The Chinese People’s Liberation Army is pressuring Taiwan using high intensity tactics to tire out Taiwanese forces and force them into making mistakes, The Economist cited Navy Commander Admiral Tang Hua (唐華) as saying in an interview published on Thursday last week.
China is “using an ‘anaconda strategy’ to squeeze the island,” he said, adding that it is “slowly, but surely” increasing its presence around the nation.
“They are ready to blockade Taiwan at any time they want,” Tang said.
It is welcome to see a high-level official give an interview to international media on this matter. Although Taiwan is one of the most reported on topics in media today, there is little representation of high-level Taiwanese officials and strategic thinkers talking about what they see as the primary strategic challenges the nation faces. It is only natural that what Taiwanese officials view as the nation’s most pressing challenges might differ from how the strategic situation looks to others.
China’s tactic appears to be to press intensive, continuous, multi-layered and comprehensive “gray zone” pressure — acts below the threshold of war — on the nation. These are no doubt part of Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) “struggle theory,” or douzheng, the idea that conflict is necessary to achieve political goals.
Beijing’s hassling and harrying of other nations has also been occurring in the South China Sea, such as the China Coast Guard using water cannons on Philippine boats and beating 10 Vietnamese fishers near the disputed Paracel Islands (Xisha Islands, 西沙群島).
Beijing’s strategy is challenging for Taiwan for three interrelated reasons:
The first is that the massive disparity in capability and Taiwan’s lack of a credible “deterrence by denial” means that China has “escalation dominance,” so once Beijing has shifted the “status quo” to its favor, it would be difficult for Taipei to re-establish deterrence.
This feeds into the second challenge, which is that China is seeking to tire out Taiwan’s forces, forcing them into making a mistake, which could give Beijing what it thinks is a propaganda tool to put in front of the international community as a justification to escalate the conflict.
“Taiwan adopts the pure defensive posture that is derived from the disparity of national comprehensive power, and the pursuit of international sympathy and support,” Institute for National Defense and Security Research assistant research fellow Chung Chih Tung said on the nation’s strategy against Beijing’s “gray zone” tactics.
As Taiwan prioritizes peace and does not want to give China any kind of casus belli, no matter how spurious, Beijing’s provocations are met with a de-escalatory response, complicating efforts to restore deterrence.
The third is that it has so far proved difficult for the nation to establish a domestic consensus on how to respond to Beijing’s aggressive actions, with many leading figures in the pan-blue camp believing that Taiwan should adopt a more accommodative policy on China, such as by making concessions on defense spending and reducing international engagement with other democracies. However, the lack of a consensus makes Beijing feel emboldened to continue its “anaconda strategy,” as it clearly believes these “gray zone” actions, whether by undermining public morale or boosting the voices of politicians seeking a more accommodative stance, further its political objective.
As military theorist and historian Basil Liddell Hart said: “The military objective is only the means to a political end.” The government should consider ways to undermine China’s belief in the political efficacy of its pressure, such as by boosting transparency on Beijing’s threats, trusting that greater public awareness would only strengthen Taiwanese resolve to resist.
We are used to hearing that whenever something happens, it means Taiwan is about to fall to China. Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) cannot change the color of his socks without China experts claiming it means an invasion is imminent. So, it is no surprise that what happened in Venezuela over the weekend triggered the knee-jerk reaction of saying that Taiwan is next. That is not an opinion on whether US President Donald Trump was right to remove Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro the way he did or if it is good for Venezuela and the world. There are other, more qualified
China’s recent aggressive military posture around Taiwan simply reflects the truth that China is a millennium behind, as Kobe City Councilor Norihiro Uehata has commented. While democratic countries work for peace, prosperity and progress, authoritarian countries such as Russia and China only care about territorial expansion, superpower status and world dominance, while their people suffer. Two millennia ago, the ancient Chinese philosopher Mencius (孟子) would have advised Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) that “people are the most important, state is lesser, and the ruler is the least important.” In fact, the reverse order is causing the great depression in China right now,
This should be the year in which the democracies, especially those in East Asia, lose their fear of the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) “one China principle” plus its nuclear “Cognitive Warfare” coercion strategies, all designed to achieve hegemony without fighting. For 2025, stoking regional and global fear was a major goal for the CCP and its People’s Liberation Army (PLA), following on Mao Zedong’s (毛澤東) Little Red Book admonition, “We must be ruthless to our enemies; we must overpower and annihilate them.” But on Dec. 17, 2025, the Trump Administration demonstrated direct defiance of CCP terror with its record US$11.1 billion arms
The immediate response in Taiwan to the extraction of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro by the US over the weekend was to say that it was an example of violence by a major power against a smaller nation and that, as such, it gave Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) carte blanche to invade Taiwan. That assessment is vastly oversimplistic and, on more sober reflection, likely incorrect. Generally speaking, there are three basic interpretations from commentators in Taiwan. The first is that the US is no longer interested in what is happening beyond its own backyard, and no longer preoccupied with regions in other