From a Taiwanese perspective, the Chinese word tong zhan (統戰) could be interpreted as the war — or effort — to achieve unification. However, this interpretation would have more to do with the unique preoccupations of a threatened nation than with historical accuracy.
The accepted English translation is “united front.” It was born of the collective desire of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) to defeat warlords in China in the 1920s. In its current iteration, it is a network of organizations affiliated with the CCP, engaging in political warfare to promote Beijing’s interests and global narrative, and suppress discussions of ideas it deems unfavorable. It is an organized, comprehensive effort to achieve the CCP’s desired ends.
It is no wonder that Taiwanese might interpret the term as specifically referring to unification, but its scope extends far beyond China’s intentions for Taiwan. It is a global mission that includes industrial espionage, political infiltration, manipulation of academic environments, and the strangulation of freedoms of thought and expression, a task that has only been made easier by technological advances, social media platforms, and the ubiquity of channels to disseminate disinformation and to surveil China’s population, not only within its own borders, but also overseas.
US President Joe Biden has arrived at the conclusion not only that the CCP represents the biggest challenge to US dominance and national security, but that any effort to counter China’s rise would require more than mounting a whole-of-government, united response from the US alone: It would require a united front of global and regional allies, relying on soft power rather than the threat, coercion and manipulation preferred by Beijing.
The Biden administration has hit the ground running to try to achieve that. On Friday last week, the US participated in a virtual summit of the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue comprising the US, Australia, Japan and India, in what was the first-ever leader-level summit of the group. The joint statement at the end of the summit, describing the “spirit of the Quad,” said: “We strive for a region that is free, open, inclusive, healthy, anchored by democratic values and unconstrained by coercion.”
China was not specified in that sentence, but it did not need to be.
On Tuesday, US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin and US Secretary of State Antony Blinken met with Japanese Minister of Foreign Affairs Toshimitsu Motegi and Japanese Minister of Defense Nobuo Kishi for “two-plus-two” talks with an ally the US sees as crucial to shoring up a united show of strength against China in the region.
However, Biden will need a wider alliance, and this is where the challenge of building a united front against China will be. He needs to differentiate the offerings of the US from those of China and to counter the economic reality that China is the principal trading partner for many US allies.
It is a task complicated by doubts planted in capitals worldwide by former US president Donald Trump’s unashamed unilateral and transactional approach to foreign policy, and the possibility of a return to that when Biden leaves office.
If the main purpose of these meetings was discussing how to counter China, Japan is on board for historical and geopolitical reasons; Australia for reasons of national and economic security; and India due to territorial disputes and the risk of China siding with its rivals, in particular Pakistan, but also Sri Lanka.
For Taiwan, the calculus is easy, because the threat posed by China is clear, present and existential. If it comes down to a battle of ideas and values, Taiwan exemplifies an alternative to what the CCP offers — a vibrant democracy committed to human rights and progressive values.
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of