US National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan on Monday met with high-level Chinese Communist Party member Yang Jiechi (楊潔篪) in Luxembourg, where the two discussed regional and global security issues, including tensions in the Taiwan Strait.
Yang told Sullivan that Beijing was open to more dialogue with the US, but that it was also concerned that the “US side has been insisting on further containing and suppressing China in an all-round way,” Bloomberg reported on Tuesday.
The meeting came on the same day Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesman Wang Wenbin (汪文斌) told the US that the Taiwan Strait was “not international waters.”
It might be important for the US and China to keep “open lines of communication to manage competition between our two countries,” as the White House said in a statement following the Luxembourg meeting, but the US should have no illusions about what can be achieved through talks with Beijing.
With its saber-rattling in the Taiwan Strait, the Sea of Japan and the South China Sea, China has shown no interest in being a productive member of the international community. Its aim is to change the norms of the existing global order to match its own ambitions. China has already tested global resolve toward action on its military buildup in the South China Sea, its increasing encroachment around Japanese and Australian territorial waters, its intrusion on Indian territory in Sikkim and Ladakh, and its buzzing of Australian and Canadian surveillance aircraft over international waters, among other acts of aggression.
It has also never stopped preparing its military to invade Taiwan, nor has it ever renounced plans to attempt such an assault. In its talks with the US, China is not coming to the table with a willingness to compromise or negotiate — it is coming to such talks to lay out its inflexible position, and to voice warnings to the US and Washington’s allies.
It is imperative that the US demonstrate its own inflexible resolve to protect its own interests and those of like-minded democracies — most importantly, Taiwan. It is acknowledged in Washington that the fall of Taiwan would be disastrous to US interests in the region. It would destroy confidence among regional allies such as Japan, South Korea and Australia; it would endanger US bases in the region; and it would disrupt global shipping, as most goods shipped across the Pacific traverse the region, and it would shift the regional balance of power.
Washington flip-flopped on a statement regarding Taiwanese independence that was published on the US Department of State Web site. It has also reiterated on multiple occasions that Washington adheres to a “one China” policy.
Rather than hold onto an ambiguous policy that facilitates pronouncements that must be later retracted or “clarified,” the US should say that it supports whatever Taiwanese decide for themselves — whether that be independence, unification or the “status quo.” The US should no longer allow itself to be bound by any policy regarding Taiwan that is unilaterally devised by Beijing.
President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) could assertively encourage the US to move toward this stance.
It could be the thinking of some politicians that a soft approach to Beijing would avoid conflict, but the opposite seems to be true — Beijing’s “wolf warrior” diplomacy demonstrates that it will prey on weakness. The Tsai administration should approach Washington about including Taiwan in a regional security pact, similar to that among the US, the UK and Australia.
What is needed in the South China Sea, the East China Sea and the Sea of Japan is an increase of patrols and joint operations between local allies to send a clear message to Beijing that its aggressive posturing has its limits.
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS