[Epoch Times, August 13, 2022]The CCP used Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan to conduct military exercises around Taiwan (the first “blockade of Taiwan”), although “it is a major upgrade of its long-term attempt to change the status quo”, but still said It is not the “fourth Taiwan Strait crisis”, because the CCP has no plan to attack Taiwan through this (the strength is not enough), and it is more to show off its military might and fight psychological warfare. However, the strategic consequences of this military exercise around Taiwan far exceeded the “Third Taiwan Strait Crisis” in 1995-96, which greatly deteriorated the CCP’s strategic situation. This article briefly discusses four points.
First, unlike the general silence of the “Third Taiwan Strait Crisis”, the G7, the European Union, NATO, Australia, etc. have all spoken out this time.
Taiwan’s international importance has risen significantly since 1996. Today, Taiwan is a vibrant democracy, an indispensable link in the global supply chain, and a model student of epidemic prevention. The Taiwan Strait is one of the busiest shipping lanes in the world. The military exercise around Taiwan is like a “blockade of Taiwan” and undermines the peace and stability of the Indo-Pacific. The CCP is regarded as a destroyer of the international order. In particular, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine this year has greatly shocked the world, and no one wants to see another war with the CCP, and the international community has spoken out.
For example, on August 3, the foreign ministers of the G7 countries and the EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy jointly issued a statement (which made the CCP extremely angry); on August 4, NATO Secretary-General Stoltenberg said that Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan and It does not constitute a reason for the CCP to overreact and threaten Taiwan (the “New Strategic Concept” adopted at the NATO summit at the end of June officially included the CCP as a “systemic challenge”); The strategic dialogue, reaffirming its commitment to advancing a free and open Indo-Pacific region and maintaining peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait, urges Beijing to immediately stop military exercises against Taiwan. In addition, some countries also issued separate statements to summon the Chinese ambassador (for example, the White House summoned the Chinese ambassador to the United States on the 4th, and the British Foreign Secretary instructed to summon the Chinese ambassador to the United Kingdom on the 10th).
On the 9th, the “Inter-Parliamentary Alliance for China Policy” (IPAC), composed of 25 countries including the United States, Canada, Australia, Japan, Britain, France, and Germany, as well as the European Parliament and 220 members of parliament from different parties from various countries, issued a solemn statement condemning the CCP. The military threat to Taiwan calls on all countries to demand that the CCP immediately cease its aggressive military activities.
Even the ASEAN foreign ministers issued a rare joint statement warning that tensions in the Taiwan Strait could lead to “misjudgment, serious confrontation, open conflict and unpredictable consequences between major powers”, claiming that they are ready to play a role in promoting the construction of peaceful dialogue among all parties sexual roles.
In fact, last year, when the CCP escalated its military threat to Taiwan, the famous international media The Economist called Taiwan the most dangerous place on earth. The G7 summit, NATO summit, US-EU summit, US-Japan summit, US-ROK summit, Japan-EU summit, Japan-Australia 2+2 talks, etc., raised the issue of the Taiwan Strait for the first time, focusing on the peace and stability of the Taiwan Strait.
Second, it is worth pondering that the “one-China policy” is marked “where applicable” in the diplomatic statement of many countries
In the above-mentioned statement issued by the international community on the situation in the Taiwan Strait, a meaningful phenomenon has emerged. In the joint statement of the G7 foreign ministers and the EU high representative for foreign policy, when referring to the “one-China policy”, the phrase “where applicable” is added after it, that is, it only applies in certain circumstances. The same is true in the joint statement issued after the US-Australia-Japan foreign ministers’ strategic dialogue.
In fact, the United States has repeatedly stated that its “one-China policy” is different from the CCP’s so-called “one-China principle.”
The CCP claims that all countries in the world generally accept its “one China principle”, that is: “There is only one China in the world, Taiwan is an inalienable part of China’s territory, and the government of the People’s Republic of China is the sole legal government of China.” Only dozens of countries (accounting for only about a quarter of the total number of countries in the world; as of December 10, 2021, 181 countries and the CCP regime have established diplomatic relations), and there are few major powers in this category.
More countries have other ideas. The first “Canadian model” is “take note of”; the second “Japanese model” is “understand and respect”. The Philippines and South Korea only use the word “respect”, not even “understand”. The third is the “American model”, which is “acknowledgement”; the fourth “doesn’t mention” model does not discuss the status of Taiwan at all, but only says that the two sides have established diplomatic relations since a certain day, a certain month, and a certain day. Obviously, most countries do not “recognize” the CCP’s claim to Taiwan, which is “a fact recognized by the international community.” (See the author’s article “Most Countries Do Not ‘Recognize’ the CCP’s Claims on Taiwan” for details.)
The CCP criticized the “One China Policy” with the addition of “where applicable” to “emptying the one China principle”, which is illegal and invalid, and expressed firm opposition. Can “resolute opposition” be effective?
Third, the CCP’s missiles fell into Japan’s EEZ, which Japan strongly condemned, accelerating the change in Japan-China relations
Former Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe said that “there is something wrong in the Taiwan Strait” means “there is something wrong with Japan”, and the CCP called it a “wrong remark with a very bad nature.” However, on August 4, the CCP tested missiles in various regions of the Taiwan Strait, and five of the ballistic missiles fell into Japan’s Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), proving this to be true. Japan lodged a strong protest to Beijing directly through diplomatic channels, demanding that the CCP immediately stop military exercises. The CCP responded strongly, saying that China and Japan have not yet delimited the relevant waters, so there is no so-called “Japan’s exclusive economic zone”.
Kyodo News, citing a number of Chinese sources, pointed out that the Chinese military proposed two plans when planning the exercise around Taiwan. One plan was that the exercise area did not include Japan’s EEZ, and the other plan overlapped with Japan’s EEZ. As a result, Xi Jinping chose the latter. The intention is to strongly restrain Japan from intervening in Taiwan when something goes wrong. The CCP is self-defeating.
The outbreak of the Russian-Ukrainian war this year has made Japan begin to prepare for danger and is determined to double its military expenditure to 2% of its gross domestic product. The assassination of Shinzo Abe sparked a political whirlwind of “inheriting Abe’s legacy”. In the 26th Senate election on July 11, the ruling Liberal Democratic Party won more than half of the 63 seats, which brought the “constitutional revisionists” to more than 2/3 of the seats needed to propose constitutional amendments. Kishida Fumio declared for two consecutive days that he would push forward the motion on constitutional amendment in Congress as soon as possible, and finally strive to realize the constitutional amendment.
Now, the CCP’s missiles fall into Japan’s EEZ, which will only stimulate the pace of Japan’s constitutional revision. Once Japan “amends the constitution” and becomes a “normal country”, its strong economic and technological strength will be converted into military strength and become a military power. On this basis, if the CCP “armed” Taiwan, even if the United States does not intervene, Japan may intervene. The evolution of the strategic pattern of the Taiwan Strait has become increasingly unfavorable for the CCP.
Fourth, India finally spoke out and contained the CCP
On August 12, India finally broke its silence on the situation in the Taiwan Strait, urging all parties to exercise restraint, avoid taking unilateral actions that change the status quo, and ease tensions. On the same day, Indian Foreign Minister Jaishankar said to the media on India-China relations: “Our relationship is not normal now. If there is no peace on the border, it will not be normal.” Earlier, on August 6, CNN reported that the United States and India will be close to China The annual joint military exercise is held about 95 kilometers from the Line of Actual Control (LAC) along the border. The Indian media also reported that in response to the “frequent activities” of Chinese fighter jets, India will deploy a new S-400 air defense missile squadron to the northern border area in the next two to three months.
In addition, according to media reports, the Chinese survey ship Yuanwang 5 departed from Jiangyin Port and was originally scheduled to arrive at Hambantota Port, Sri Lanka, which is operated by a Chinese company on August 11. Due to India’s opposition, the Sri Lankan government has asked China to delay the ship. Arrival.
Originally, at the beginning of the CCP’s military exercise around Taiwan, India remained silent. During the ASEAN Foreign Ministers’ Meeting and a series of meetings, Indian Foreign Minister Jaishankar did not mention the Taiwan issue when he met with US Secretary of State Blinken. On the 3rd, when Sun Weidong, the Chinese ambassador to India, was interviewed by the Times of India, he was still working in India, hoping to “understand and support China’s efforts to safeguard its sovereignty, security and development interests.”
But this fell through. Because Indian public opinion doesn’t buy the CCP’s account. For example, on the 6th, associate professor of Nehru University (JNU), Happymon Jacob, published an opinion piece in The Hindu, saying that New Delhi can learn three things from the changing situation in Taiwan: first , India should draw a clear red line on the border dispute, because unclear bottom line will give the CCP an opportunity to step up. Second, India does not need to take the appeasement line. Take Taiwan as an example. Taiwan could have declined or kept a low profile on Pelosi’s visit, but it did not, because Taiwan knew that appeasement would not stop Beijing from aggression. Third, India does not need to swallow its words to the CCP for economic and trade relations. For example, Taiwan has not made concessions to the CCP because of its close cross-strait trade.
For a long time, Sino-Indian frictions have continued, but India has fallen into the CCP’s strategic trap and has illusions about the CCP. As a result, the “Quartet Security Talks” is still a “forum” rather than an “Indo-Pacific version of NATO” (see the author’s “India” The Dilemma and the Choice of the Indo-American Alliance”). This time the CCP’s military exercise around Taiwan, the reaction of Taiwan and the international community, should have a greater impact on India. Judging from India’s final voice, its China policy is being adjusted on the fly, which is by no means good news for the CCP.
Preventing the recurrence of the Ukrainian war in the Indo-Pacific is the general aspiration of the international community. The CCP used Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan University to conduct military exercises, which is against the trend, so it has been condemned by many. The CCP has pushed itself into a predicament.
This military exercise around Taiwan has also increased some Indo-Pacific countries’ concerns about the CCP, quietly supporting the US military presence. The U.S. military has also been keeping an eye on the Chinese military. On April 28, with regard to countering the CCP’s threat, US Naval Operations Chief Michael Gilday said at a discussion held by the US think tank Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), “The balance we are trying to maintain is that the United States You need to be ready to fight tonight, and you need to be ready for a scenario in 2027 or earlier.” If the U.S. does this, the CCP will be locked in a cage.
The Epoch Times premieres
Responsible editor: Gao Yi#