In Taiwan, attention is focused on activity that directly affects the nation’s sovereignty. Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) Navy blockade drills, PLA Air Force fighters crossing the Taiwan Strait median line, the potential of conflict arising from incidents in the sea between Kinmen and China’s Xiamen and sand dredging around Matsu all directly impinge upon Taiwan’s sovereignty.
This activity is just part of the provocations against regional neighbors that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the PLA are engaged in. It is important not to miss the forest for the trees, and to understand the threat from a wider perspective.
The CCP is the sole antagonist driving the expansion of an international coalition against it in the Taiwan Strait and the South China Sea.
With increasing tensions between Beijing and Manila over provocative activities by the PLA and China Coast Guard in the part of the South China Sea that Manila calls the West Philippine Sea, Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr has announced countermeasures against “illegal, coercive, aggressive and dangerous attacks” by the China Coast Guard. These countermeasures include expanding the role of the military in supporting the Philippine government’s maritime council by involving the Armed Forces of the Philippines, not just its navy.
This is only the latest hardening of Manila’s stance against China, from a short-lived position of friendly engagement to a policy of “hard-balancing” that has not only entailed closer ties with Washington, including potentially giving the US military access to bases in the Philippines, but also significantly increasing its own military capabilities, such as acquiring BrahMos supersonic missiles from India and entering talks with Sweden over a major fighter jet deal.
The CCP is well aware that, with the Philippines’ northernmost island, Mavulis, less than 150km from the southern tip of Taiwan, increased fortifications and military coordination there, especially when Manila is cooperating with the US, endangers its ability to control the South China Sea and execute an invasion of Taiwan.
Beijing has vociferously objected, but the escalation is all its own doing.
More concerning to Beijing is India’s recent involvement, which extends beyond selling the BrahMos missiles.
When the Permanent Court of Arbitration found for Manila and against China in the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) case in 2019, India simply “noted” the verdict.
Last week, Indian Minister of External Affairs Subrahmanyam Jaishankar visited the Philippines and met with Philippine Secretary of Foreign Affairs Enrique Manalo and Marcos. Jaishankar spoke about adherence, not in part but in full, to the UNCLOS, and voiced India’s support for the Philippines in protecting its national sovereignty.
This marks a significant shift in India’s position, and it is very much related to New Delhi’s problems with the CCP’s expansionist activity on its own border with China, and with the amount of Indian trade that goes through the South China Sea.
Again, Beijing was furious. Again, it had nobody to blame but itself.
There are calls for India to now formalize a security relationship with Manila, as the US has done.
Marcos is well aware that the Philippines cannot take on the PLA on its own, and that the answer is in engaging with nations with similar security concerns.
This is the same logic that has informed President Tsai Ing-wen’s (蔡英文) cross-strait policy.
The government should look into approaching Manila about the possibility of security ties. There are clear obstacles, not least because Manila adheres to a “one China” policy, but also because incoming president William Lai (賴清德) will have an opposition-majority legislature to contend with.
Taiwan’s semiconductor industry gives it a strategic advantage, but that advantage would be threatened as the US seeks to end Taiwan’s monopoly in the industry and as China grows more assertive, analysts said at a security dialogue last week. While the semiconductor industry is Taiwan’s “silicon shield,” its dominance has been seen by some in the US as “a monopoly,” South Korea’s Sungkyunkwan University academic Kwon Seok-joon said at an event held by the Center for Strategic and International Studies. In addition, Taiwan lacks sufficient energy sources and is vulnerable to natural disasters and geopolitical threats from China, he said.
After reading the article by Hideki Nagayama [English version on same page] published in the Liberty Times (sister newspaper of the Taipei Times) on Wednesday, I decided to write this article in hopes of ever so slightly easing my depression. In August, I visited the National Museum of Ethnology in Osaka, Japan, to attend a seminar. While there, I had the chance to look at the museum’s collections. I felt extreme annoyance at seeing that the museum had classified Taiwanese indigenous peoples as part of China’s ethnic minorities. I kept thinking about how I could make this known, but after returning
What value does the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) hold in Taiwan? One might say that it is to defend — or at the very least, maintain — truly “blue” qualities. To be truly “blue” — without impurities, rejecting any “red” influence — is to uphold the ideology consistent with that on which the Republic of China (ROC) was established. The KMT would likely not object to this notion. However, if the current generation of KMT political elites do not understand what it means to be “blue” — or even light blue — their knowledge and bravery are far too lacking
Taipei’s population is estimated to drop below 2.5 million by the end of this month — the only city among the nation’s six special municipalities that has more people moving out than moving in this year. A city that is classified as a special municipality can have three deputy mayors if it has a population of more than 2.5 million people, Article 55 of the Local Government Act (地方制度法) states. To counter the capital’s shrinking population, Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an (蔣萬安) held a cross-departmental population policy committee meeting on Wednesday last week to discuss possible solutions. According to Taipei City Government data, Taipei’s