A Chinese official on Tuesday said that the Royal Australian Navy should notify China before operating in the South and East China seas.
Liu Jianchao (劉建超), head of the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) international department, made the comment in response to questions about an incident in which the Chinese navy allegedly used sonar against Australian divers in waters off Japan.
The incident, which occurred in international waters in Japan’s exclusive economic zone, occurred because the Australian navy was “in disputed waters,” Liu said. Australia should provide China with “any kind of pre-consultations or notification” to prevent misunderstandings from happening between the two militaries, he said, according to a Reuters report.
China’s People’s Liberation Army (PLA) has repeatedly operated dangerously close to foreign militaries’ vessels and aircraft in recent years in the region, despite numerous protests lodged with Beijing.
Beijing has generally responded with denial and deflection. It has rarely made demands of foreign countries involved in the incidents.
However, Liu’s demand that Australia notify Beijing before operating in international waters reflects an emboldening attitude of the CCP. The China Coast Guard Law passed in January 2021 authorizes Chinese Coast Guard ships to fire on foreign vessels and destroy structures on disputed islands and other features China claims in the region.
That law contradicts the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), but recent aggressions toward the Philippines in contested waters, and now the statements by Liu, suggest that China plans to justify its aggressive behavior by invoking its law. This is supported by Liu’s assertion regarding Australia’s activities in the East China Sea.
“The reason why the Australian naval ships were there was really to contain China — so that is the message that we have been getting,” he said.
China is known for using “gray zone” tactics — actions taken below the threshold of war, or which can be committed with plausible deniability — to coerce its opponents into getting what it wants.
China will continue with this “salami slicing” until it is met with a firm response. Countries that oppose China’s actions in the Indo-Pacific far outnumber any allies that Beijing can muster in support.
China knows it is unlikely to be met with opposition when acting aggressively toward international surveillance or research teams acting alone or in small numbers. That is why democracies need to collaborate on such missions. China would not dare to intimidate a joint operational team involving two or more countries conducting research or surveillance with a military escort.
Foreign powers could also take other action to demonstrate their resolve to protect freedom of navigation. For example, they could detain or shadow PLA and Chinese Coast Guard vessels and aircraft that commit aggressions, or sanction China. An international coalition could also increase deployment in the region, signaling to Beijing that every action will be met.
Australia said that when its divers were allegedly injured by Chinese sonar, the Australian vessel had stopped to clear a fishing net from its propellers, and had communicated this to the approaching PLA vessel. Even had the incident occurred in Chinese waters, such an attack would be unjustified. The normal, and professional, course of action would have been to offer assistance.
That the incident happened in international waters, and the Chinese response was to act dangerously, demonstrates the disregard that China has for international conventions. The international community must act to deter further aggression from China. Doing so is imperative to the interests of all democracies, including Taiwan.
A nation has several pillars of national defense, among them are military strength, energy and food security, and national unity. Military strength is very much on the forefront of the debate, while several recent editorials have dealt with energy security. National unity and a sense of shared purpose — especially while a powerful, hostile state is becoming increasingly menacing — are problematic, and would continue to be until the nation’s schizophrenia is properly managed. The controversy over the past few days over former navy lieutenant commander Lu Li-shih’s (呂禮詩) usage of the term “our China” during an interview about his attendance
Bo Guagua (薄瓜瓜), the son of former Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Central Committee Politburo member and former Chongqing Municipal Communist Party secretary Bo Xilai (薄熙來), used his British passport to make a low-key entry into Taiwan on a flight originating in Canada. He is set to marry the granddaughter of former political heavyweight Hsu Wen-cheng (許文政), the founder of Luodong Poh-Ai Hospital in Yilan County’s Luodong Township (羅東). Bo Xilai is a former high-ranking CCP official who was once a challenger to Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) for the chairmanship of the CCP. That makes Bo Guagua a bona fide “third-generation red”
US president-elect Donald Trump earlier this year accused Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) of “stealing” the US chip business. He did so to have a favorable bargaining chip in negotiations with Taiwan. During his first term from 2017 to 2021, Trump demanded that European allies increase their military budgets — especially Germany, where US troops are stationed — and that Japan and South Korea share more of the costs for stationing US troops in their countries. He demanded that rich countries not simply enjoy the “protection” the US has provided since the end of World War II, while being stingy with
Historically, in Taiwan, and in present-day China, many people advocate the idea of a “great Chinese nation.” It is not worth arguing with extremists to say that the so-called “great Chinese nation” is a fabricated political myth rather than an academic term. Rather, they should read the following excerpt from Chinese writer Lin Yutang’s (林語堂) book My Country and My People: “It is also inevitable that I should offend many writers about China, especially my own countrymen and great patriots. These great patriots — I have nothing to do with them, for their god is not my god, and their patriotism is
RSS