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.
Why is Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) not a “happy camper” these days regarding Taiwan? Taiwanese have not become more “CCP friendly” in response to the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) use of spies and graft by the United Front Work Department, intimidation conducted by the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) and the Armed Police/Coast Guard, and endless subversive political warfare measures, including cyber-attacks, economic coercion, and diplomatic isolation. The percentage of Taiwanese that prefer the status quo or prefer moving towards independence continues to rise — 76 percent as of December last year. According to National Chengchi University (NCCU) polling, the Taiwanese
It would be absurd to claim to see a silver lining behind every US President Donald Trump cloud. Those clouds are too many, too dark and too dangerous. All the same, viewed from a domestic political perspective, there is a clear emerging UK upside to Trump’s efforts at crashing the post-Cold War order. It might even get a boost from Thursday’s Washington visit by British Prime Minister Keir Starmer. In July last year, when Starmer became prime minister, the Labour Party was rigidly on the defensive about Europe. Brexit was seen as an electorally unstable issue for a party whose priority
US President Donald Trump’s return to the White House has brought renewed scrutiny to the Taiwan-US semiconductor relationship with his claim that Taiwan “stole” the US chip business and threats of 100 percent tariffs on foreign-made processors. For Taiwanese and industry leaders, understanding those developments in their full context is crucial while maintaining a clear vision of Taiwan’s role in the global technology ecosystem. The assertion that Taiwan “stole” the US’ semiconductor industry fundamentally misunderstands the evolution of global technology manufacturing. Over the past four decades, Taiwan’s semiconductor industry, led by Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), has grown through legitimate means
Today is Feb. 28, a day that Taiwan associates with two tragic historical memories. The 228 Incident, which started on Feb. 28, 1947, began from protests sparked by a cigarette seizure that took place the day before in front of the Tianma Tea House in Taipei’s Datong District (大同). It turned into a mass movement that spread across Taiwan. Local gentry asked then-governor general Chen Yi (陳儀) to intervene, but he received contradictory orders. In early March, after Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) dispatched troops to Keelung, a nationwide massacre took place and lasted until May 16, during which many important intellectuals