The Chinese People’s Liberation Army is pressuring Taiwan using high intensity tactics to tire out Taiwanese forces and force them into making mistakes, The Economist cited Navy Commander Admiral Tang Hua (唐華) as saying in an interview published on Thursday last week.
China is “using an ‘anaconda strategy’ to squeeze the island,” he said, adding that it is “slowly, but surely” increasing its presence around the nation.
“They are ready to blockade Taiwan at any time they want,” Tang said.
It is welcome to see a high-level official give an interview to international media on this matter. Although Taiwan is one of the most reported on topics in media today, there is little representation of high-level Taiwanese officials and strategic thinkers talking about what they see as the primary strategic challenges the nation faces. It is only natural that what Taiwanese officials view as the nation’s most pressing challenges might differ from how the strategic situation looks to others.
China’s tactic appears to be to press intensive, continuous, multi-layered and comprehensive “gray zone” pressure — acts below the threshold of war — on the nation. These are no doubt part of Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) “struggle theory,” or douzheng, the idea that conflict is necessary to achieve political goals.
Beijing’s hassling and harrying of other nations has also been occurring in the South China Sea, such as the China Coast Guard using water cannons on Philippine boats and beating 10 Vietnamese fishers near the disputed Paracel Islands (Xisha Islands, 西沙群島).
Beijing’s strategy is challenging for Taiwan for three interrelated reasons:
The first is that the massive disparity in capability and Taiwan’s lack of a credible “deterrence by denial” means that China has “escalation dominance,” so once Beijing has shifted the “status quo” to its favor, it would be difficult for Taipei to re-establish deterrence.
This feeds into the second challenge, which is that China is seeking to tire out Taiwan’s forces, forcing them into making a mistake, which could give Beijing what it thinks is a propaganda tool to put in front of the international community as a justification to escalate the conflict.
“Taiwan adopts the pure defensive posture that is derived from the disparity of national comprehensive power, and the pursuit of international sympathy and support,” Institute for National Defense and Security Research assistant research fellow Chung Chih Tung said on the nation’s strategy against Beijing’s “gray zone” tactics.
As Taiwan prioritizes peace and does not want to give China any kind of casus belli, no matter how spurious, Beijing’s provocations are met with a de-escalatory response, complicating efforts to restore deterrence.
The third is that it has so far proved difficult for the nation to establish a domestic consensus on how to respond to Beijing’s aggressive actions, with many leading figures in the pan-blue camp believing that Taiwan should adopt a more accommodative policy on China, such as by making concessions on defense spending and reducing international engagement with other democracies. However, the lack of a consensus makes Beijing feel emboldened to continue its “anaconda strategy,” as it clearly believes these “gray zone” actions, whether by undermining public morale or boosting the voices of politicians seeking a more accommodative stance, further its political objective.
As military theorist and historian Basil Liddell Hart said: “The military objective is only the means to a political end.” The government should consider ways to undermine China’s belief in the political efficacy of its pressure, such as by boosting transparency on Beijing’s threats, trusting that greater public awareness would only strengthen Taiwanese resolve to resist.
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS