Kyiv’s counteroffensive to liberate Russian-occupied areas in Ukraine’s east and south was a surprise following a months-long stalemate marked by artillery battles.
In a video address on Monday, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy said that Ukrainian soldiers had retaken more than 6,000km2 of land this month.
While the figure was unverified, a British Ministry of Defence intelligence update published on Monday said that Ukraine has recaptured an area “at least twice the size of Greater London.”
Russia has said that its forces have withdrawn from the strategically important cities of Balakliya, Izyum and Kupiansk in the eastern Kharkiv region, while in the southern Kherson region, Ukrainian forces are reported to have been making slower, but equally significant advances.
Multiple eyewitness accounts, photographs and videos show Russian units in a disorderly retreat, leaving behind vast quantities of equipment, including armored vehicles and ammunition.
In a sign that a combination of panic and frustration is beginning to set in at the Kremlin, Russian President Vladimir Putin on Monday sacked the Russian commander in charge of the war, Lieutenant General Roman Berdnikov, who was in the post for a mere 16 days.
While it is still too early to draw a definite conclusion, all the evidence points to a significant turning point in the war. With the momentum now on its side, Ukraine stands a chance to defeat Russia. What would the implications of a Ukrainian victory be for Taiwan and China?
Having aligned his country with Russia, Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) might have picked the losing side, which would be a major foreign policy embarrassment just as he is preparing to force through a third term as president.
However, the implications for the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) are by far the most significant.
Closely modeled on the Russian military in terms of force structure, equipment, operational strategy and tactics, the sense of doubt that a high-profile Russian defeat would implant within the minds of PLA commanders would be corrosive, not just in terms of strategy and tactics, but also regarding equipment, as the PLA has many fighter jets that were either manufactured under license from Russia or are reverse-engineered copies. The inability of Russia to secure air dominance over Ukraine has severely hampered its ability to wage war.
In the event of a Ukrainian victory, PLA commanders would surely begin to ask themselves questions. If Russia’s military, which is more experienced and battled-hardened than the PLA, cannot defeat a vastly outnumbered and inferior Ukrainian military in a simple hop across a land border, what chance does the PLA stand in an invasion of Taiwan, which would require an amphibious invasion orders of magnitude more complex and prone to failure?
The flip side is that a Ukrainian victory would be an inspiration to Taiwan’s armed forces. Ukraine’s military has demonstrated that superior leadership, tactics, planning and intelligence — if properly coordinated — can deliver a significant advantage against a numerically superior enemy with more advanced weaponry.
The war also demonstrates the defender’s advantage in terms of morale. Ukrainian morale is reportedly sky-high, whereas the morale of Russian soldiers, far from home, cold, hungry and disillusioned with their commanding officers, is at rock bottom.
Taiwan’s military cannot afford to rest on its laurels. It must continue to modernize and update its operational strategy. However, if Ukraine is triumphant, despite the enormous odds against it at the beginning of the war, it would deliver a huge fillip to Taiwan and a thumping headache for China.
A gap appears to be emerging between Washington’s foreign policy elites and the broader American public on how the United States should respond to China’s rise. From my vantage working at a think tank in Washington, DC, and through regular travel around the United States, I increasingly experience two distinct discussions. This divergence — between America’s elite hawkishness and public caution — may become one of the least appreciated and most consequential external factors influencing Taiwan’s security environment in the years ahead. Within the American policy community, the dominant view of China has grown unmistakably tough. Many members of Congress, as
The shifting geopolitical tectonic plates of this year have placed Beijing in a profound strategic dilemma. As Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) prepares for a high-stakes summit with US President Donald Trump, the traditional power dynamics of the China-Japan-US triangle have been destabilized by the diplomatic success of Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi in Washington. For the Chinese leadership, the anxiety is two-fold: There is a visceral fear of being encircled by a hardened security alliance, and a secondary risk of being left in a vulnerable position by a transactional deal between Washington and Tokyo that might inadvertently empower Japan
After declaring Iran’s military “gone,” US President Donald Trump appealed to the UK, France, Japan and South Korea — as well as China, Iran’s strategic partner — to send minesweepers and naval forces to reopen the Strait of Hormuz. When allies balked, the request turned into a warning: NATO would face “a very bad” future if it refused. The prevailing wisdom is that Trump faces a credibility problem: having spent years insulting allies, he finds they would not rally when he needs them. That is true, but superficial, as though a structural collapse could be caused by wounded feelings. Something
Former Taipei mayor and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) founding chairman Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) was sentenced to 17 years in prison on Thursday, making headlines across major media. However, another case linked to the TPP — the indictment of Chinese immigrant Xu Chunying (徐春鶯) for alleged violations of the Anti-Infiltration Act (反滲透法) on Tuesday — has also stirred up heated discussions. Born in Shanghai, Xu became a resident of Taiwan through marriage in 1993. Currently the director of the Taiwan New Immigrant Development Association, she was elected to serve as legislator-at-large for the TPP in 2023, but was later charged with involvement