During an online keynote speech on June 12, Legislative Speaker You Si-kun (游錫堃) said that when he was premier, he already knew that the Yun Feng (雲峰, Cloud Peak) medium-range supersonic land-attack cruise missile developed in Taiwan could reach Beijing.
If Beijing were to attack Taiwan, Taipei would respond by firing the missiles and China would regret its aggression, he said.
You’s comments were met by immediate criticism from political commentator Lai Yueh-tchienn (賴岳謙), who said that the Cloud Peak relied on guidance from the US’ Global Positioning System (GPS) to find its target.
If war broke out in the Taiwan Strait, the US would most likely shut off its GPS, as China would demand in the strongest terms to do so, Lai said, adding that if the US refused, China would destroy the GPS, negating the effect of the Cloud Peak missile.
Lai then said that You should not talk about things he did not understand.
The news site Storm Media then published Lai’s criticisms as news, headlining the article: “You Si-kun says Cloud Peak could reach Beijing, academic points out major flaw, says he shouldn’t talk about things he does not understand.”
There might have been problems with what You said, but he understands well what he is talking about, and in fact it was Lai who was in the dark.
First, the Cloud Peak is not a ballistic missile. It is a medium-range land attack cruise missile that can fly a distance of about 2,000km.
As it is a land attack missile, its main guidance system, which is also the most difficult to obtain, tracks the attack route stored in a digital file, allowing it to use the terrain contour matching guidance system, not the GPS.
Second, although it is by no means clear whether the US will send its forces to assist Taiwan in the event of war across the Taiwan Strait, the provision of high-precision coordinates through its GPS would be a major benefit to Taiwan’s armed forces. The US is highly unlikely to shut it down under pressure from Beijing.
Finally, although China has developed the high-orbit Dong Neng-3 anti-satellite weapon, which is capable of destroying GPS satellites, if hostilities broke out in the Taiwan Strait, Beijing authorities would have to think very carefully before they gave an order to attack the US’ GPS, even if Washington continued to provide the system’s support to Taiwan.
There are three reasons that Beijing would hesitate.
First, it would want to avoid a war between superpowers. After Russia invaded Ukraine, Washington demanded that Beijing place economic sanctions on Moscow, but Beijing not only refused to comply with Washington’s demands, it has continued to assist Russia with its BeiDou Navigation Satellite System — China’s answer to the US’ GPS — to help Russian forces make precision strikes against Ukrainian targets.
Despite this, and although it possessed anti-satellite weapons 20 years before China, the US has refrained from military action that would prevent China’s BeiDou system from operating. The reason is none other than Washington does not want to see a contained conflict from escalating into a war between two nuclear powers.
Similarly, a war in the Taiwan Strait would be a contained war, and China would probably not want to see it escalate into a conflict of mutualy assured destruction just for the sake of the GPS issue.
Second, destroying the GPS would cause a major international incident, threatening the livelihoods of people around the world. The GPS has a wide range of civilian applications beyond its military uses, and the vast majority of the world relies on it.
If the GPS system is taken out, a conflict in the Taiwan Strait would no longer be a regional issue; it would become a threat that extends to people around the world. Beijing would not take lightly any contemplation of its destruction.
Finally, China’s best option would be to interfere with the operation of the GPS. Electrical interference would make it impossible for Taiwan’s armed forces to attack China, and the People’s Liberation Army would be able to use this option without attacking the GPS in an open and easily discoverable way.
Lai seems to be the kind of person who enjoys appearing on TV, but does not have the time to do the requisite research before he speaks publicly. He is content to accuse others of not knowing what they are talking about, even when they themselves have a better understanding.
Lin Tsung-ta is the founder of International Military Affairs Magazine.
Translated by Paul Cooper
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
India is not China, and many of its residents fear it never will be. It is hard to imagine a future in which the subcontinent’s manufacturing dominates the world, its foreign investment shapes nations’ destinies, and the challenge of its economic system forces the West to reshape its own policies and principles. However, that is, apparently, what the US administration fears. Speaking in New Delhi last week, US Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau warned that “we will not make the same mistakes with India that we did with China 20 years ago.” Although he claimed the recently agreed framework
The Office of the US Trade Representative (USTR) on Wednesday last week announced it is launching investigations into 16 US trading partners, including Taiwan, under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 to determine whether they have engaged in unfair trade practices, such as overproduction. A day later, the agency announced a separate Section 301 investigation into 60 economies based on the implementation of measures to prohibit the importation of goods produced with forced labor. Several of Taiwan’s main trading rivals — including China, Japan, South Korea and the EU — also made the US’ investigation list. The announcements come
Taiwan is not invited to the table. It never has been, but this year, with the Philippines holding the ASEAN chair, the question that matters is no longer who gets formally named, it is who becomes structurally indispensable. The “one China” formula continues to do its job. It sets the outer boundary of official diplomatic speech, and no one in the region has a serious interest in openly challenging it. However, beneath the surface, something is thickening. Trade corridors, digital infrastructure, artificial intelligence (AI) cooperation, supply chains, cross-border investment: The connective tissue between Taiwan and ASEAN is quietly and methodically growing
RSS