Minister of Foreign Affairs Lin Chia-lung (林佳龍) on Tuesday thanked legislators in the US House of Representatives for passing the Taiwan Conflict Deterrence Act. The bill would empower the US government to publish the “illicit” financial assets of Chinese Communist Party (CCP) members and “restrict financial services for certain immediate family of such officials,” in the event of a conflict in the Taiwan Strait.
US Representative French Hill, who introduced the bill last year, said the legislation would put public pressure on the CCP, and could act as a deterrent to Chinese aggression toward Taiwan.
Beijing “has failed to deliver a social safety net and families are battered by sinking real-estate debt,” Hill said. “Let these corrupt officials explain to ordinary Chinese citizens how they acquired their riches on a government salary.”
Hill’s support for Taiwan is very welcomed, but his estimate of the bill’s impact is overly optimistic. To start, where would the US Department of the Treasury publish the information? Access to international media in China is limited under the CCP’s censorship.
The social media and content platforms most widely used in the US, including Facebook, X, Instagram, Twitch and YouTube, are all blocked in China. Content posted to Chinese social media such as Sina Weibo, WeChat and Douyin is also monitored by the CCP, and even code language — using intentionally misspelled words and homophones — that users employ to get around restrictions is quickly picked up by censors and removed. Those who persist in posting banned subject matter find their accounts blocked, and in the most egregious cases are imprisoned.
However, that is a moot point, as Chinese citizens are largely aware of corruption in their government already, but are powerless to act on that information.
Even outside of China, CCP members do not even attempt to hide illegal or questionable behavior, as three examples from 2022 demonstrate. Chinese Ambassador to France Lu Shaye (盧沙野) said during an interview with French media on Aug. 3 that year that in the event of China’s annexation of Taiwan, Taiwanese would need to be “re-educated” to make them patriotic and accepting of unification.
This was followed by Chinese Ambassador to Australia Xiao Qian (肖千) smiling on TV while discussing the arrest of Australian activist Drew Pavlou in the UK over false charges, from which he was later absolved. Then in October 2022, a Hong Kong dissident was dragged onto the grounds of the Chinese consulate in Manchester, England, and beaten.
These sorts of actions are evidence that CCP officials care little what anyone knows or thinks about them. Financial restrictions could have more impact as a deterrent, but they need to be comprehensive and must target the CCP as a whole, which is outside the scope of the Taiwan Conflict Deterrence Act.
“This bill does not focus on retaliating against the Chinese government per se, but rather on individuals who are in that government,” Hill said.
It must be understood that in China there are no officials with individual interests, nor companies that can operate free from the CCP’s influence. In China, the party is everything.
To be effective, any legislation must threaten sanctions against China as a whole. Such legislation must entirely prohibit financial transactions, either direct or indirect, between tax-paying individuals or companies registered in the US and any entity in China.
Lessons from Russia show that to be effective, sanctions need to target trade funneled through third countries. US companies should also diversify their export partners and supply chains.
It is promising to see continued support for Taiwan’s defense from cross-party US officials, but legislation must promise truly impactful consequences to really serve as a deterrent to Chinese aggression.
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
US President Donald Trump’s second administration has gotten off to a fast start with a blizzard of initiatives focused on domestic commitments made during his campaign. His tariff-based approach to re-ordering global trade in a manner more favorable to the United States appears to be in its infancy, but the significant scale and scope are undeniable. That said, while China looms largest on the list of national security challenges, to date we have heard little from the administration, bar the 10 percent tariffs directed at China, on specific priorities vis-a-vis China. The Congressional hearings for President Trump’s cabinet have, so far,
The US Department of State has removed the phrase “we do not support Taiwan independence” in its updated Taiwan-US relations fact sheet, which instead iterates that “we expect cross-strait differences to be resolved by peaceful means, free from coercion, in a manner acceptable to the people on both sides of the Strait.” This shows a tougher stance rejecting China’s false claims of sovereignty over Taiwan. Since switching formal diplomatic recognition from the Republic of China to the People’s Republic of China in 1979, the US government has continually indicated that it “does not support Taiwan independence.” The phrase was removed in 2022
US President Donald Trump, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth have each given their thoughts on Russia’s war with Ukraine. There are a few proponents of US skepticism in Taiwan taking advantage of developments to write articles claiming that the US would arbitrarily abandon Ukraine. The reality is that when one understands Trump’s negotiating habits, one sees that he brings up all variables of a situation prior to discussion, using broad negotiations to take charge. As for his ultimate goals and the aces up his sleeve, he wants to keep things vague for
RSS