Kyiv’s counteroffensive to liberate Russian-occupied areas in Ukraine’s east and south was a surprise following a months-long stalemate marked by artillery battles.
In a video address on Monday, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy said that Ukrainian soldiers had retaken more than 6,000km2 of land this month.
While the figure was unverified, a British Ministry of Defence intelligence update published on Monday said that Ukraine has recaptured an area “at least twice the size of Greater London.”
Russia has said that its forces have withdrawn from the strategically important cities of Balakliya, Izyum and Kupiansk in the eastern Kharkiv region, while in the southern Kherson region, Ukrainian forces are reported to have been making slower, but equally significant advances.
Multiple eyewitness accounts, photographs and videos show Russian units in a disorderly retreat, leaving behind vast quantities of equipment, including armored vehicles and ammunition.
In a sign that a combination of panic and frustration is beginning to set in at the Kremlin, Russian President Vladimir Putin on Monday sacked the Russian commander in charge of the war, Lieutenant General Roman Berdnikov, who was in the post for a mere 16 days.
While it is still too early to draw a definite conclusion, all the evidence points to a significant turning point in the war. With the momentum now on its side, Ukraine stands a chance to defeat Russia. What would the implications of a Ukrainian victory be for Taiwan and China?
Having aligned his country with Russia, Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) might have picked the losing side, which would be a major foreign policy embarrassment just as he is preparing to force through a third term as president.
However, the implications for the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) are by far the most significant.
Closely modeled on the Russian military in terms of force structure, equipment, operational strategy and tactics, the sense of doubt that a high-profile Russian defeat would implant within the minds of PLA commanders would be corrosive, not just in terms of strategy and tactics, but also regarding equipment, as the PLA has many fighter jets that were either manufactured under license from Russia or are reverse-engineered copies. The inability of Russia to secure air dominance over Ukraine has severely hampered its ability to wage war.
In the event of a Ukrainian victory, PLA commanders would surely begin to ask themselves questions. If Russia’s military, which is more experienced and battled-hardened than the PLA, cannot defeat a vastly outnumbered and inferior Ukrainian military in a simple hop across a land border, what chance does the PLA stand in an invasion of Taiwan, which would require an amphibious invasion orders of magnitude more complex and prone to failure?
The flip side is that a Ukrainian victory would be an inspiration to Taiwan’s armed forces. Ukraine’s military has demonstrated that superior leadership, tactics, planning and intelligence — if properly coordinated — can deliver a significant advantage against a numerically superior enemy with more advanced weaponry.
The war also demonstrates the defender’s advantage in terms of morale. Ukrainian morale is reportedly sky-high, whereas the morale of Russian soldiers, far from home, cold, hungry and disillusioned with their commanding officers, is at rock bottom.
Taiwan’s military cannot afford to rest on its laurels. It must continue to modernize and update its operational strategy. However, if Ukraine is triumphant, despite the enormous odds against it at the beginning of the war, it would deliver a huge fillip to Taiwan and a thumping headache for China.
US President Donald Trump has gotten off to a head-spinning start in his foreign policy. He has pressured Denmark to cede Greenland to the United States, threatened to take over the Panama Canal, urged Canada to become the 51st US state, unilaterally renamed the Gulf of Mexico to “the Gulf of America” and announced plans for the United States to annex and administer Gaza. He has imposed and then suspended 25 percent tariffs on Canada and Mexico for their roles in the flow of fentanyl into the United States, while at the same time increasing tariffs on China by 10
US President Donald Trump last week announced plans to impose reciprocal tariffs on eight countries. As Taiwan, a key hub for semiconductor manufacturing, is among them, the policy would significantly affect the country. In response, Minister of Economic Affairs J.W. Kuo (郭智輝) dispatched two officials to the US for negotiations, and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co’s (TSMC) board of directors convened its first-ever meeting in the US. Those developments highlight how the US’ unstable trade policies are posing a growing threat to Taiwan. Can the US truly gain an advantage in chip manufacturing by reversing trade liberalization? Is it realistic to
Trying to force a partnership between Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) and Intel Corp would be a wildly complex ordeal. Already, the reported request from the Trump administration for TSMC to take a controlling stake in Intel’s US factories is facing valid questions about feasibility from all sides. Washington would likely not support a foreign company operating Intel’s domestic factories, Reuters reported — just look at how that is going over in the steel sector. Meanwhile, many in Taiwan are concerned about the company being forced to transfer its bleeding-edge tech capabilities and give up its strategic advantage. This is especially
Last week, 24 Republican representatives in the US Congress proposed a resolution calling for US President Donald Trump’s administration to abandon the US’ “one China” policy, calling it outdated, counterproductive and not reflective of reality, and to restore official diplomatic relations with Taiwan, enter bilateral free-trade agreement negotiations and support its entry into international organizations. That is an exciting and inspiring development. To help the US government and other nations further understand that Taiwan is not a part of China, that those “one China” policies are contrary to the fact that the two countries across the Taiwan Strait are independent and
RSS