When former Japanese prime minister Shinzo Abe in 2021 said that a contingency in Taiwan would also be an emergency for Japan, it was taken as a warning that Tokyo would have to get involved if conflict erupted in the Taiwan Strait — if not to defend its national security, then certainly to address a transformed security environment if the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) were to annex Taiwan.
What seemed to be an insightful comment then is now — less than three years later — generally regarded to be the case. This is just one measure of how much the regional dynamic has changed. The CCP and its fellow travelers put the blame squarely on the US and its foreign policy, while others say it is the CCP’s behavior that has changed the landscape.
This is not a chicken-and-egg scenario. It is not difficult to see which party is responsible for increasing regional tensions.
These tensions were behind Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida’s decision to extend changes in Tokyo’s national security posture that started with Abe’s constitutional reinterpretation to allow the exercise of the right of collective self-defense.
Following Abe’s assassination in 2022, Kishida introduced further changes to enhance Japan’s defense, including significantly increasing defense spending, lifting the ban on exports of lethal defense equipment to third countries and, more recently, introducing changes that would augment the interoperability of US and Japanese forces.
Japan is not doing this to attack other countries: It is to protect itself from the CCP’s ambition.
As if to confirm Tokyo’s concerns, the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) Air Force on Monday sent a Y-9 reconnaissance plane into Japanese airspace near the Danjo Islands in the East China Sea. Japanese Minister of Defense Minoru Kihara called it a “grave violation of Japan’s sovereignty.”
Clearly, the PLA is expanding its aggressive, destabilizing posture in the region, and talk about tensions in the Taiwan Strait has become less meaningful as the Taiwan Strait and the South China Sea merge into one extensive and continuous region in which the CCP is asserting itself.
Some believe this is simply a historical inevitability, as a resurgent regional hegemon reclaims dominance after a “century of humiliation.” Former Singaporean permanent representative to the UN Kishore Mahbubani believes that the West and countries in the region should just allow China to resume its former hegemonic position, and that Taiwan must bow to the whims of destiny.
Former Singaporean minister for foreign affairs George Yeo (楊榮文) is of the same opinion, saying that China and Taiwan forming “one China” is the only sure way to peace. He should make clear that he understands the CCP will not allow Taiwan to have any real say in what form that “one China” would take.
In May, former Malaysian prime minister Mahathir Mohamad argued that China should just be allowed to make its claims unchallenged in the interests of regional peace.
Is this how Taipei should play it? Should Tokyo just throw up its hands and allow the CCP to have its way? Should Manila stop pushing its maritime rights in the West Philippine Sea like a latter-day, Asian King Canute commanding the tide to retreat?
The answer is no. Kishida will be standing down as Japanese prime minister and as leader of the ruling Liberal Democratic Party next month. Taipei should work to maintain close ties with his successor and further security cooperation.
On Wednesday, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs said that Taiwan might collaborate with Manila against China’s aggressive actions in the South China Sea. This would be a welcome development.
The right way is to stand up, not lie down and be walked over.
Chinese state-owned companies COSCO Shipping Corporation and China Merchants have a 30 percent stake in Kaohsiung Port’s Kao Ming Container Terminal (Terminal No. 6) and COSCO leases Berths 65 and 66. It is extremely dangerous to allow Chinese companies or state-owned companies to operate critical infrastructure. Deterrence theorists are familiar with the concepts of deterrence “by punishment” and “by denial.” Deterrence by punishment threatens an aggressor with prohibitive costs (like retaliation or sanctions) that outweigh the benefits of their action, while deterrence by denial aims to make an attack so difficult that it becomes pointless. Elbridge Colby, currently serving as the Under
The Ministry of the Interior on Thursday last week said it ordered Internet service providers to block access to Chinese social media platform Xiaohongshu (小紅書, also known as RedNote in English) for a year, citing security risks and more than 1,700 alleged fraud cases on the platform since last year. The order took effect immediately, abruptly affecting more than 3 million users in Taiwan, and sparked discussions among politicians, online influencers and the public. The platform is often described as China’s version of Instagram or Pinterest, combining visual social media with e-commerce, and its users are predominantly young urban women,
Most Hong Kongers ignored the elections for its Legislative Council (LegCo) in 2021 and did so once again on Sunday. Unlike in 2021, moderate democrats who pledged their allegiance to Beijing were absent from the ballots this year. The electoral system overhaul is apparent revenge by Beijing for the democracy movement. On Sunday, the Hong Kong “patriots-only” election of the LegCo had a record-low turnout in the five geographical constituencies, with only 1.3 million people casting their ballots on the only seats that most Hong Kongers are eligible to vote for. Blank and invalid votes were up 50 percent from the previous
Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi lit a fuse the moment she declared that trouble for Taiwan means trouble for Japan. Beijing roared, Tokyo braced and like a plot twist nobody expected that early in the story, US President Donald Trump suddenly picked up the phone to talk to her. For a man who normally prefers to keep Asia guessing, the move itself was striking. What followed was even more intriguing. No one outside the room knows the exact phrasing, the tone or the diplomatic eyebrow raises exchanged, but the broad takeaway circulating among people familiar with the call was this: Trump did