China on Sunday unilaterally announced the opening of a third extension of the M503 flight route, which lies just west of the median line in the Taiwan Strait, marking another attempt by Beijing to alter the cross-strait “status quo.”
Prior to the opening of the W121 extension, China twice activated new flight routes in the area without giving notice or engaging in cross-strait negotiations. In 2015, it launched the north-south M503 route, just 4.2 nautical miles (7.8km) from the Taipei Flight Information Region (FIR), and last year, it opened the west-east W122 and W123 connecting paths to move the M503 route closer to the median line.
All the new routes that Beijing unilaterally added would disrupt flight safety and order in the area, especially for flights to and from Taiwan proper to the outlying islands of Kinmen and Lienchiang (Matsu) counties.
China’s unilateral actions violate International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) guidelines, which state that any new flight routes or adjustments should be established through a collaborative process involving all stakeholders along the route. They also ignore an agreement signed by Taiwan and China after Taipei protested Beijing’s unilateral launch of the M503 route in 2015, which states that only southbound flights would be allowed, and any changes to the route and its extensions must be communicated in advance and agreed by both sides.
The Civil Aviation Administration of China said the new W121 extension would “optimize the airspace environment and improve operational efficiency.” However, statistics show that China’s international passenger numbers have yet to return to pre-COVID-19 pandemic levels, rendering its claims untenable.
Moreover, the opening of the W121 extension came just a few days before the Wednesday start of Taiwan’s annual Han Kuang military exercises and civil defense drills, which would simulate a Chinese blockade and invasion of the democratic nation.
Defense experts said China’s move was obviously a part of its “gray zone” tactics to deny the existence of the median line and undermine safety in the Taipei FIR, restrain Taiwan’s defense and response in case of any contingency, as well as align with China’s escalating daily deployment of warplanes over Taiwan to suppress its sovereignty and security.
It further demonstrated Beijing’s intention to mark the Taiwan Strait as its territory and claim sovereignty over the skies, an obvious move to alter the “status quo” in the area. Such acts have increased regional unrest and threaten freedom of international aviation, adding to evidence of Beijing’s hegemonic and expansionist ambitions, as Chinese aircraft and warships also intrude into the territories of neighboring states such as Japan and the Philippines.
Taiwan has protested China’s unilateral actions. The Ministry of National Defense has also said that the military would take necessary actions to safeguard Taiwanese territory in case of any flight detour or abnormal aviation incident.
A growing number of countries, including the US, Canada, Japan, Sweden and the Netherlands, have successively expressed concerns over Beijing’s unilateral moves, and said that issues related to civil aviation and safety in Taiwan Strait should be decided through dialogue between the two sides. Some countries have also deployed more military aircraft and warships to transit through the Taiwan Strait to highlight its status as international waters, as defined by the UN Convention on the Law of Sea.
To counter China’s expansionary tactics, Taiwan needs to work with like-minded countries to raise global awareness and caution about Beijing’s unilateral opening of new flight routes on international platforms, such as the ICAO’s triennial assembly in September, to maintain the Taiwan Strait’s international status, and safeguard freedom and security in the region.
Elbridge Colby, America’s Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, is the most influential voice on defense strategy in the Second Trump Administration. For insight into his thinking, one could do no better than read his thoughts on the defense of Taiwan which he gathered in a book he wrote in 2021. The Strategy of Denial, is his contemplation of China’s rising hegemony in Asia and on how to deter China from invading Taiwan. Allowing China to absorb Taiwan, he wrote, would open the entire Indo-Pacific region to Chinese preeminence and result in a power transition that would place America’s prosperity
A few weeks ago in Kaohsiung, tech mogul turned political pundit Robert Tsao (曹興誠) joined Western Washington University professor Chen Shih-fen (陳時奮) for a public forum in support of Taiwan’s recall campaign. Kaohsiung, already the most Taiwanese independence-minded city in Taiwan, was not in need of a recall. So Chen took a different approach: He made the case that unification with China would be too expensive to work. The argument was unusual. Most of the time, we hear that Taiwan should remain free out of respect for democracy and self-determination, but cost? That is not part of the usual script, and
All 24 Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers and suspended Hsinchu Mayor Ann Kao (高虹安), formerly of the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), survived recall elections against them on Saturday, in a massive loss to the unprecedented mass recall movement, as well as to the ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) that backed it. The outcome has surprised many, as most analysts expected that at least a few legislators would be ousted. Over the past few months, dedicated and passionate civic groups gathered more than 1 million signatures to recall KMT lawmakers, an extraordinary achievement that many believed would be enough to remove at
Behind the gloating, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) must be letting out a big sigh of relief. Its powerful party machine saved the day, but it took that much effort just to survive a challenge mounted by a humble group of active citizens, and in areas where the KMT is historically strong. On the other hand, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) must now realize how toxic a brand it has become to many voters. The campaigners’ amateurism is what made them feel valid and authentic, but when the DPP belatedly inserted itself into the campaign, it did more harm than good. The
RSS