International debate on Taiwan is obsessed with “invasion countdowns,” framing the cross-strait crisis as a matter of military timetables and political opportunity. However, the seismic political tremors surrounding Central Military Commission (CMC) vice chairman Zhang Youxia (張又俠) suggested that Washington and Taipei are watching the wrong clock.
Beijing is constrained not by a lack of capability, but by an acute fear of regime-threatening military failure.
The reported sidelining of Zhang — a combat veteran in a largely unbloodied force and long-time loyalist of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) — followed a year of purges within the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) and the CMC. These are not mere “anti-corruption” drives; they are decapitation strikes against the PLA’s leadership.
An amphibious invasion requires absolute trust between the commander-in-chief and his generals. The current atmosphere of distrust and internal instability heightens caution rather than confidence. If Xi cannot trust his hand-picked military leadership, he cannot trust them with a high-stakes war where failure could trigger a blame cascade and threaten the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) survival.
Amphibious operations are inherently failure-prone. For the CCP, a military defeat on the beaches of Taiwan would be an existential catastrophe, gutting elite divisions and shattering the narrative of “national rejuvenation.”
PLA modernization does not reduce the political costs of defeat; it merely raises the expectations of success and amplifies the shock if operations fail. A “battlefield humiliation” that triggers a domestic collapse remains the most powerful deterrent in the Taiwan Strait.
Because the risks of war are so catastrophic, Beijing has pivoted to “gray zone” coercion — maritime harassment, cyberwarfare and economic leverage. These tactics allow the CCP to impose cumulative costs on Taiwan while controlling the domestic narrative and avoiding the “all-or-nothing” gamble of a full-scale invasion.
The danger is that fixation on “invasion dates” leads policymakers to prioritize military posturing over long-term societal resilience needed to blunt that slow-burn erosion.
Deterrence is not just about preventing a invasion; it is about preventing the gradual collapse of political resolve. A stabilizing strategy should shift focus away from calendar-driven scenarios and toward making all forms of coercion costly and unattractive. This requires several things.
First is hardening civilian infrastructure by investing in energy, communication and supply-chain security.
Second involves operational uncertainty, ensuring Beijing remains convinced that the domestic consequences of military failure are irreversible.
Third is crisis stability: bolstering communication channels to prevent miscalculations from spiraling into the war the CCP fears.
Zhang’s downfall is a reminder that the CCP’s greatest enemy is its own internal fragility. Understanding that fear is the key to designing a deterrence strategy that lasts longer than the next election cycle.
Simon H. Tang, PhD, is a lecturer in international relations at California State University, Fullerton.
There is a modern roadway stretching from central Hargeisa, the capital of Somaliland in the Horn of Africa, to the partially recognized state’s Egal International Airport. Emblazoned on a gold plaque marking the road’s inauguration in July last year, just below the flags of Somaliland and the Republic of China (ROC), is the road’s official name: “Taiwan Avenue.” The first phase of construction of the upgraded road, with new sidewalks and a modern drainage system to reduce flooding, was 70 percent funded by Taipei, which contributed US$1.85 million. That is a relatively modest sum for the effect on international perception, and
At the end of last year, a diplomatic development with consequences reaching well beyond the regional level emerged. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu declared Israel’s recognition of Somaliland as a sovereign state, paving the way for political, economic and strategic cooperation with the African nation. The diplomatic breakthrough yields, above all, substantial and tangible benefits for the two countries, enhancing Somaliland’s international posture, with a state prepared to champion its bid for broader legitimacy. With Israel’s support, Somaliland might also benefit from the expertise of Israeli companies in fields such as mineral exploration and water management, as underscored by Israeli Minister of
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) challenges and ignores the international rules-based order by violating Taiwanese airspace using a high-flying drone: This incident is a multi-layered challenge, including a lawfare challenge against the First Island Chain, the US, and the world. The People’s Liberation Army (PLA) defines lawfare as “controlling the enemy through the law or using the law to constrain the enemy.” Chen Yu-cheng (陳育正), an associate professor at the Graduate Institute of China Military Affairs Studies, at Taiwan’s Fu Hsing Kang College (National Defense University), argues the PLA uses lawfare to create a precedent and a new de facto legal
Chile has elected a new government that has the opportunity to take a fresh look at some key aspects of foreign economic policy, mainly a greater focus on Asia, including Taiwan. Still, in the great scheme of things, Chile is a small nation in Latin America, compared with giants such as Brazil and Mexico, or other major markets such as Colombia and Argentina. So why should Taiwan pay much attention to the new administration? Because the victory of Chilean president-elect Jose Antonio Kast, a right-of-center politician, can be seen as confirming that the continent is undergoing one of its periodic political shifts,