When it comes to national security and foreign affairs, President William Lai (賴清德) has said he wants to maintain the same policies as his predecessor, Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文). Unfortunately, he does not find himself in the same geopolitical circumstances as Tsai during her presidency.
The loss of a legislative majority aside, the regional geopolitical situation is in a continuous state of flux.
Regardless of the perception of the binary nature of the forces that conspire against or with Taiwan — the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the US — the actual situation is far more complex, as encapsulated by many of the participants in this year’s ongoing RIMPAC exercises, the emerging geostrategic alignment between China and Russia, and the renewed friendly relations between Russia and North Korea, complicating an already complex dynamic.
Even if he says he would retain Tsai’s strategies, Lai must acknowledge that the geopolitical ground has shifted under his feet. The CCP might have been holding out for an election result more conducive to its designs; now that it knows that it must deal with at least another four years of a Democratic Progressive Party administration, it has run out of patience. Nothing we have seen since the election provides assurance that Beijing intends to relieve the pressure.
Lai needs to address this situation both internationally and at home, and for this he requires a nimble foreign affairs and national security team with the ability to adjust policy and strategy to meet the ever-changing circumstances. It is not clear to many of Taiwan’s allies, including Washington and Tokyo, that he has that.
There are good reasons for Lai to have chosen Wellington Koo (顧立雄), who has no military background, to be minister of national defense, but some would question whether this was the time to do it. Minister of Foreign Affairs Lin Chia-lung (林佳龍) is a competent and loyal administrator, but his experience is limited to domestic policies.
An article by Cathy Fang, a policy analyst in the US, published in this paper (“Consistency sacrifices adaptability,” July 13, page 8) brought up many of these concerns. Fang writes that “the sands of time favor Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), not Lai.”
That is far from clear, given the ever-shifting geopolitical situation, and how events might transpire in the coming years or months.
Complicating factors include responses to the CCP’s aggressive behavior toward Taiwan and other regional players, including India, and also the CCP’s domestic problems with a faltering economy and demographic challenges.
That said, other developments could equally work against Taiwan, such as a change in mood in Washington or complications in the event of an invasion attempt, such as North Korea threatening South Korea and Japan in Northeast Asia, or Russian involvement.
Purely in terms of military preparedness, there is no doubt that time favors Xi. This is why Lai needs to re-evaluate the strategy and sense of urgency in Taiwan’s war preparedness, in both the military and civil spheres.
On Wednesday, national security professor Masahiro Matsumura wrote in this paper that Japanese officials have been briefed that the Chinese People’s Liberation Army needs less than a week to invade Taiwan with its amphibious forces. Matsumura writes that “time is running out for Taipei,” that Lai has so far failed to shift his policies to prepare for a full invasion, and that he “does not share the same sense of urgency as Tokyo and Washington.”
This urgency needs to include not just military strategy, but also preparing the public for potential conflict.
Yes, there are complicating factors, but the winds of change could blow in Taiwan’s favor or usher in its demise. Lai must prepare for the latter, not rely on the former.
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
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS