Former British prime minister Liz Truss on Wednesday called on EU countries and other like-minded nations to form an “economic NATO” as a countermeasure to Chinese economic coercion. Truss also called on the UK and other states to have a clear stance toward China, and not to let the economic benefits it offers cloud the threats it presents to freedom and democracy.
These are two separate issues that Truss has raised — creating economic resilience by reducing reliance on China, and having a clear stance on relations with Taiwan and China — but they are highly connected.
China is well aware that an attempted invasion of Taiwan would most likely draw the US into a larger conflict, which would have fatal consequences for Beijing. Last month, the US was granted access to four more bases in the Philippines: three that are close to Taiwan and one facing the South China Sea. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin on Tuesday said that Washington would send Taiwan military equipment from its stockpile “in the near term” and Japan is installing new missile defense systems in Okinawa Prefecture. Beijing is not likely to risk a war when the odds are stacked so greatly against it. That is why it has been ramping up its cognitive warfare against Taiwan.
Beijing in January lifted a ban on imports of 63 products from Taiwanese food and beverage producers following a visit to China by Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) officials. It was seen as a political move aimed at weakening public trust in the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) government ahead of next year’s presidential election.
On Sunday, Here I Stand Project deputy secretary-general Cynthia Yang (楊欣慈) told a news conference that after she bought a book critical of the Chinese Communist Party, she received a telephone call telling her that Taiwan would never win a war with China.
These two incidents might seem unrelated, but they are both part of larger efforts by Beijing to manipulate Taiwanese voters, lower public confidence in Taiwan’s military and democratic institutions, and foster ill sentiment toward the US, Japan and other countries friendly toward Taiwan, while bolstering sentiment toward China.
These efforts can be seen online, where China uses fake accounts to post anti-US and anti-DPP diatribes in the comments sections of news stories on social media and on YouTube. This is why it is crucial for countries to have a clear, unambiguous stance on their relationships with Taiwan and China, and their planned courses of action in the event of a Chinese attack. Beijing called Truss’ visit to Taiwan a “dangerous political stunt,” but she was not deterred and said that allowing a totalitarian regime to dictate who goes where “is a very dangerous idea.”
Then-US House of Representatives speaker Nancy Pelosi set a precedent when she visited Taiwan in August last year despite Chinese threats, proving that Beijing was powerless to stop her.
The only real course of action Beijing could take against countries that refuse to succumb to its manipulation is to impose trade barriers and other restrictions on companies that do business in China, which is why, as Truss has clearly articulated, economic resilience is critical. As Beijing employs a divide-and-conquer approach, priming powerful business lobbyists and paying politicians, there must be concerted efforts by governments to assist companies to reduce their operations in China, and clear laws that prohibit trade of some technologies with Beijing.
An alliance of like-minded countries that are clear in their intentions to assist Taiwan will help deter China in its military ambitions, and that clarity of intentions can only be achieved by reducing their economic reliance on 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
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
Out of 64 participating universities in this year’s Stars Program — through which schools directly recommend their top students to universities for admission — only 19 filled their admissions quotas. There were 922 vacancies, down more than 200 from last year; top universities had 37 unfilled places, 40 fewer than last year. The original purpose of the Stars Program was to expand admissions to a wider range of students. However, certain departments at elite universities that failed to meet their admissions quotas are not improving. Vacancies at top universities are linked to students’ program preferences on their applications, but inappropriate admission
RSS