter turnout fell short of the threshold. The nation needs energy stability, especially with the complex international security situation and significant challenges regarding
Most countries are commemorating the 80th anniversary of the end of World War II with condemnations of militarism and imperialism, and commemoration of the global catastrophe wrought by the war. On the other hand, China is to hold a military parade. According to China’s state-run Xinhua news agency, Beijing is conducting the military parade in Tiananmen Square on Sept. 3 to “mark the 80th anniversary of the end of World War II and the victory of the Chinese People’s War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression.” However, during World War II, the People’s Republic of China (PRC) had not yet been established. It
Much like the first round on July 26, Saturday’s second wave of recall elections — this time targeting seven Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers — also failed. With all 31 KMT legislators who faced recall this summer secure in their posts, the mass recall campaign has come to an end. The outcome was unsurprising. Last month’s across-the-board defeats had already dealt a heavy blow to the morale of recall advocates and the ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), while bolstering the confidence of the KMT and its ally the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP). It seemed a foregone conclusion that recalls would falter, as
A recent critique of former British prime minister Boris Johnson’s speech in Taiwan (“Invite ‘will-bes,’ not has-beens,” by Sasha B. Chhabra, Aug. 12, page 8) seriously misinterpreted his remarks, twisting them to fit a preconceived narrative. As a Taiwanese who witnessed his political rise and fall firsthand while living in the UK and was present for his speech in Taipei, I have a unique vantage point from which to say I think the critiques of his visit deliberately misinterpreted his words. By dwelling on his personal controversies, they obscured the real substance of his message. A clarification is needed to
RSS