At the annual Aspen Security Forum last week, CIA Director Bill Burns and MI6 Chief Richard Moore gave their respective opinions on the current level of threat faced by Taiwan, and revealed a subtle difference of opinion that could prove significant for Taiwan’s security.
Burns played down fears that Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) might take military action against Taiwan after the Chinese Communist Party’s 20th National Congress in November — when it is expected that Xi would secure a convention-busting third term as president — but added that the risk of military action increases as the decade progresses.
Burns also said Beijing appears “unsettled” by Russia’s “strategic failure” in Ukraine and that China likely drew the lesson that “You’ve got to amass overwhelming force if you’re going to contemplate that [invasion of Taiwan] in the future,” suggesting that Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has bought Taiwan more time.
Burn’s comments were broadly in line with previous intelligence assessments released into the public domain by Taiwanese and US military officials over the past 12 months.
However, Moore struck a slightly more cautious note, saying it is too early to tell what lessons China will draw from Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
There are many signs that Chinese officials are “going into overdrive” to analyze the Ukraine situation and draw the right conclusions, Moore said. However, party ideology and officials seeking to please Xi ahead of November’s congress are clouding the picture, so analysts are finding it difficult to read the tea leaves at present, he added.
Moore could be hinting that hawks within the upper echelons of the party are egging Xi on to roll the dice on Taiwan. He added that Xi is watching Ukraine “like a hawk,” which means it is essential that the West “toughs it out” in Ukraine, and helps Ukrainians either win the war “or at least negotiate from a position of significant strength.”
Moore repeated concerns first made during a speech delivered in December last year that, like Russian President Vladimir Putin, Xi appears to have bought into an entrenched narrative of Western weakness, which could lead China’s leader to miscalculate — particularly over Taiwan. Moore’s observation is timely, with tensions between Washington and Beijing threatening to boil over due to reports that US House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi might visit Taiwan later this summer.
The New York Times on Monday reported that officials within US President Joe Biden’s administration view the trip as high risk. Speaking to the newspaper, one former high-ranking US Department of State official warned that the trip could be perceived as a humiliation of Xi’s leadership at an “extremely tense” time for domestic politics in China.
US Senator Chris Coons, who deals with the Biden administration often on Taiwan issues, said in an interview with the Times on Sunday: “One school of thought is that the lesson is ‘go early and go strong’ before there is time to strengthen Taiwan’s defenses... And we may be heading to an earlier confrontation — more a squeeze than an invasion — than we thought.”
Any significant military action against Taiwan would have to rely on the element of surprise. As Beijing has made no secret of its intentions, pre-empting the timescales of Taiwan’s and the West’s intelligence assessments by launching an “early” invasion would be a way to achieve this. Moreover, Biden’s rock-bottom approval ratings and his perceived frailty could lead Xi and his inner circle of hawkish advisers to conclude that the time to act is now.
Taiwan cannot afford to let its guard down. With the danger of miscalculation by Xi a real possibility, Taiwan’s military and national security apparatus must remain vigilant.
Donald Trump’s return to the White House has offered Taiwan a paradoxical mix of reassurance and risk. Trump’s visceral hostility toward China could reinforce deterrence in the Taiwan Strait. Yet his disdain for alliances and penchant for transactional bargaining threaten to erode what Taiwan needs most: a reliable US commitment. Taiwan’s security depends less on US power than on US reliability, but Trump is undermining the latter. Deterrence without credibility is a hollow shield. Trump’s China policy in his second term has oscillated wildly between confrontation and conciliation. One day, he threatens Beijing with “massive” tariffs and calls China America’s “greatest geopolitical
On Sunday, 13 new urgent care centers (UCC) officially began operations across the six special municipalities. The purpose of the centers — which are open from 8am to midnight on Sundays and national holidays — is to reduce congestion in hospital emergency rooms, especially during the nine-day Lunar New Year holiday next year. It remains to be seen how effective these centers would be. For one, it is difficult for people to judge for themselves whether their condition warrants visiting a major hospital or a UCC — long-term public education and health promotions are necessary. Second, many emergency departments acknowledge
US President Donald Trump’s seemingly throwaway “Taiwan is Taiwan” statement has been appearing in headlines all over the media. Although it appears to have been made in passing, the comment nevertheless reveals something about Trump’s views and his understanding of Taiwan’s situation. In line with the Taiwan Relations Act, the US and Taiwan enjoy unofficial, but close economic, cultural and national defense ties. They lack official diplomatic relations, but maintain a partnership based on shared democratic values and strategic alignment. Excluding China, Taiwan maintains a level of diplomatic relations, official or otherwise, with many nations worldwide. It can be said that
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) made the astonishing assertion during an interview with Germany’s Deutsche Welle, published on Friday last week, that Russian President Vladimir Putin is not a dictator. She also essentially absolved Putin of blame for initiating the war in Ukraine. Commentators have since listed the reasons that Cheng’s assertion was not only absurd, but bordered on dangerous. Her claim is certainly absurd to the extent that there is no need to discuss the substance of it: It would be far more useful to assess what drove her to make the point and stick so
RSS