There are few certainties in life, but when the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs denies a report about some nefarious behavior conducted on behalf of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), there is almost certainly truth to the alleged behavior.
When ministry spokeswoman Mao Ning (毛寧) described reports of the arrest in March of a British parliamentary researcher for having spied for Beijing as “completely fabricated and nothing but malicious slander,” that justified the UK’s Conservative Party taking a closer look at how it engages with the CCP.
News of the arrest, which was only made public by British police on Saturday last week, has already sparked calls for increased security around Westminster and a major rethink of the British government’s official policy toward China. For many members of parliament, this major rethink must include clarity over how the UK’s relationship with China is defined.
During a parliamentary debate on the issue following the arrest report, former Conservative Party leader Iain Duncan-Smith and former British prime minister Liz Truss called on the government to define China as a threat.
British lawmaker Alicia Kearns, chair of the Foreign Affairs Committee and lead author of a report that for the first time referred to Taiwan as an “independent country,” also called for clarity on the UK’s stance toward China. Kearns was one of the prominent British politicians linked with the arrested researcher.
The problem is certainly not the UK’s alone. On Tuesday, Conservative Party of Canada lawmaker Michael Chong (莊文浩), a vocal opponent of the CCP’s rights abuses against the Uighur community in Xinjiang, testified to the US Congressional-Executive Commission on China hearings about countering transnational repression by Beijing. Chong spoke about how Chinese security forces had targeted him in a political interference campaign.
Chong is not the only Canadian lawmaker to have been targeted in this way. Former Canadian Conservative Party leader Erin O’Toole has said that the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) found an “active campaign of voter suppression” by China against him and his party, while Hong Kong-born New Democratic Party lawmaker Jenny Kwan (關慧貞), who has fought for the rights of Hong Kong residents, said that she was also recently informed by the CSIS that she has been a target of Chinese government interference for years.
There is a definite theme in these reports. It is unclear exactly how much of this Mao would classify as “nothing but malicious slander.”
As a Canadian lawmaker, Chong’s appearance before the US congressional committee was a rare event. He called for a joint approach to sharing information about Chinese security forces’ attempts to interfere politically in the operation and institutions of democratic nations, an idea that could be applied to other democratic nations that have been targeted by Beijing, including Taiwan.
In an interview with Politico, Chong said: “Beijing’s targeting of me has only further emboldened me.”
That effect applies on the individual level and the national level. The CCP’s efforts to subvert Taiwan’s elections with military intimidation or economic coercion have only galvanized sentiment against China among Taiwanese.
While other nations are discussing how best to counter Beijing’s efforts to subvert their democratic elections, Taipei should be pulling out all the stops to ensure that next year’s presidential elections are protected from CCP interference, which could include approaching other democratic governments about how best to join forces.
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