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.
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (傅?萁) has caused havoc with his attempts to overturn the democratic and constitutional order in the legislature. If we look at this devolution from the context of a transition to democracy from authoritarianism in a culturally Chinese sense — that of zhonghua (中華) — then we are playing witness to a servile spirit from a millennia-old form of totalitarianism that is intent on damaging the nation’s hard-won democracy. This servile spirit is ingrained in Chinese culture. About a century ago, Chinese satirist and author Lu Xun (魯迅) saw through the servile nature of
In their New York Times bestseller How Democracies Die, Harvard political scientists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt said that democracies today “may die at the hands not of generals but of elected leaders. Many government efforts to subvert democracy are ‘legal,’ in the sense that they are approved by the legislature or accepted by the courts. They may even be portrayed as efforts to improve democracy — making the judiciary more efficient, combating corruption, or cleaning up the electoral process.” Moreover, the two authors observe that those who denounce such legal threats to democracy are often “dismissed as exaggerating or
Monday was the 37th anniversary of former president Chiang Ching-kuo’s (蔣經國) death. Chiang — a son of former president Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), who had implemented party-state rule and martial law in Taiwan — has a complicated legacy. Whether one looks at his time in power in a positive or negative light depends very much on who they are, and what their relationship with the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is. Although toward the end of his life Chiang Ching-kuo lifted martial law and steered Taiwan onto the path of democratization, these changes were forced upon him by internal and external pressures,
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus in the Legislative Yuan has made an internal decision to freeze NT$1.8 billion (US$54.7 million) of the indigenous submarine project’s NT$2 billion budget. This means that up to 90 percent of the budget cannot be utilized. It would only be accessible if the legislature agrees to lift the freeze sometime in the future. However, for Taiwan to construct its own submarines, it must rely on foreign support for several key pieces of equipment and technology. These foreign supporters would also be forced to endure significant pressure, infiltration and influence from Beijing. In other words,
RSS