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
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
RSS