![]() |
![]() |
China–Taiwan Weekly Updates
This page features the China–Taiwan Weekly Updates by ISW's China Team, which track the Chinese Communist Party's (CCP) strategies towards Taiwan and relevant cross–Taiwan Strait developments since April 24, 2023.
The Coalition Defense of Taiwan is a collaboration between ISW and the American Enterprise Institute (AEI). Research Director Stephen Gailliot and ISW Senior Fellow Matthew McInnis, along with AEI Senior Fellows Dan Blumenthal and Frederick W. Kagan, lead the project.
The initiative aims to explore strategies for the United States and its allies to deter the CCP's aggression and potentially defeat the People's Liberation Army. Over the next two years, it will produce essays, op-eds, analytical graphics, and reports offering policy recommendations. By leveraging ISW and AEI’s Asia expertise and military planning methodologies like PLANEX, the project will analyze strategic and operational challenges.
Click here to read the China-Taiwan Weekly Updates published in 2023.
China-Taiwan Weekly Update, August 23, 2024
Click here to read the full report
Authors: Matthew Sperzel and Daniel Shats of the Institute for the Study of War;
Alexis Turek of the American Enterprise Institute
Editors: Dan Blumenthal and Frederick W. Kagan of the American Enterprise Institute
Data Cutoff: August 21, 2024
Key Takeaways
- The PRC carried out a 30-hour patrol of the Taiwan Strait after its summer fishing moratorium ended. The increase in maritime traffic in the Taiwan Strait risks accidents and other incidents involving PRC and ROC vessels, which the PRC may use as a pretext to expand the scope of its law enforcement activities against Taiwan.
- CCG ships intruded into Taiwan’s restricted waters around Kinmen twice on August 16, the day the PRC’s fishing moratorium ended, and twice on August 21.
- The PRC announced that it will implement export controls for antimony on September 15. The US Department of Interior designated antimony as a critical mineral in 2018.
- The PRC is taking steps to secure its supply of critical minerals as it closes off access to other countries.
- A Chinese Coast Guard ship rammed a Philippine Coast Guard ship twice near Sabina Shoal on August 19.
Cross-Strait Relations
Taiwan
The PRC carried out a 30-hour patrol of the Taiwan Strait after its summer fishing moratorium ended. The increase in maritime traffic in the Taiwan Strait risks accidents and other incidents involving PRC and ROC vessels, which the PRC may use as a pretext to expand the scope of its law enforcement activities against Taiwan. The PRC annually bans fishing along its coastlines and in the South China Sea from early May to mid-August. Its 2024 fishing moratorium ended on August 16. 55,000 PRC fishing vessels entered the East and South China Sea at the start of the fishing season. The PRC Ministry of Transport (MOT) organized a 30.5-hour patrol of the Taiwan Strait on August 17 and 18 “to enhance maritime traffic control and emergency rescue capabilities in the Taiwan Strait, and effectively protect the safety of life and property of ships, facilities and personnel sailing and operating in the Taiwan Strait.” Two boats from the Fujian Maritime Safety Administration (MSA) and one from the East China Sea Rescue Bureau jointly carried out the patrol. One of the MSA ships was the Haixun 06, the largest PRC patrol vessel deployed to the Taiwan Strait. The patrol covered 413 nautical miles (475 miles). The MOT noted that the large number of vessels in the Taiwan Strait increased the risk of collision between fishing and commercial vessels. It listed a wide range of maritime law enforcement activities as the “main tasks” of the patrol, including “patrolling waterways in the central waters of the Taiwan Strait,” inspecting high-risk waterways, implementing traffic control, and checking passing ships.[1] Taiwan’s Coast Guard Administration (CGA) reported that the three PRC vessels briefly crossed the median line of the Taiwan Strait and then sailed back toward the PRC without entering Taiwan-controlled waters.[2] A portion of the PRC’s contiguous zone crosses over the median line. The PRC claims Taiwan and the entire Taiwan Strait as its territory and denies that any “median line” boundary exists.
The PRC patrol may expand the PRC’s claimed legal jurisdiction in the Taiwan Strait to incorporate international waters near Taiwan’s Penghu Islands. The PRC state social media account Yuyuan Tantian reported in a post titled “The ability to control the Taiwan Strait is changing” that the patrol covered a wider area than in previous years, reaching two nautical miles east of the median line in the Taiwan Strait and as far south as Taiwan Shoal. Taiwan Shoal is an undersea feature southwest of Taiwan’s Penghu islands.[3] Director of the Division of Defense Strategy and Resources at the Institute for National Defense and Security Research Su Tzu-yun said that this is the first time the PRC’s patrol route has included Taiwan Shoal. He commented that this indicates the PRC intends to expand its control to the median line and turn the Taiwan Strait into a “quasi-inland sea.”[4]
The increase in maritime traffic in the Taiwan Strait risks a greater number of accidents and other incidents involving PRC and ROC vessels. The PRC may use such incidents as a further excuse to intensify its “law enforcement” operations against Taiwanese nationals or extend the geographic scope of such operations. Taiwanese fishermen and law enforcement authorities have reported occasional CCG operations in waters east of the median line, including attempts to expel Taiwanese fishermen from international waters near Penghu that are within Taiwan’s claimed Exclusive Economic Zone.[5]
CCG ships intruded into Taiwan’s restricted waters around Kinmen twice on August 16, the day the PRC’s fishing moratorium ended, and twice on August 21. Taiwan’s CGA reported that four CCG ships entered Taiwan’s restricted waters around Kinmen at 9:00 am and again at 3:00 pm on August 16, three hours before and after the PRC fishing moratorium ended at noon, respectively. The ships stayed in Kinmen’s restricted waters for two hours each time. The CCG did not announce the incursions.[6] The CCG conducted a very similar pair of incursions on August 21. Four ships simultaneously entered Kinmen’s southern restricted waters at four separate points at 8:50 am and left at 11:00 am. They entered again at 2:50 pm and left at 5:00 pm. The incursions were ten minutes longer on August 21 than on August 16 but were otherwise nearly identical.[7] The Fujian CCG announced the August 21 patrols. It said that it had organized a fleet to “continuously strengthen law enforcement patrols in the waters near Kinmen” in August, especially after the fishing season started. The CCG said that it will further strengthen the control of the waters, “safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of Chinese fishermen, including those in Taiwan,” and “effectively ensure the normal navigation and operation order in the Xiamen-Kinmen waters.”[8]
The PRC normalized Chinese Coast Guard (CCG) patrols around Kinmen in response to the deaths of two PRC fishermen whose boat capsized while fleeing a CGA pursuit in Kinmen’s prohibited waters on February 14. The CCG carried out incursions into Kinmen’s restricted and prohibited waters an average of five times per month between February and July. The CCG has continued its incursions into Kinmen’s waters despite the PRC and ROC recently resolving some disputes related to the February 14 capsizing incident. This indicates that the PRC remains committed to its long-term campaign of using law enforcement to establish the PRC’s legal jurisdiction around Taiwan’s outlying islands.
The PRC Taiwan Affairs Office (TAO) rejected and condemned the findings of a Taiwanese investigation that exonerated Taiwan’s Coast Guard in the February 14 capsizing incident. Two PRC fishermen died on February 14 while fleeing a Taiwanese CGA pursuit in prohibited waters around Kinmen, a Taiwanese island group two miles from the PRC. The CGA boat and PRC fishing boat collided during the chase, after which the fishing boat sank. The Kinmen Prosecutor’s Office released the results of an investigation into the incident on August 16 and announced it would not prosecute the CGA personnel. It determined that the CGA personnel were not at fault in the collision and acted legally during the pursuit.[9] TAO spokesperson Zhu Fenglian rejected the investigation’s findings, claiming they “disregard facts and deliberately shirk responsibilities.” She called on Taiwan to disclose the truth about the incident, “severely punish” those responsible, and prevent similar incidents in the future.[10]
The Taiwanese prosecutors released their findings weeks after PRC and ROC authorities concluded negotiations on June 30 over the capsizing incident. The ROC released the bodies of the deceased fishermen and their boat to the PRC and apologized for not recording the incident. The details of the agreement are not public. The PRC subsequently released two of the three Taiwanese fishermen it had detained, including a former soldier it had held since March.[11]
The TAO’s reaction to the investigation’s findings is consistent with PRC demands during earlier rounds of negotiations in March, in which the PRC demanded that Taiwan reveal the truth and apologize for the incident, in addition to returning the boat and bodies. The PRC may seize on Taiwan’s decision not to prosecute anyone for the incident as an outstanding grievance that demands retribution, such as further “law enforcement” actions against Taiwan around Kinmen’s waters.
PRC researchers at Xiamen University released and quickly deleted a report advocating for the establishment of a “shadow government” that would be prepared to take control of Taiwan after “reunification.” Xiamen University’s Cross Strait Urban Planning Institute posted the short article on August 5 on the PRC social media platform WeChat. The article called for the immediate establishment of a Central Taiwan Work Committee that would be primed to enter Taiwan as a “shadow government” as soon as the PRC “reunifies” Taiwan. The committee would deeply study Taiwan’s existing system to figure out a way to “digest” the system, determine which institutions to preserve and which to change, and incorporate Taiwanese elites into the design of the new government to smooth the regime change process. The committee would also unite “anti-independence” forces in Taiwan. The post argued that the Kuomintang (KMT), the relatively PRC-friendly political party in Taiwan, is softening its “anti-independence” stance and moving toward “implicit Taiwan independence,” while “pro-unification” forces are generally disorganized and vilified in Taiwanese society. It said the establishment of the Central Taiwan Work Committee could systematize and institutionalize forces against Taiwan's independence, support them as the Communist International supported the Chinese Communist Party in its early days, and make Taiwanese people feel a greater sense of urgency with regard to unification.
The post also advocated for the establishment of a “Taiwan governance pilot zone” to conduct policy experiments, train cadres, and demonstrate what post-unification governance might look like. It proposed to situate the pilot zone in the districts of the cities of Xiamen and Quanzhou nearest to Taiwan’s Kinmen islands and to incorporate retired Taiwanese military, government, and education personnel as consultants for the pilot zone. Xiamen and Quanzhou are in Fujian Province, which is already the center of many cross-strait integration initiatives due to its location directly across the Taiwan Strait from Taiwan. The paper argued that the One Country, Two Systems model of governance that the PRC applied to Hong Kong may not be suitable for Taiwan and that the PRC should aim to fully integrate Taiwan right away.[12]
It is unclear the extent to which the post reflects the views of CCP officials. The names of the authors were not listed on the article and the post was deleted soon after posting without explanation. Hong Kong-based South China Morning Post reported that the Xiamen research institute said it would republish the article later. The research institute has not done so as of August 21.[13] Mainland PRC media did not report on the article. Xiamen University is one of at least 75 public universities subordinate to the PRC Ministry of Education.[14] The Cross-Strait Urban Planning Institute is part of its architecture and civil engineering school.
China
The PRC announced that it will implement export controls for antimony on September 15.[15] The US Department of Interior designated antimony as a critical mineral to the economy and national security in 2018.[16] Antimony has a variety of military applications, including night vision goggles, strengthening shielding materials, explosives, flares, nuclear weapons, and infrared sensors.[17] The export controls on antimony follow a pattern of the PRC’s increasing securitization of critical minerals. The PRC implemented export restrictions on gallium and germanium in August 2023 and high-grade graphite in December 2023.[18] All three minerals are US-designated critical minerals. Gallium and germanium have applications in aerospace, military, and telecommunications due to their use in the manufacture of optoelectronic devices and fundamental inputs such as integrated circuits, semiconductors, and transistors.[19] Graphite has extensive industrial and military applications, including the manufacture of missile guidance systems, artillery components, firearms, and military aircraft.[20]
The PRC’s export controls will complicate the United States’ access to antimony. The PRC is the world’s leading producer of antimony, accounting for 48% of global production in 2023. The PRC accounted for 63% of US antimony imports from 2019–2022.[21] The United States has not mined its antimony since 2001.[22] The United States’ annual demand for antimony is greater than any other single country’s mine production.[23]
The PRC is also taking steps to secure its supply of critical minerals as it closes off access to other countries. PRC Minister of Natural Resources Wang Guanghua publicly urged the PRC to increase production of strategic minerals to guard against “unexpected domestic or external emergencies that could bring negative impacts.”[24] Improving access to strategic minerals for national security purposes was among the policy measures that the PRC outlined in a resolution following the Third Plenum in July.[25] PRC Premier Li Qiang toured Australian lithium processing plants on June 17, following an agreement to repair ties after several years of trade tensions.[26] The PRC Ministry of Natural Resources designated lithium as a strategic mineral in 2016.[27]
The PRC encountered a recent setback regarding its access to rare earth minerals in Australia, however. Australian Treasurer Jim Chalmers ordered the PRC national-owned Yuxiao Fund from an Australian rare earth mining company on June 3 after using apparent proxy companies to increase its stake, despite denial by the government’s Foreign Investment Review Board.[28] A corporate filing from 2023 reveals the head of the Yuxiao Fund, Wu Tao, as a mining magnate with connections to the PRC government.[29]
Southeast Asia
Philippines
A Chinese Coast Guard (CCG) ship rammed a Philippine Coast Guard (PCG) ship twice near Sabina Shoal on August 19. The collisions caused significant damage to the hull of the PCG ship. The PCG ship continued its mission to supply personnel at other Philippine-occupied islands in the South China Sea, however.[30] The Sabina Shoal is 75 nautical miles from the Philippine island of Palawan and is within the Philippines’ United Nations-recognized Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). Sabina Shoal belongs to the Spratly Islands, which is a semi-submerged archipelago that the PRC and Philippines both claim in its entirety. CCG and Chinese Maritime Militia (CMM) boats frequently resort to ramming against rival claimants in the South China Sea to deter their presence in PRC-claimed waters without escalating to outright violence.[31]
The CCG and PRC MFA stated that the Philippines was responsible for the incident and that the PCG ship deliberately caused the collision.[32] PCG spokesperson Jay Tarriela denied the PRC’s version of events and blamed the CCG for the collision.[33] The US Department of State issued a press statement that condemned the PRC for deliberately colliding with the PCG ship and reaffirmed the United States’ commitment to defending the Philippines in the South China Sea under the two countries’ mutual defense treaty.[34]
The PRC and the Philippines both accuse each other of attempting to establish footing at Sabina Shoal to assert control over the feature. PCG spokesperson Jay Tarriela stated on May 11 that the PCG was committed to maintaining a presence at Sabina Shoal to monitor PRC attempts at land reclamation, which he claimed aimed to build an artificial island on the shoal.[35] The PRC MFA stated that the accusation was an attempt to mislead the international community.[36] The CCG anchored its largest ship near Sabina Shoal on July 3 and remained there for 38 days.[37] The PRC communicated its intent to stop the Philippines from adding to its presence there days before the incident. State-owned tabloid Global Times reported on August 14 that the PRC would not allow the Philippines to “expand its occupation” of the shoal.[38]
PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesperson stated on August 16 and 19 that the Philippines’ presence at Sabina Shoal violates the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea (DOC).[39] The DOC is a non-binding document between ASEAN countries and the PRC that affirms the signatories’ commitment not to act in an escalatory manner or resort to violence in territorial disputes.[40] The PRC’s accusation possibly refers to a provision of the DOC that states that members will refrain from inhabiting previously uninhabited features in the South China Sea. The PRC’s ramming of the PCG ship represents its own violation of the DOC’s provision not to use violence in territorial disputes. The parties have failed to solidify a binding code during the last two decades amid the PRC’s aggressive militarization of the South China Sea. The PRC denied the validity of alternative regional security frameworks in response to the Philippines’ calls in November to establish an ASEAN-led South China Sea code of conduct.[41]
A PRC-controlled Sabina Shoal would improve the PRC’s ability to assert its claim over the Second Thomas Shoal and other nearby features in the South China Sea. The PRC has built military infrastructure on the features of the Spratly Islands that it occupies to counter the Philippines’ claims in the South China Sea. For example, the PRC’s two most militarized features in the Spratly Islands are Subi Reef and Mischief Reef, both of which are directly adjacent to the two most militarized Philippine-controlled features, Thitu Island and Second Thomas Shoal, respectively. The infrastructure on both of the PRC-controlled features enables the PRC to sustain deployments of naval ships and aircraft in the South China Sea.[42]
Controlling the shoal, which is near the Philippines as one of the easternmost features in the Spratly Islands, likely would enable the PRC to more easily intercept Philippine vessels sailing from Palawan to prevent them from accessing or establishing a presence around other disputed features. PRC infrastructure on the shoal, especially facilities that accommodate CCG or naval vessels, would better position CCG ships to frustrate Philippine resupply missions to the Sierra Madre military outpost on Second Thomas Shoal, which is 35 nautical miles to the west.
Vietnam
The PRC and Vietnam signed fourteen economic deals and pledged to increase diplomatic efforts pertaining to the South China Sea. These agreements reflect Vietnam’s desire to avoid picking sides in South China Sea disputes. Vietnamese President To Lam met with Xi Jinping on August 14, during which they signed fourteen bilateral agreements, mostly focusing on infrastructure and trade regulations. The PRC and Vietnam also issued a joint declaration on August 20 that reiterated their desire to diplomatically resolve issues in the South China Sea and cooperate to build a “China-Vietnam community of shared destiny with strategic significance.”[43] The two countries agreed that they would implement the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea (DOC) and push for the negotiation of the South China Sea Code of Conduct (COC). The COC is an agreement between the PRC and ASEAN member states that has been under negotiation for over a decade. The COC will provide guidelines for state behavior in disputed waters to reduce maritime tensions in the region.[44] The PRC and ASEAN have had difficulty completing negotiations due to disagreements on the proposed geographic scope of the COC and the binding nature of such an agreement.[45] This led to the completion of the non-binding DOC in 2002, with sporadic negotiation attempts taking place up to the present day.[46] Defense ministers and public security officials from the PRC and Vietnam also met and promised to continue bilateral engagement on security issues.[47]
These high-level meetings occurred only a few weeks after the announcement of joint coast guard exercises between Vietnam and the Philippines and the corresponding agreement to expand coast guard cooperation between the two countries. Both the Philippines and Vietnam have experienced PRC incursions into their territorial waters, but the two countries have pursued very different courses of action regarding the PRC. Vietnam’s engagement with CCP leadership indicates that they see positive relations with the PRC as a key component of their national security and economic development.
Myanmar
The PRC promised to support the Myanmar junta’s upcoming elections and plans for government transition. PRC Foreign Minister Wang Yi visited Myanmar from August 14–15.[48] Wang met with top leaders from Myanmar’s State Administration Council (SAC), who took control of the country in a military coup in 2021. During this meeting, Wang reiterated the PRC’s support for the SAC and expressed his desire for the SAC to bring about an end to the conflict. The PRC has supported the SAC since the coup occurred, and the two governments have been working together on a number of cooperative efforts including building the China-Myanmar Economic Corridor, maintaining existing oil and gas pipelines, and reducing transnational crime.[49] The PRC brokered a short-lived ceasefire between the SAC and a group of militias known as the Three Brotherhood Alliance after the militias conducted the massive Operation 1027 joint offensive along the PRC border last October.[50] Since the resumption of fighting this June, resistance forces have taken even more territory within the border areas.[51]
The PRC has promised additional support for the SAC’s upcoming census and elections. Wang Yi reiterated the PRC’s support for democratic transition in Myanmar during an August 16 meeting with leaders from Vietnam, Thailand, Laos, and Cambodia.[52] During this meeting Wang also stated the PRC’s support for the Association of Southeast Asian Nations’ “Five-Point Consensus,” the organization’s peace plan for Myanmar. Pro-democracy forces in Myanmar widely criticized the Five Point Consensus and claimed that it was a way to legitimize the junta’s control. The junta’s proposed elections have been widely criticized, as the junta has forcibly dissolved almost 40 political parties in Myanmar and banned several others from participating in the upcoming election.[53] The dissolved parties include the National League for Democracy (NLD), whose overwhelming electoral victory in 2021 sparked the military coup.
The United States met with representatives from Myanmar’s opposition movement after Wang’s statements. US State Department Counselor Tom Sullivan and USAID Assistant Administrator Michael Schiffer met with leading members of Myanmar’s shadow National Unity Government (NUG), the National Unity Consultative Council, and representatives for key Ethnic Resistance Organizations.[54] During this meeting, the US representatives voiced their support for the opposition and stated that they would continue to expand direct support to pro-democracy actors and improve their ability to provide humanitarian aid and public services to those in need. While the US representatives also called for an end to the crisis, analysts believe that recent rebel victories will embolden opposition groups to move towards areas in central Myanmar.[55]
Indonesia
Indonesia and the PRC agreed to organize joint military training as part of their first “2+2” diplomatic and military dialogue. Indonesia will host a US-led regional military exercise next week. Senior PRC and Indonesian foreign ministry and defense officials met in the two countries’ first “2+2” dialogue in Jakarta on August 12 to discuss strengthening diplomatic and defense ties. A statement that the Indonesian Ministry of Foreign Affairs released on August 13 announced cooperation on various issues including joint military training.[56] It did not provide any details on the arrangement. Indonesia will host the US-led Super Garuda Shield exercises from August 26 to September 5. The exercises will include dozens of other countries including Japan, Australia, South Korea, Germany, Singapore, and Malaysia.[57]
Indonesia has participated in separate joint military exercises with the PRC and the United States as part of a policy of engaging with both major powers to avoid being drawn into one side of the geopolitical rivalry.[58] Indonesia’s push for military modernization, spearheaded by Defense Minister and incoming president Prabowo Subianto, may lead to closer defense cooperation and new arms deals with other countries including the PRC. The South China Morning Post cited analysts who said Indonesia has been “lukewarm” about developing a defense partnership with the PRC, however. Indonesia procures most of its military equipment from European and other Western-aligned countries.[59]
Europe
Germany
The PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) criticized the scheduled transit of two German warships through the Taiwan Strait in September. The German frigate Baden-Wuerttemberg and replenishment ship Frankfurt am Main are visiting ports in East Asia and awaiting orders to transit the Taiwan Strait in September. The United States and other nations have sent warships through the Taiwan Strait several times in 2024, including a Canadian transit on July 31. The upcoming German transit will be Germany’s first since 2002, however.[60] MFA spokesperson Mao Ning responded to the news and said that “China has always opposed undermining China's territorial sovereignty and security under the guise of ‘freedom of navigation.’”[61] The PRC perceives itself as surrounded by a coalition of US-aligned nations that seek to contain it. It has repeatedly criticized “external interference” in the region and especially in the “Taiwan question,” which it considers to be its internal affair.
Russia
PRC Premier Li Qiang traveled to Russia to meet with Russian Prime Minister Mikhail Mishustin for the 29th meeting between PRC and Russian prime ministers on August 21. The PRC readout called for the PRC and Russia to strengthen coordination in international affairs, better safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of Russia and China, and promote the continuous development of the comprehensive strategic cooperative partnership between the two countries in the new era.[62] The two prime ministers signed an updated version of the PRC-Russia investment cooperation planning outline as well as cooperation agreements spanning education, science and technology, chemicals, green construction, maritime search and rescue, cross-border cargo transportation, and facilitation of citizen exchanges.
Mishustin stated that the two countries should jointly defend their interests and the principles of the multipolar world order in the face of pressure from Western sanctions. Mishustin claimed that Western countries wanted to contain the PRC and Russia’s economic and technological potential to maintain their global dominance.[63]
Li met with Russian President Vladimir Putin after meeting with Mishustin. Li expressed the PRC’s interest in expanding cooperation with Russia outside of traditional areas to include scientific and technological innovation in emerging sectors.[64] Li signaled the PRC’s willingness to strengthen multilateral coordination with Russia and promote multi-polarization.
Iran
Iran is seeking security partnerships with two Chinese satellite companies specializing in low-cost satellites capable of capturing high-resolution imagery.[65] This capability could enable Iran to enhance its intelligence-gathering capabilities to improve the effectiveness of its strikes. The Washington Post, citing unspecified Western security officials, reported on August 16 that Iran is seeking a partnership with two Chinese satellite companies specializing in manufacturing and operating small, low-cost satellites with optical equipment capable of producing high-resolution images. The Washington Post reported that the optical equipment of the Chinese satellites is “at least twice as sensitive” as the most advanced satellites currently operated by Iran. Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) and the Chinese companies have exchanged multiple delegations over the past few months in an attempt to secure these partnerships.
Higher resolution satellite imagery could allow Iranian military services to improve their targeting practices for future operations targeting US, Israeli, and Arab military bases. Iran would also almost certainly share this targeting information with its proxies and partners to enable their attacks. Iranian state media previously reported in July 2020 that the IRGC used its satellites to collect intelligence on US military positions in the region.[66] The United States previously sanctioned one of the companies Iran is pursuing a partnership with, Chang Guang Satellite Technology Co., due to its support for Russia’s Wagner Group.[67]
China-Taiwan Weekly Update, August 16, 2024
Click here to read the full report
Authors: Matthew Sperzel, Daniel Shats, and Alexander Richter of the Institute for the Study of War;
Alexis Turek of the American Enterprise Institute
Editors: Dan Blumenthal and Frederick W. Kagan of the American Enterprise Institute
Data Cutoff: August 12, 2024 at 5pm ET
Key Takeaways
- The PRC released four members of a Taiwanese fishing boat on August 13, whom it detained near Kinmen on July 2. The crew’s release does not indicate a change in the PRC’s long-term coercion campaign against Taiwan, however.
- The PRC exempted Fujian residents from a travel ban covering Taiwan’s Matsu islands, possibly to make decoupling from the PRC a politically unpopular policy among Matsu residents.
- ROC officials warned that PRC outreach to religious groups in Taiwan is a national security risk.
- The PRC’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs accused the National Endowment for Democracy of carrying out subversive activities against the PRC under the guise of democracy promotion.
- The PLA Air Force conducted unsafe and unprofessional maneuvers while intercepting a Philippine military transport plane over Scarborough Shoal. This was the first time that the Philippine–PRC disputes in the South China Sea led to an aerial confrontation.
- The PRC reiterated its support for Iran and called for Israel to end the war in Gaza following the assassination of Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh.
Cross-Strait Relations
Taiwan
The PRC released four members of a Taiwanese fishing boat on August 13, whom it detained near Kinmen on July 2.[1] The crew’s release does not indicate a change in the PRC’s long-term coercion campaign against Taiwan, however. The PRC continues to hold the Taiwanese captain of the crew and the boat, with no confirmed date for their release. The Chinese Coast Guard (CCG) detained the crew and boat for fishing in PRC waters during a seasonal fishing moratorium. The crew’s release comes after the PRC and ROC made progress in resolving the handling of the February 14 capsizing incident, in which two PRC fishermen died while fleeing from a Taiwanese Coast Guard pursuit near Kinmen. Kinmen is a group of Taiwan-controlled islands with a large military garrison roughly 3 kilometers from the coast of the PRC. The July 30 deal concludes lengthy backchannel negotiations that stalled in early March, resulting in the ROC returning the bodies of the deceased and paying restitution to their families. The PRC released a Taiwanese former soldier that it held for nearly five months on August 7 after the deal.[2]
Since the February 14 capsizing incident, the CCG has conducted frequent violations of Taiwan’s maritime jurisdiction in the waters around Kinmen, which peaked in May around President Lai’s inauguration. Several commercial PRC drones have also flown over Kinmen in recent months.[3] This phenomenon has previously occurred during periods of high cross-strait tensions, which suggests that it is a PRC-directed gray zone warfare activity.[4]
The capsizing incident triggered the PRC’s aggression around Kinmen, but its coercive actions are part of a broader campaign to exert pressure on Taiwan after the election of President Lai Ching-te. Since Lai’s election, the PRC has conducted large-scale military exercises that encircled Taiwan, nearly brought Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) incursions to an all-time high, and announced legal guidelines that threaten severe punishment for Taiwanese “separatists.”
The PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) lodged diplomatic objections to Japan’s detention of two ROC-registered fishing vessels on behalf of Taiwan and denied the ROC government’s legitimacy. The Japanese Fisheries Agency vessel detained an ROC fishing vessel on July 5 for illegally fishing 1.5 nautical miles past a “designated enforcement line” near Amami Oshima.[5] The Japanese Coast Guard detained a second ROC fishing vessel on July 28 for illegally fishing inside Japan’s territorial waters near Yonaguni.[6] Japanese authorities subsequently fined and released both vessels within two days of detention.[7]
The PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) stated on August 9 that “Japan has no right to take law enforcement measures against “Chinese fishing vessels,” citing the China-Japan Fisheries Agreement.[8] The PRC and Japan signed the agreement in 1975, which outlines procedures for dispute settlements and fishing regulations in agreed-upon waters.[9] The ROC Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) rebuked the PRC’s interference and said that this case is a maritime matter between Taiwan and Japan. MOFA stated that the matter has been resolved in accordance with international maritime regulations and bilateral mechanisms. [10]
The PRC uses international dialogue to act as a voice for Taiwan and deny the legitimacy of the ROC government.[11] The PRC Deputy Permanent Representative to the UN Geng Shuang thanked the international community for its “sympathy and concern” on April 3 after Taiwan experienced a damaging earthquake.[12] The ROC MOFA condemned “China’s shameless behavior” and stated that “only Taiwan’s democratically elected government can represent Taiwan’s 23.5 million people internationally.”[13]
The PRC exempted Fujian residents from a travel ban covering Taiwan’s Matsu islands, possibly to make decoupling from the PRC a politically unpopular policy among Matsu residents. Matsu (officially Lienchiang County) is a Taiwan-controlled group of islands 10 kilometers off the mainland coast at their closest point and home to roughly 13,000 people. The first mainland tour group since 2019 arrived in Matsu on August 9. The PRC suspended individual tourism to Taiwan in 2019, citing poor cross-strait relations.[14] It then suspended group tours to Taiwan in 2020 during the pandemic and maintained the restrictions on Taiwan despite resuming group travel to more than 70 countries in August 2023.[15]
Matsu is the target of a series of PRC economic integration programs that likely aim to foster the islands’ economic dependence on the mainland and build political support for cross-strait integration. The Fujian provincial government in the PRC announced on April 28 the “Fuzhou-Matsu City Pass,” a 300 RMB (approximately 42 USD) benefits card that facilitates the travel and settlement of Matsu residents in Fuzhou, the capital of Fujian province.[16] The card offers Matsu residents discounted rides on transportation and hotels in Fuzhou, free tours of Fuzhou's major cultural attractions, housing benefits, and dedicated hotline consultation for children's education, employment, and entrepreneurship. The Fujian government also announced that it will promote the construction of transportation and industrial infrastructure, such as airports, high-speed rails, highways, and ports, to increase connectivity between Fuzhou and Matsu. The PRC announced another batch of policies on May 16 that aim to strengthen economic integration with trade, investment, and employment incentives.[17]
Tourism is an important source of revenue for Matsu to offset lesser military presence after significant force reductions in the past two decades, which shrunk the county’s military garrison to just 2,000 people from 20,000.[18] Lienchiang County Director of Transportation and Tourism Liu Hsing-chien stated Matsu received approximately 22,000 tourists from the PRC in 2019, representing approximately 10% of total tourist arrivals.[19] Professor Huang Cheng-tsung of Providence University’s Department of Tourism in Taiwan estimated that the potential daily tourism revenue would be 260,000 USD if the islands’ hotels reached full capacity.[20]
ROC officials warned that PRC outreach to religious groups in Taiwan is a national security risk. President Lai Ching-te spoke at a Buddhist temple in Taichung on August 9 and warned that the PRC is using religious pretenses to lure Taiwanese people to the mainland.[21] Lai stated that the exchanges are a risk to national security and urged people not to let the PRC swindle them. Taiwan’s Ministry of Interior (MOI) warned on August 10 that an account on the popular messaging platform LINE may be a CCP front carrying out United Front activities.[22] The United Front is a whole-of-government and society effort to advance the CCP’s ideology and win the hearts and minds of Chinese-ethnic people by forming a thorough alliance between the CCP and the rest of society. The MOI stated that it contacted the Taiwan Taoist Provincial Church, the supposed parent organization, which denied that it had established a cross-strait youth league. Former Mainland Affairs Council (MAC) Minister Chiu Tai-san stated in October 2023 that religious exchanges enable the CCP to collect information on Taiwanese people and learn which people hold influence in certain communities.[23]
The PRC Ministry of State Security (MSS) claimed it destroyed Taiwanese espionage networks in the PRC. The MSS posted on the social media WeChat on August 13 that it discovered over 1,000 instances of Taiwanese espionage during major operations in recent years. It said that it severely punished “spies who carried out intelligence theft, infiltration, and sabotage activities.” It specifically mentioned Taiwanese political activist Yang Chih-yuan, who was detained in August 2022 in Wenzhou, Zhejiang province, and charged with secessionism in 2023. The MSS accused Yang of being a “Taiwan independence” leader and claimed his arrest was a “heavy blow [and] a strong deterrent” to Taiwanese pro-independence “separatists.”[24] The MSS post is part of a trend of PRC crackdowns on Taiwanese “separatism” following Lai Ching-te’s presidential election victory in January and inauguration in May. The PRC released an authoritative “legal opinion” in June that threatened “Taiwan independence diehards” with penalties up to life imprisonment and death. The Taiwan Affairs Office and Ministry of Public Security added website sections on August 7 with information about Taiwanese “separatism” and how to report it to authorities. They included the names of ten Taiwanese political figures that the PRC designated “Taiwan independence diehards” in 2021 and 2022.
China
The PRC’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) accused the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) of carrying out subversive activities against the PRC under the guise of democracy promotion. The MFA released a report on August 9 entitled “The National Endowment for Democracy: What it is and what it does,” accusing the NED of implementing US government-supported infiltration, subversion, and sabotage operations around the world.[25] The NED is a US non-governmental organization focused on promoting democracy around the world that receives a portion of its funding from the US Congress. In 2019 the MFA released a report accusing the NED of being a front for US intelligence operations and funding anti-PRC groups in Hong Kong.[26] The NED was one of several US NGOs to be sanctioned by the PRC for “instigating extremely violent criminal activities” in Hong Kong.
The most recent MFA report accuses the NED of instigating “color revolutions,” cultivating pro-US forces in foreign countries, interfering in foreign elections, and working to undermine stability in foreign states. The MFA accuses the NED of working to “incite division” within the PRC by supporting Taiwan independence forces, colluding with anti-China forces in Hong Kong, providing support to a number of Uyghur activists and organizations, and meeting with the Tibetan government-in-exile. The MFA accuses the NED of engaging in subversion utilizing a number of capabilities in the information, economic, diplomatic, and political domains for the purpose of inciting change in unfriendly regimes. Representatives from the NED have not released a statement responding to the MFA’s accusations.
Southeast Asia
Philippines
The PLA Air Force (PLAAF) conducted unsafe and unprofessional maneuvers while intercepting a Philippine military transport plane over Scarborough Shoal. This was the first time that Philippine–PRC disputes in the South China Sea led to an aerial confrontation. Philippine military officials stated that two PLAAF aircraft flew very close to a Philippine Air Force (PAF) light transport plane that was on patrol near Scarborough Shoal on August 8 and launched at least eight flares in the flight path of the PAF plane, putting the plane at risk.[27] The Philippines’ National Task Force for the West Philippine Sea condemned the PLA’s “irresponsible, unprofessional, illegal and dangerous acts” and called on the PRC to cease “all forms of provocative and hazardous acts that could undermine the safety of Filipino military and civilian personnel in the waters or in the skies, destabilize regional peace, and erode the trust and confidence of the international community in the PRC.”[28] The Philippines filed a diplomatic protest against Beijing on August 13 over the incident.[29]
PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs Spokesperson Lin Jian claimed the Philippines intruded into the “adjacent airspace of Huangyan Dao” (Scarborough Shoal) on August 7 and August 8, which infringed on PRC sovereignty and international law. He claimed the PLA took “necessary and lawful measures in response” and called the PLAAF maneuvers “professional” and “consistent with Chinese and international law.” Lin accused the Philippines of sending its aircraft into Scarborough Shoal’s airspace as a “deliberate provocation” during a joint patrol with US, Australian, and Canadian forces in the South China Sea.[30] A statement from the PLA’s Southern Theater Command, which is responsible for the South China Sea, likewise accused the Philippines of illegally intruding into PRC airspace and said that the incursion disrupted a PLA training exercise.[31]
The PRC and the Philippines both claim Scarborough Shoal as their territory. The PRC has maintained de facto control of the shoal since 2012 but has not built any infrastructure on it. The PRC conducted a joint air and sea combat patrol around Scarborough Shoal on August 7 on the same day as the Philippines, United States, Canada, and Australia held joint drills in the Philippine Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ).[32] The Philippine government said the PLA Navy sent three ships to tail its joint exercises with its partners.[33]
The aerial confrontation is the first since PRC–Philippine hostilities in the South China Sea began to heat up in 2023.[34] Some Philippine and other Southeast Asian analysts assess that the PRC may begin to employ military harassment and gray-zone tactics against the Philippines in the aerial domain, in the latest escalation of the two countries’ territorial disputes.[35] Philippine Undersecretary of Foreign Affairs Maria Theresa Lazaro said the Philippines will review a provisional agreement the two sides reached on July 22 regarding resupply missions in the South China Sea. The provisional agreement, which Lazaro helped negotiate, was aimed at de-escalating tensions in the South China Sea after a series of violent confrontations surrounding Philippine missions to resupply soldiers at Second Thomas Shoal, another South China Sea maritime feature that both countries claim.[36] The PRC observed but did not impede a Philippine resupply mission to Second Thomas Shoal on July 27.[37]
Indonesia
The PRC is taking steps to deepen diplomatic and defense ties with Indonesia, likely to counter Western influence with the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). The PRC held its first “2+2” diplomatic and military dialogue with Indonesia in Jakarta on August 12. PRC Vice Minister of Foreign Affairs Sun Weidong and Deputy Director of the Office for International Military Cooperation of the Central Military Commission Zhang Baoqun met with their Indonesian counterparts Abdul Kadir Jailani, Director General of Asia-Pacific and African Affairs at the Indonesian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and Brigadier General Oktaheroe Ramsi, Secretary of the Directorate General for Defense Strategy at the Indonesian Ministry of Defense. Sun also met with Indonesian Foreign Minister Retno Marsudi and Deputy Foreign Minister Pahala Mansury on the same day. A PRC readout said the two sides discussed diplomatic and defense strategic cooperation and reached a series of “common understandings.” They also discussed issues of common concern including management of differences in the South China Sea through peaceful negotiations. The readout also said this inaugural 2+2 dialogue marks a new level of strategic mutual trust between the two countries.[38]
The PRC also has proposed naval sales to Indonesia in recent months. Representatives from the China State Shipbuilding Corporation (CSSC) have traveled to Indonesia to propose discounted offers on PRC S26T diesel-electric submarines (SSK) and guided-missile destroyers. The South China Morning Post (SCMP) reported that the offer is in the “proposal” stage but would be Indonesia’s largest purchase of PRC defense equipment if it goes through. Indonesia has procured anti-ship missiles, drones, and self-propelled air defense systems from the PRC. It has procured most of its military equipment from France, Italy, Sweden, Belgium, the United States, and South Korea, however. PRC-produced equipment has made up less than 0.1% of Indonesia’s defense acquisitions since 2014. The SCMP cited analysts who said Indonesia has been “lukewarm” about developing a defense partnership with the PRC, even as its defense minister and president-elect Prabowo Subianto has pushed for military modernization.[39]
Some PRC media and analysts are presenting PRC–Indonesia cooperation as a model of PRC–ASEAN relations in contrast to the hostile PRC–Philippines relationship. PRC state-owned media Global Times cited Chen Xiangmiao, director of the World Navy Research Center at the National Institute for South China Sea Studies (NISCSS), who said the PRC and Indonesia were likely to discuss negotiations on the South China Sea Code of Conduct. NISCSS is a government-affiliated think tank. Chen said Indonesia was concerned that tensions in the South China Sea, particularly between the PRC and the US-aligned Philippines, may force members of ASEAN to choose sides in the US–PRC geopolitical contest. He said Indonesia may wish to play a mediating role in the South China Sea.[40] Indonesia is a minor player in the multinational South China Sea dispute, as its EEZ extending from the Natuna Islands overlaps with the PRC’s Nine Dash Line claims that cover most of the South China Sea.[41]
Russia
The PRC and Russia may begin barter trade to evade payment issues related to Western sanctions on Russia. 98 percent of PRC banks are rejecting payments in Chinese yuan from Russia. Reuters cited three unspecified Russian sources who are closely involved in Russia–PRC trade and payments, who claimed that the PRC and Russia expect to reach deals involving barter trade as soon as this autumn. The sources said that Russia is developing regulations for barter trading and assumed the PRC is doing the same. One source said Russia is discussing ways to export food products to the PRC using a barter system. Another source said companies were discussing trading metal from Russia for machines from the PRC. Barter trade circumvents the use of payment systems that Western regulators monitor, allowing traders from the two countries to do business without fear of stopped payments or secondary sanctions. Unspecified Russian sources said that Russian President Vladimir Putin’s visit to Beijing in May helped to facilitate alternative payment means between the two countries to some extent, but major difficulties and political problems remain.[42]
The PRC and Russia’s attempts to implement barter trade show both the effectiveness and the limits of Western-led sanctions on Russia over Russia’s war in Ukraine. The PRC is Russia’s largest trading partner and faces criticism for its support of Russia’s defense industrial base. However, PRC banks have increased restrictions on trade with Russia since at least December 2023, after the European Union imposed its 12th sanctions package against Russia and the United States authorized secondary sanctions on financial institutions that help Russia evade sanctions. Three of the PRC’s “Big Four” state banks and many smaller PRC banks began rejecting payments from sanctioned Russian financial institutions since the start of 2024. Russian newspaper Izvestia reported on August 12 that 98% of PRC banks are now rejecting yuan payments from Russia.[43] Russian business newspaper Kommersant reported on July 29 that around 80 percent of payments in Chinese yuan are being returned to Russia.[44] Besides bartering, Russian companies are being forced to use "trading houses” as intermediaries or to make use of small local banks or PRC-based subsidiaries of Russian banks that are not significantly involved in trade with the United States. These workarounds enable some trade but increase the cost and difficulty of trade compared to normal transactions without sanctions.[45]
Iran
The PRC reiterated its support for Iran and called for Israel to end the war in Gaza following the assassination of Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh. Israel killed Hamas Political Bureau Chairman Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran on July 30. The PRC condemned the assassination and expressed concern that it would result in further regional upheaval.[46] PRC Minister of Foreign Affairs Wang Yi called acting Iranian Foreign Minister Ali Bagheri Kani on August 11 to reiterate the PRC’s support for Iran’s defense of its sovereignty.[47] Wang condemned the assassination, blaming those responsible for undermining ceasefire negotiations and increasing tensions. Bagheri Kani stated that he hoped the PRC would play a bigger role in de-escalating tensions in Gaza.
Wang’s comments are part of a broader PRC effort to more closely align itself with Iran. The PRC’s rhetoric has remained consistent since the start of the war, centering on calls for a ceasefire in Gaza and blaming Israel for the increase in regional tensions.[48] PRC responses to attacks on Israel have thus far been muted. Following Iran’s April 13 strike on Israeli territory, the PRC MFA did not condemn Iran’s strike, instead calling for Israel to bring an end to the conflict in Gaza and avoid further spillover of conflict.[49]
The PRC has used the Israel–Hamas war to build better relations with the Arab States, likely to cement the PRC as a key player in the Middle East and present itself as a potential economic and diplomatic partner for states seeking to distance themselves from the US due to its alliance with Israel. The PRC has been working to foster negotiations and peace deals since the outbreak of conflict, with the most recent instance being the July 23 signing of the Beijing Declaration between Hamas and Fatah.[50] The Arab League (AL) expressed support for the Beijing Declaration and the PRC’s peace efforts. The AL stated that the PRC’s support for Palestine was commendable and showed the strength of relations between the Arab States and the PRC.[51] Wang also had similar conversations with leaders in Egypt and Jordan, calling for joint efforts to pursue de-escalation and ceasefire in Gaza.[52]
China-Taiwan Weekly Update, August 9, 2024
Click here to read the full report
Authors: Matthew Sperzel and Daniel Shats of the Institute for the Study of War
Alexis Turek of the American Enterprise Institute
Editors: Dan Blumenthal and Frederick W. Kagan of the American Enterprise Institute
Data Cutoff: August 7, 2024 at 5pm ET
Key Takeaways
- The PRC Taiwan Affairs Office (TAO) and Ministry of Public Security (MPS) listed the names of ten Taiwanese political figures in new website sections devoted to punishing “Taiwan independence diehards.” The postings are part of a pressure campaign targeted at Taiwan’s new administration of Lai Ching-te and the ruling DPP.
- PRC state-sponsored hacker group APT41 likely stole passwords and documents from a Taiwanese government-affiliated research center in July 2023.
- The PRC released a Taiwanese former soldier it held for nearly five months — a week after Taiwan returned the bodies of two PRC fishermen who died in the February 14 capsizing incident in Kinmen’s waters. This small breakthrough in tense cross-strait relations is unlikely to change the PRC’s long-term coercion campaign against Taiwan.
- The People’s Liberation Army Eastern Theater Command released a video on the PLA’s 97th anniversary that depicts an assault on Taiwan.
- The United States imposed sanctions on five individuals and seven entities in Iran and the PRC for facilitating the procurement of components for Iran’s ballistic missile and UAV programs
- PRC Special Representative for Eurasian Affairs Li Hui traveled to Brazil, South Africa, and Indonesia to generate support for the PRC’s efforts to mediate the war and promote peace talks.
Cross-Strait Relations
Taiwan
The PRC Taiwan Affairs Office (TAO) and Ministry of Public Security (MPS) listed the names of ten Taiwanese political figures in new website sections devoted to punishing “Taiwan independence diehards.” The postings are part of a pressure campaign targeted at Taiwan’s new administration of Lai Ching-te and the ruling DPP. The TAO and MPS posted the names on their websites with other information, such as the text of the 2005 Anti-Secession law, legal guidelines about the punishment of Taiwanese “separatists,” relevant statements from PRC officials, and contact information for reporting separatist activities.[1] The names include the following Taiwanese political figures:
- Vice President Hsiao Bi-khim
- Minister of Defense Wellington Koo
- National Security Council Secretary-General Joseph Wu
- National Security Council Deputy Secretary-General Lin Fei-fan
- Senior Advisor to the President and Former Premier and DPP Chair Su Tseng-chang
- DPP Legislative Caucus Whip Ker Chien-ming
- Former Premier, Speaker of the Legislative Yuan (LY), and DPP Chair You Si-kun
- Legislator and former LY Deputy Speaker Tsai Chi-chang
- Legislator Wang Ting-yu
- Former Legislator and New Power Party (NPP) Chair Chen Jiau-hua
The TAO originally published a list of “Taiwan independence diehards” in 2021 and included Su, You, and Wu, who at the time were Taiwan’s Premier, Speaker of the LY, and Foreign Minister. It added the other seven names in 2022.[2] Nine of the ten people are prominent members of the DPP, including Su and You who are considered founding members of the party. Chen Jiau-hua was a legislator and chairwoman of the pan-Green (DPP-aligned) New Power Party, a minor party that no longer holds any legislative seats. All members of the list held government offices at the time they were included, except Lin Fei-fan who was a founding member of the 2014 Sunflower Movement and held no political office. Taiwan President Lai Ching-te and former president Tsai Ing-wen are not on the list even though the PRC has repeatedly called them separatists.
The TAO and MPS prominently published this list weeks after the PRC Supreme People’s Court and other institutions issued an authoritative legal opinion that threatened “diehard” advocates of Taiwanese independence with criminal penalties up to life imprisonment and death. The opinion is an authoritative legal interpretation of Article 103 of the PRC’s criminal code, which delineates the crime of “splitting the State and undermining the unity of the country” but does not specifically reference Taiwan.[3] The opinion clarifies how Article 103 should be applied to issues of Taiwanese “separatism” and defines the types of actions that would be subject to criminal prosecution under the criminal code.[4] The PRC could use the policy to arrest pan-Green political figures and activists who travel to the PRC. It can also try and convict suspects in absentia, issue international arrest warrants, and pressure other countries to extradite wanted Taiwanese “separatists” who travel to those countries.
The PRC may add other prominent DPP officials that it considers to be major “separatist” figures in the coming months. It has strongly criticized new president Lai Ching-te as a separatist and intensified its coercion against Taiwan since he took office on May 20, including issuing the “legal opinion,” launching a massive military exercise around Taiwan days after Lai’s inauguration, and rapidly escalating incursions into Taiwan’s Air Defense Identification Zone. TAO Spokesperson Zhu Fenglian clarified on June 28 that the new guidelines only target a “very small number of ‘Taiwan independence’ diehards” and do not target the “vast majority” of Taiwanese people, however.[5] Zhu likely intended to reassure Taiwanese nationals who wish to work, invest, and travel in the PRC that the “legal opinion” does not put them in danger. Zhu made the comment after Taiwan’s Mainland Affairs Council raised the severity of its travel warning for Taiwanese people traveling to the PRC in response to the new legal opinion.[6] Publishing the names of ten “diehard separatists” likely serves the same purpose of reassuring Taiwanese people that the PRC’s “anti-separatist” measures are targeted only at a very small number of specific people.
The PRC state-sponsored hacker group APT41 likely stole passwords and documents from a Taiwanese government-affiliated research center in July 2023. Cisco Systems’ Talos Threat Intelligence Group released a report on August 1 that found a malicious hacking campaign compromised an unspecified Taiwanese government-affiliated research institute on computing. Talos said that the nature of the institute’s work makes it a valuable target for threat actors wishing to obtain proprietary and sensitive technologies. The breach happened in July 2023 and lasted 11 days. Talos assessed with “moderate confidence” that the hackers were part of APT41, also known as Double Dragon, a PRC state-sponsored hacker group that US officials have linked to the PRC Ministry of State Security (MSS).[7] Talos researchers did not assess how much data the cyberattacks stole. APT41 is connected to PRC state-sponsored espionage and financially motivated hacking activities.[8] A spokesperson for the PRC embassy in Washington accused the United States of spreading disinformation and “groundless smears” against the PRC. The spokesperson claimed that the PRC “does not encourage, support or condone attacks launched by hackers.”[9]
The US government and other authorities have designated other cyber threat actors besides APT41, including Volt Typhoon, APT31, and APT40, as affiliated with the MSS.[10] US and foreign partner cybersecurity and intelligence agencies stated on February 7 that Volt Typhoon infiltrated critical infrastructure organizations in the continental United States and US territories. They assessed with high confidence that Volt Typhoon’s goal was to develop the capability to disrupt key operational technology functions in the event of a conflict with the United States.[11] The US Department of Justice accused APT31 of targeting Chinese dissidents in the United States at the behest of the MSS.[12]
The PRC released a Taiwanese former soldier it held for nearly five months a week after Taiwan returned the bodies of two PRC fishermen who died in the February 14 capsizing incident in Kinmen’s waters. This small breakthrough in tense cross-strait relations is unlikely to change the PRC’s long-term coercion campaign against Taiwan, however. The Chinese Coast Guard (CCG) rescued the soldier, surnamed Hu, and another man near Taiwan’s Kinmen islands on March 18 after their boat ran out of fuel and drifted into PRC waters. Kinmen is located just 3 kilometers from the PRC city of Xiamen. The CCG promptly released the second man but continued to detain Hu after discovering he was a non-commissioned officer of the Kinmen Defense Command. PRC officials claimed Hu tried to conceal his identity as a soldier.[13] The ROC Army discharged Hu at his family’s request while he was in custody.[14] The PRC allowed him to return home on August 7 following lengthy backchannel negotiations.[15]
Hu’s release was precipitated by successful ROC-PRC negotiations on July 30 on Kinmen that largely resolved a standoff related to the February 14 capsizing incident in Kinmen’s waters. The incident centered on a PRC speedboat that capsized following a collision with a Taiwan Coast Guard Administration (CGA) vessel, killing two PRC fishermen. The speedboat was fleeing a legal CGA pursuit within Taiwan’s prohibited waters around Kinmen. The PRC demanded during many rounds of negotiation that Taiwan return the boat and bodies of the PRC fishermen, pay compensation to the families, provide a full explanation of the incident, and apologize for wrongdoing. Negotiations broke down in early March but resumed and concluded on July 30, when Taiwan handed over the boat, bodies, and monetary compensation as part of an undisclosed agreement with the PRC.[16] Taiwan did not admit wrongdoing and has not concluded its investigation into the incident. Taiwanese legislator Jessica Chen Yu-jen, who represents Kinmen County, said the deadlock over the February 14 incident had hampered negotiations to secure Hu’s release. Chen was a key figure in Taiwan’s efforts to free Hu.[17] PRC state media Xinhua claimed Hu was allowed to return after PRC authorities completed their investigations. It did not reference any negotiations.[18]
The July 30 agreement and Hu’s release from PRC custody may open the path for further negotiations on specific issues, such as securing the release of a Taiwanese fishing crew that the PRC detained on July 2 for illegal fishing in PRC waters. PRC and ROC government officials had a rare face-to-face meeting during the negotiations on Kinmen, apparently a quiet exception to a PRC policy since 2016 of not meeting with ROC officials while the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) is in power.[19] The PRC considers the DPP a separatist party. The PRC did not announce the participation of any PRC officials in the talks, however. PRC state media described the head of the PRC delegation, Li Zhaohui, as a “senior consultant” with a local branch of the Red Cross Society of China. It did not mention his role as the deputy director of the Taiwan Affairs Office of the city of Quanzhou.[20]
This breakthrough in negotiations likely will not change the trajectory of PRC coercion toward Taiwan and Kinmen, however. The PRC responded to the February 14 capsizing incident by beginning regular CCG patrols around Kinmen, including several incursions each month into Kinmen’s restricted and prohibited waters to assert PRC authority there. The change in CCG activity around Kinmen represents a long-term PRC effort to assert sovereignty over the island and to erode Taiwan’s control of the surrounding waters.
The Kuomintang (KMT) denied a Taiwanese media report it did not send representatives to the July Inter-Parliamentary Alliance on China (IPAC) conference in Taipei because of CCP lobbying efforts and threats. IPAC is an international group of legislators that lawmakers from the United States, Canada, UK, Japan, and other allied democracies established in 2020. The organization aims to coordinate an international response to what it perceives as the threats to global trade, security, and human rights posed by the PRC’s rise.[21] The organization now has 250 members from 40 countries including Taiwan. Taiwan joined IPAC during the conference on July 30–31 with co-chairs from the ruling DPP and the smaller Taiwan People’s Party (TPP).[22] No representatives from the KMT attended the IPAC conference. The PRC opposes Taiwan’s participation in most international organizations and considers IPAC to be an “extreme anti-China” group.[23]
Taiwan’s Up Media reported on August 1 based on unspecified sources that the PRC pressured the KMT to skip the conference. It said the PRC’s Taiwan Affairs Office (TAO) and United Front Work Department jointly lobbied individual KMT legislators and even threatened to suspend KMT-CCP exchanges at all levels if the KMT attended the IPAC conference.[24] Secretary-general of the KMT legislative caucus Hung Mong-kai denied the report as a malicious smear.[25] KMT officials cited a preexisting policy of not sending an official delegation to IPAC meetings but said the party would not prevent members from going if they wished.[26]
A report by Taiwan’s National Audit Office (NAO) showed that foreign vessels including the PRC damaged submarine cables between Taiwan and its outlying islands 36 times from 2019 to 2023. 12 incidents occurred in 2023, the highest number ever in one year. In the most serious case, a PRC fishing boat and a PRC cargo ship damaged both of the submarine cables connecting Taiwan and the Matsu islands on February 2 and February 8, 2023. The damage caused an Internet outage that affected Matsu’s 13,000 residents for 50 days, seriously disrupting communications as well as government services, financial transactions, medical services, and transportation.[27] Taiwan’s government did not claim the cables were severed intentionally or at the direction of the PRC, though some local officials speculated that may be the case.[28] It is unclear which other countries’ vessels have damaged Taiwan’s submarine cables.
Submarine cables are a critical infrastructure that ensure Taiwan’s communications with its outlying islands. Taiwan has ten submarine cables, including two that connect Taiwan to the archipelagos of Kinmen and Matsu. Damage to these submarine cables, whether intentional or accidental, can impair Taiwan’s ability to effectively govern its outlying island territories by cutting off communications and government services. It could also seriously disrupt economic activity in the affected areas. Taiwan is exploring ways to safeguard its connectivity by protecting its cables, laying additional redundant cables, shortening repair times, and setting up satellite communications networks.[29]
China
The People’s Liberation Army (PLA) Eastern Theater Command (ETC) released a video on the PLA’s 97th anniversary that depicts an assault on Taiwan.[30] The video, set to rock and roll music, depicts a simulated sequence in which PLA ships and aircraft surround Taiwan as a barrage of missiles strike the island’s major cities. The words that accompanied the video included themes that allude to unification with Taiwan, including “prosperity and unity are linked by the blood of compatriots” and “steadfastly protect national unity and territorial integrity.”
The PLA’s use of imagery of violence against Taiwan is an example of cognitive warfare designed to threaten and intimidate the ROC to deter it from practicing policies that support Taiwanese sovereignty. The ETC released footage in May from large-scale military exercises that encircled Taiwan after President Lai Ching-te’s inauguration, which the PRC claimed was punishment for Lai’s “independence provocations.”[31] The ETC released similar content on the PLA’s anniversary in 2023 that included footage from earlier military exercises around Taiwan that the PLA conducted after then-US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi visited Taiwan in 2022.
The PRC is presenting itself as a responsible nuclear power to deflect criticism for its expanding nuclear arsenal. The PRC submitted a working paper to the United Nations that calls on states with nuclear weapons to follow the PRC in adopting a “no first use” policy.[32] The document highlighted the PRC’s commitment and consistent adherence to this policy and stated the PRC’s willingness to engage in discussions with states on the issue.
The PRC’s self-portrayal as a responsible nuclear state and framing of its no first use policy as an example for others to follow aims to counter criticism of unwillingness to meaningfully engage in nuclear arms control talks with the US while it forges ahead with building its nuclear weapons arsenal. The PRC submitted the document on July 12 before suspending arms control and non-proliferation talks with the United States on July 17, citing US arms sales to Taiwan.[33] PRC MFA spokesperson Lin Jian highlighted the PRC’s no first use policy in response to a joint statement from the US and Japan that expressed concern over the PRC’s lack of transparency and rapid expansion of its nuclear weapons arsenal.[34] Lin stated that the PRC maintains its nuclear arsenal at a minimum level for its own national security and does not engage in arms competition with other countries.[35]
US National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan commented on the PRC’s disinterest in “substantive dialogue” on arms control and nuclear non-proliferation prior to the two countries holding rare, semi-official talks in June.[36] Sullivan stated that the PRC had little willingness to “compartmentalize strategic stability from broader issues in the relationship.”[37] The United States and the PRC last held official arms control negotiations in Washington in November 2023 after a five-year hiatus.[38] The meeting occurred a week before President Joe Biden and CCP General Secretary Xi Jinping held a summit in San Francisco to stabilize bilateral relations. An unnamed US official familiar with the talks described the PRC’s level of engagement during that meeting as not substantive.[39] The US Under Secretary for Arms Control Bonnie Jenkins stated in Congressional testimony in May that the PRC declined a follow-on meeting and did not provide a substantive response to the risk reduction suggestions that the US side put forth during that meeting.[40] The PRC MFA rejected the notion that the PRC was dragging its feet and stated that the PRC is willing to uphold communication with the US on arms control on the condition that the US respects its “core interests.”[41]
The PRC imposed export controls on a range of unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) technologies that will take effect on September 1.[42] The restrictions apply to radio communication equipment to control drones, infrared imaging equipment for target indication, civilian anti-drone jamming equipment greater than 5 kilometers, high-powered anti-drone lasers, and more. The announcement added that exporters of drone technology shall not export any items that are not included in the list if they know that the technology will be used for the proliferation of weapons, terrorism, or military purposes. Some commercial drones are also subject to the export controls.[43] The PRC also canceled a temporary ban on the exports of consumer drones that it imposed last year.[44] The Ministry of Commerce (MOFCOM), the General Administration of Customs (GAC), and the Equipment Development Department of the Central Military Commission jointly issued the new controls.
MOFCOM stated in a press release that the controls reflect the PRC’s principle of coordinating economic development with national security, which is conducive to better safeguarding the PRC’s safety and interests.[45] This suggests that the PRC aims to tighten oversight over the sales of its domestically developed drone technology.
The PRC is simultaneously taking steps to promote sales of its military drones. A PRC aviation and aerospace exhibition scheduled for November in Guangdong province will feature a dedicated area for unmanned systems for the first time, including a demonstration area for UAVs and unmanned surface vessels, according to the state-owned tabloid Global Times.[46] The PRC’s spotlight on its drone technology signals its interest in promoting its domestic drone industry to foreign consumers, who will attend the expo.
Voice of America reported that the PRC lifted sanctions on US telecommunications company Viasat because the company’s services are irreplaceable for distant-water communications. The PRC imposed sanctions on Viasat in January 2024 in response to the United States announcing a $300 million sale of equipment to Taiwan to help maintain Taiwan’s tactical information systems.[47] The PRC lifted the sanctions on Viasat on July 22, claiming that “the circumstances based on which the countermeasures were issued have changed.”[48] This is the first time the PRC publicly announced the lifting of sanctions on a firm that has sold military equipment to Taiwan.[49] Voice of America cited Taiwanese and US experts who said that PRC vessels operating far from the PRC, including fishing boats and research vessels, rely on services from the Viasat subsidiary Inmarsat. The PRC has communications satellites that cover the entirety of PRC territory and offshore areas, but it cannot replace Inmarsat’s services in the short term for distant-water communications.[50] There is no evidence that the PRC sanctions on Viasat forced the company to change its behavior, such as canceling contracts with Taiwan.
The PRC criticized Canada on July 31 for “undermining peace and stability” in the Taiwan Strait after a Canadian warship transited the strait.[51] Canadian Defense Minister Bill Blair stated that Canada was increasing the presence of the Royal Canadian Navy in the Indo-Pacific region, in line with its Info-Pacific Strategy, which it released in 2022.[52] PRC Ministry of Defense spokesperson Zhang Xiaogang accused Canada of sending “wrong signals to ‘Taiwan independence’ separatist forces” and making excuses to justify its wrongful presence in the strait.[53] The People’s Liberation Army (PLA) Eastern Theater Command (ETC) spokesperson Li Xi stated that the ETC organized naval and air forces to monitor Canada’s HCMS Montreal during its transit.[54]
The PRC has used confrontational intimidation tactics to deter foreign military presence in waters it deems to be its neighborhood, which has resulted in several tense encounters with the Canadian military. The Canadian Ministry of Defense claimed that a PRC fighter jet launched flares in front of one of its military helicopters near the Paracel Islands in the South China Sea on October 29, forcing the helicopter to take evasive maneuvers.[55] The PLA Navy destroyer Luyang III came within 150 yards of the USS Chung-Hoon destroyer and Canadian HMCS Montreal frigate as they transited through the Taiwan Strait in June 2023.[56] The PRC’s aggression towards foreign militaries in the region has also instigated dangerous encounters with US and Australian military craft in recent months.[57]
The United States imposed sanctions on five individuals and seven entities in Iran and the PRC for facilitating the procurement of components for Iran’s ballistic missile and UAV programs.[58] The PRC-based entities included Hong Kong resident Thomas Ho Ming Tong and his four companies, which procure components for a subsidiary of Iran’s Ministry of Defense and Armed Forces Logistics (MODAFL) that produces Shahed-series UAVs for Russian use against Ukraine. The sanctions also include a Shenzhen-based supplier for a MODAFL front company in Beijing.
Hong Kong has emerged as a hub for PRC companies to circumvent sanctions on Iran, Russia, and North Korea. Hong Kong’s lenient regulatory environment facilitates relatively easy concealment of corporate ownership and the rapid creation and dissolution of shell companies. Iran relies on Hong Kong companies as transshipment intermediaries to obtain Western parts for its UAVs.[59]
Hong Kong Chief Executive John Lee stated in October 2022 that the territory would not implement unilateral sanctions on Russia after the US warned that Hong Kong’s status as a financial center could be affected if it acted as a haven for sanctions evasion.[60] Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba appealed to the Hong Kong government in July not to allow Russian companies to use Hong Kong companies to evade sanctions.[61] The US sanctioned approximately 20 PRC and Hong Kong entities on May 1 for supporting Russia’s military-industrial base.[62]
Southeast Asia
Vietnam
The PRC flew two UAVs near the Vietnamese coast after Vietnam and the Philippines announced joint coast guard exercises in Manila Bay. The South China Sea Chronicle Initiative (SCSCI), a Vietnamese research group, tracked a WZ-10 UAV that flew from the PRC’s Hainan island to roughly 100 km (62 miles) from Vietnam’s coastline to the city of Nha Trang before returning to Hainan on August 2.[63] The UAV’s tracker was on throughout the course of the journey. Aircraft tracking data showed that a second WZ-10 flight along a similar path occurred on August 7.[64] The SCSCI and other South China Sea researchers confirmed that this was the first time that the PRC had made such a voyage visible to the Vietnamese. Neither Vietnam’s nor the PRC’s foreign and defense ministries have released comments on the flights.
The flights occurred after Vietnam and the Philippines announced joint Coast Guard exercises, which are scheduled to begin on August 9 in Manila Bay.[65] Vietnam and the Philippines signed two agreements in January that expanded cooperation between their coast guards to prevent incidents in the South China Sea.[66] Vietnamese Coast Guard ships arrived in Manila on August 5 and are scheduled to remain there until August 10. The Philippine Coast Guard (PCG) reported that these exercises will focus on search and rescue and fire and explosion prevention operations.
The flights also took place after Vietnam filed a claim at the United Nations to extend its continental shelf in the South China Sea in July.[67] While the Philippines and Vietnam still hold competing territorial claims in the South China Sea, these types of joint efforts are likely to be interpreted by the PRC as a cooperative effort to challenge the PRC within what it sees as its sovereign territory.
Philippines
The Philippines and Germany committed to sign a defense agreement this year. On August 4 the Philippines and Germany committed to sign a defense cooperation agreement this year during a meeting between German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius and Philippine Defense Minister Gilberto Teodoro.[68] The two Ministers agreed to expand training, bilateral exchanges, bilateral armaments cooperation, and other joint projects. Both sides agreed to uphold the international rules-based order. Pistorius specifically reaffirmed the validity of the 2016 Permanent Court of Arbitration decision denying the legal basis of China’s claims in the South China Sea and stressed the importance of strengthening these maritime borders.[69]
This meeting marks the first visit of a German Defense Minister to the Philippines, marking 70 years of diplomatic relations between the two states and following several violent clashes between Philippine and Chinese coast guard vessels in Philippine territory in the South China Sea. Pistorius stated that Germany’s commitments were not directed at any particular country but rather to protect trading routes and ensure freedom of navigation. Teodoro stated that its agreements with Germany were not intended to provoke the PRC and blamed the PRC for increasing tensions. PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) spokesperson Mao Ning denied that the PRC was responsible for recent disputes, stating that PRC behavior was all in accordance with international law.[70] The MFA did not comment on Germany’s actions, but did accuse the Philippines of “stirring up trouble” in the South China Sea.
The United States, Australia, Canada, and the Philippines conducted joint maritime activity within the Philippines’ EEZ while the PRC held a joint combat patrol near Scarborough Shoal on August 7.[71] US Indo-Pacific Command stated that the joint activities focused on enhancing interoperability among the four armed forces. It also reiterated the US and allied commitment to upholding international law regarding freedom of navigation and the 2016 South China Sea Arbitral Tribunal Award that rejected PRC territorial claims in the South China Sea. The PRC’s People’s Liberation Army (PLA) simultaneously conducted combat patrols over the sea and airspace near the Scarborough Shoal.[72] The Scarborough Shoal is a disputed territory within the South China Sea, located about 120 nautical miles from the Philippine Island of Luzon.[73] Information released by the PRC Ministry of National Defense stated that the joint patrol was carried out by the PLA’s Southern Theater Command and focused on training early warning, rapid mobility, and joint strike capabilities.[74] The Philippine government released a statement in response, accusing the PLA of sending three of its ships to tail their joint exercises instead of conducting Shoal.[75]
Oceania
The PRC MFA criticized the United States and Australia for cooperating to upgrade the latter’s military facilities on the Cocos Islands in the Indian Ocean. PRC MFA spokesperson Mao Ning stated the PRC’s conviction that defense cooperation should be conducive to regional stability and not be targeted at or harm the interests of “third parties,” which references PRC interests.[76] Mao urged the “relevant countries,” meaning the United States and US allies, to do more to maintain peace in the Indo-Pacific.
The planned upgrades are funded under the US Pacific Deterrence Initiative, which directs investments to enhance US military infrastructure, presence, and readiness, as well as that of regional allies, to counter the PRC’s expanding military presence in the Indo-Pacific.[77] Former Australian Assistant Secretary for Force Development Ross Babbage stated that the upgrades would allow reconnaissance planes, early warning aircraft, and aerial refuelers to operate from the islands, which would extend the range and operability of US and Australian aircraft in the Indo-Pacific.[78]
Europe
Germany accused PRC state-sponsored cyber threat actors of infiltrating the Federal Agency for Cartography and Geodesy to conduct espionage in 2021.[79] Germany accused the PRC actors of exploiting individuals and companies to obfuscate its own presence in federal networks. The PRC embassy in Germany dismissed the accusation and accused the German government of misusing cybersecurity issues to defame the PRC, which undermines the international community’s efforts to jointly combat such challenges.[80] The embassy urged Germany to stop “political smearing” and highlighted the PRC’s responsible approach to preventing malign cyber activities.
The PRC has consistently denied accusations of state-sponsored hacking amid Western countries’ vocal condemnation and coordination to expose the PRC’s malign cyber activities. The United States, United Kingdom, and New Zealand accused PRC-state-sponsored cyber threat actors of conducting malicious cyber operations against democratic institutions in March.[81] Palau, one of Taiwan’s twelve remaining diplomatic allies, announced in March that the PRC was the culprit behind a major cyber incident in which threat actors stole over 20,000 government documents.[82] The PRC conducted the operation as Palau finalized a deal with the US to renew the latter’s military access to the archipelago in exchange for financial aid.
The extensive accusations against the PRC’s violation of other countries’ cyber sovereignty highlight that the PRC exploits cyber tools to advance national interests that it cannot achieve through legitimate and transparent statecraft.
Russia
PRC Special Representative for Eurasian Affairs Li Hui traveled to Brazil, South Africa, and Indonesia to generate support for the PRC’s efforts to mediate the war and promote peace talks. PRC MFA spokesperson Mao Ning announced the new round of shuttle diplomacy last week and stated that Li would confer with “important members of the Global South.” Li’s trip comes after a June 21 announcement from the Ukrainian Deputy Head of the Office of the President that a “Global South” country would likely host a second peace summit, which Ukraine aimed to hold before the end of the year.[83] The PRC did not participate in the first peace summit in Switzerland on June 15–16 because the summit excluded Russia.[84] Mao Ning stated that the summit did not meet the PRC’s three conditions for a peace conference, which include “recognition by both Russia and Ukraine, equal participation by all parties, and fair discussion of all peace plans.”[85] 90 countries and organizations attended the summit.
The PRC MFA readout of Li’s meeting with Brazilian diplomats stated that the PRC-Brazil joint statement on reaching a political solution to the crisis received a positive response from more than 110 countries.[86] The PRC and Brazil released a joint statement outlining a series of vague steps to deescalate the war in May. The joint statement does not meet Ukraine’s base condition of Russia’s withdrawal from occupied territory.[87] Readouts from Li’s meetings in all three countries stated that the host country appreciated the PRC’s role in mediating the crisis.[88] PRC readouts made similar claims from high-level meetings with other countries’ officials, including Hungary and Ukraine.[89]
The PRC’s efforts to ingratiate itself with leading Global South countries aim to curry early support for its peace efforts before the next peace summit, which European countries and other stakeholders will likely attend. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy stated on July 15 that Russian representatives should be present at the next peace summit.[90] The PRC’s previous peace plans, including its joint statement with Brazil and a 12-point plan from February 2023, failed to gain traction with Ukraine, the US, and most European countries.[91] An EU readout from a July 26 meeting between EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Josep Borrell and PRC Foreign Minister Wang Yi stated that Borrell asked the PRC to use its influence with Russia to contribute to ending the war, but that “the joint statement with Brazil of May 2024 does not go in that direction.”[92] This statement contradicted the PRC readout from the meeting, which claimed that Borrell stated that the EU “attaches importance to the PRC-Brazil peace initiative.”[93]
China-Taiwan Weekly Update, August 2, 2024
Click here to read the full report
Authors: Matthew Sperzel, Daniel Shats, and Alexandros Tsipouras of the Institute for the Study of War
Alexis Turek of the American Enterprise Institute
Editors: Dan Blumenthal and Frederick W. Kagan of the American Enterprise Institute
Data Cutoff: July 31, 2024
Key Takeaways
- The PRC attempted to prevent legislators from at least six countries from attending an international parliamentary forum that works to counter the CCP’s actions to subvert the international order and democratic principles.
- The PRC and ROC made progress in resolving the handling of the February 14 capsizing incident. The deal is unlikely to result in the PRC decreasing coercive actions against Kinmen.
- The PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs accused the United States and Japan of inciting a “new Cold War” and exaggerating the threat from the PRC following a US-Japan 2+2 dialogue on July 28.
- US Secretary of State Antony Blinken and PRC Foreign Minister Wang Yi met on the sidelines of the annual Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) Regional Forum on July 27. Wang called on ASEAN to resist US- and NATO-led “external interference” in the region.
- The CCG claimed to monitor a Philippine resupply mission to Second Thomas Shoal. The Philippines confirmed that the CCG was present but disputed that it inspected the Philippines ships.
Cross-Strait Relations
Taiwan
The PRC attempted to prevent legislators from at least six countries from attending an international parliamentary forum that works to counter the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) actions to subvert the international order and democratic principles. The Inter-Parliamentary Alliance on China (IPAC) was established in 2020 by a group of legislators from the Five Eyes, Germany, Japan, Norway, and Sweden to form a coordinated response between democracies to challenges that the PRC’s expanding global influence poses to the free, open, and rules-based international order.[1] IPAC holds an annual summit, which Taiwan hosted this year. IPAC members at this year’s summit in Taiwan launched the 2758 Initiative, which pledges to advocate for resolutions in members’ home parliaments that counter the PRC’s efforts to suppress Taiwan’s status and representation in the international community.[2] The 2758 Initiative also serves as a joint statement that addresses the PRC’s distortion of United Nations General Assembly Resolution 2758, which established the PRC as the sole representative of China in the UN in 1971, replacing Taiwan. The initiative highlights that the PRC misrepresents UNGA 2758 as an international legal decision against Taiwan’s participation in international organizations.
Eight member legislators from Bolivia, Bosnia, Colombia, North Macedonia, Slovakia, and an unspecified Asian country claimed that PRC diplomatic officials contacted them before they traveled to Taipei and in some cases attempted to prevent them from attending.[3] Some lawmakers received inquiries about their plans to attend while others received requests for meetings that would interfere with their travel plans. One PRC diplomat contacted the head of the Bosnian Naša Stranka party to prevent lawmaker Sanela Klarić from attending the IPAC summit.[4] These actions are part of the PRC’s efforts to diplomatically isolate Taiwan, degrade Taiwan’s legitimacy on the world stage, and facilitate unification with Taiwan without resistance from the international community.
PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesperson Lin Jian responded to the reports of interference by condemning IPAC for “maliciously hyping up issues and spring rumors about China.”[5] Lin urged the attending parliamentarians to “abandon their ideological prejudices” and expressed the PRC’s opposition to interference in its internal affairs by conducting official exchanges with Taiwan.
IPAC has been the target of PRC subversion in the past. The United States indicted six PRC nationals affiliated with a Ministry of State Security (MSS)-backed cyber threat actor Advanced Persistent Threat 31 (APT31) for malign hacking activities that included inundating IPAC members from European Parliament and the UK with emails that transmitted data back to the PRC when opened.[6] The PRC has also sanctioned some members of IPAC.[7]
2024 marks was first year that Taiwan was able to formally join the organization, as a legislature’s representation requires two co-chairs from “ideologically diverse political parties.” Taiwan joined with co-chairs from the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) and the smaller Taiwan People’s Party (TPP). No legislators from the Kuomintang (KMT), the main opposition party, have sought membership. IPAC welcomed members from six other new countries this year, bringing the total membership to 250 lawmakers from 40 parliaments.[8]
The PRC and ROC made progress in resolving the handling of the February 14 capsizing incident. The deal is unlikely to result in the PRC decreasing coercive actions against Kinmen. A PRC fishing boat capsized in Taiwanese waters near Kinmen while fleeing from a legal Taiwan Coast Guard pursuit, resulting in the death of two PRC fishermen. Kinmen is a group of Taiwan-controlled islands with a large military garrison roughly 3 kilometers from the coast of the PRC.[9] The PRC pledged after the incident to strengthen law enforcement activities around Kinmen and has since conducted repeated violations of Kinmen’s maritime boundaries to normalize the presence of Chinese Coast Guard (CCG) ships. The PRC’s violations have become more frequent over time and have expanded to include other maritime agency-affiliated vessels and even naval ships.[10]
The ROC agreed to return the bodies of the deceased and pay restitution to their families. The details of the accident will be handed over to a third party for investigation. CGA Deputy Director-General Hsieh Ching-chin stated that the details of the deal were not public out of respect for the victims’ families.[11]
Taiwan has a stake in negotiations, including several ROC nationals detained in the PRC. The Chairman of the MAC Chiu Chui-cheng stated that the SEF is lobbying the PRC for the immediate release of the Taiwanese fishing boat and its two Taiwanese crew members after the PRC detained them for fishing in PRC waters on July 2.[12] The PRC has also kept an ROC soldier from Kinmen in detainment since March after his boat ran out of fuel and drifted into PRC waters.
Representatives from the Mainland Affairs Council (MAC), Coast Guard Administration (CGA), and Straits Exchange Foundation (SEF) led Taiwan’s negotiating party. The Deputy Director of the Quanzhou Taiwan, Hong Kong, and Macau Affairs Office Li Zhaohui led the PRC side. PRC readouts referred to Li only as a member of the Red Cross Society, however, as the PRC halted official contact with the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) government in Taiwan in 2016. The PRC alleges that the DPP is a separatist party.
The resolution to the capsizing dispute is unlikely to result in a de-escalation of the PRC’s erosion of ROC sovereignty around Kinmen. The PRC’s activities around Kinmen foreshadow efforts to gradually wrest control of Taiwan’s sea and air space. The capsizing incident triggered the PRC’s aggression around Kinmen, but its coercive actions are part of a broader campaign to exert pressure on Taiwan after the election of President Lai Ching-te. Since Lai’s election, the PRC has conducted large-scale military exercises that encircled Taiwan, near all-time high Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) incursions, and announced legal guidelines that threaten severe punishment for Taiwanese “separatists.”
The PRC conducted at least 439 military incursions into Taiwan’s Air Defense Identification Zone in July 2024, surpassing all previous months except August 2022. PLA aircraft entered Taiwan’s ADIZ every day of July except the four days of July 24-27, when Typhoon Gaemi disrupted military operations.[13] 280 of the incursions (roughly 64 percent) occurred during the first two weeks of the month. The ADIZ incursion numbers, which are reported by Taiwan’s Ministry of National Defense, do not include activities around outlying islands such as Kinmen and Matsu.
July is the third consecutive month of significantly higher and rising numbers of ADIZ incursions and is part of a trend of increased ADIZ violations after Lai Ching-te took office as president of Taiwan on May 20.[14] The PRC considers Lai a dangerous separatist. The heightened number of incursions reflects an intensified PRC pressure campaign against Taiwan under the new administration. The high frequency of incursions drains Taiwan’s resources, exhausts military personnel, and degrades Taiwan’s threat awareness. Taiwan does not scramble aircraft in response to all PRC ADIZ incursions, but it does put military personnel on standby to respond quickly if needed.
August 2022 is the only month in which the PRC conducted more ADIZ incursions. Most of the 446 incursions at that time were part of massive military exercises in response to then-US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan.
China |
US federal prosecutors charged three people in two separate cases for operating as unregistered PRC agents to harass Chinese dissidents and fugitives in the United States. US federal prosecutors alleged on July 29 that Wang Shujun, a naturalized US citizen and academic who emigrated from the PRC in 1994, pretended to be a pro-democracy advocate against the PRC government while spying on Chinese dissidents in New York. Wang was arrested in March 2022 and pleaded not guilty to four charges that include acting as an unregistered foreign agent and lying to US authorities. The prosecutors said that Wang targeted Uyghur and Tibetan activists, Hong Kong democracy activists, and advocates of Taiwan independence from 2005 to 2022 at the direction of the Ministry of State Security (MSS). Wang’s defense lawyer said Wang communicated with the MSS agents to win their support for democratic movements, not to work for the MSS.[15] The US Department of Justice also accused PRC nationals and Los Angeles residents John Chen and Lin Feng of acting as unregistered agents of the PRC and bribing an Internal Revenue Service (IRS) agent in a plot to target practitioners of Falun Gong, a spiritual practice banned in the PRC. Chen and Feng pleaded guilty on July 25.[16]
The PRC has been using agents in New York and other cities around the world to spy on overseas Chinese and extend the reach of the PRC’s law enforcement. The US Department of Justice charged two Chinese nationals in April 2023 for setting up an illegal overseas police station in New York on behalf of the Fuzhou branch of the PRC’s Ministry of Public Security (MPS) in 2022.[17] A former NYPD officer was convicted in June 2023 for working as a PRC agent to intimidate a PRC fugitive in New York into returning home to face charges.[18] The 2022 report by the Spanish human rights group Safeguard Defenders found that local branches of the MPS had set up at least 102 overseas police stations in at least 53 countries to harass, threaten, intimidate, and force targets to return to the PRC to face charges.[19]
Northeast Asia
Japan
The PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs accused the United States and Japan of inciting a “new Cold War” and exaggerating the threat from the PRC following a US-Japan 2+2 dialogue on July 28. US Secretary of State Blinken, US Secretary of Defense Austin, Japanese Minister for Foreign Affairs Kamikawa, and Japanese Minister of Defense Kihara met in Tokyo for the US-Japan Security Consultative Committee (SCC) on July 28. Following the 2+2 meeting a joint statement was released reiterating their shared stances on Indo-Pacific security issues.[20] This statement made clear that the PRC’s recent actions in the East China Sea and South China Sea were contributing to regional instability, and decried PRC attempts to alter the status quo and “reshape the international order for its own benefit.
Subsequent US Department of Defense (DOD) press releases also built upon the April 10 official visit of Japanese Prime Minister Kishida to the United States and earlier statements on upgrading the US-Japan alliance.[21] These alliance upgrades include facilitating greater US and Japan force interoperability as part of the establishment of the Japanese Self Defense Forces Joint Operations Command (JJOC), increasing the production of key military technology, and expanding bilateral cooperative efforts to include other partners and allies in and beyond the Indo-Pacific region.
PRC MFA spokesperson Lin Jian responded to the US-Japan Joint Statement in a press conference on July 29.[22] Lin denounced the US-Japan joint statement, seeing it as an attack on PRC foreign policy and an exaggeration of regional tensions and the “threat” posed by the PRC. Lin reiterated that the PRC is a force for peace in the Indo-Pacific region, and instead blamed the US and Japan for inciting a “new Cold War” and undermining regional peace and stability.
North Korea
The United States Department of Treasury announced sanctions on July 24 targeting five Chinese companies and six Chinese nationals accused of supporting North Korean ballistic missile programs. The US Department of Treasury stated that these individuals and companies participate in a large overseas network of missile component suppliers to North Korea.[23] The US has identified Chinese national Shi Qianpei as organizing efforts to transfer restricted missile technology to North Korea.[24]
South Korean Defense Minister Shin Wok-sik stated the day after the United States announced its sanctions that North Korea is in the final stages of developing a tactical nuclear weapon. It is unclear whether the ballistic missile program procurement targeted by the sanctions is connected to North Korea's nuclear program. Short-range ballistic missiles can be used to deliver tactical nuclear warheads.[25] While tactical nuclear weapons have a lower yield, the South Korean Ministry of Defense stated that this tactical nuclear weapon has the range to strike US bases in Japan.[26]
Southeast Asia
US Secretary of State Antony Blinken and PRC Foreign Minister Wang Yi met on the sidelines of the annual Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) Regional Forum on July 27. Wang called on ASEAN to resist US- and NATO-led “external interference” in the region. A US readout said Blinken and Wang had “open and productive discussions on key bilateral, regional, and global issues” at the event in Laos. The readout said Blinken acknowledged recent steps by the PRC to advance counternarcotics cooperation and to enhance military-to-military communication. He raised concerns about the PRC’s “destabilizing actions” in the South China Sea, including at Second Thomas Shoal, the PRC support for Russia’s defense industrial base, and North Korea’s “provocative actions.”[27] An unspecified senior US State Department official said Blinken also expressed concern about the PRC’s “provocative actions” around Taiwan, including a simulated blockade of Taiwan during the Joint Sword-2024A exercise after Lai Ching-te’s presidential inauguration in May.[28] A PRC readout said Wang criticized the United States for intensifying its “containment and suppression of China” and called on the United States to “return to a rational and pragmatic policy toward China.” Wang claimed the United States persists in a “wrong perception of China” that “reflects China with its own hegemonic logic.” He claimed the PRC does not seek hegemony or power and is the “major country with the best record in the world on peace and security issues.” Wang also called on the United States to stop “fanning the flames” of the PRC-Philippines disputes and to stop “smearing” the PRC and “abusing unilateral sanctions” on the issue of the war in Ukraine.[29]
Wang Yi attended the ASEAN Regional Forum’s Foreign Ministers’ Meeting and a series of other regional forums on the same day and urged ASEAN states to reject “external interference.” Wang said the US-led Indo-Pacific Strategy “exacerbates the security dilemma and runs counter to the vision of long-term peace and prosperity in the region” and that “NATO's intervention in the Asia-Pacific region is bound to trigger confrontation and intensify tensions. All parties must be highly vigilant and resolutely oppose it.” He urged continued dialogue and consultation and stressed that “external interference cannot solve problems.”[30] Wang also stressed on several occasions that the “Taiwan issue” is a matter of China’s internal affairs and that external forces have no right to intervene. He highlighted the temporary agreement between the PRC and the Philippines to allow the delivery of “humanitarian supplies” to Philippine personnel on Second Thomas Shoal and called on the Philippines to stop “going back on its words” and “causing unnecessary trouble.”[31]
Philippines
The CCG claimed to monitor a Philippine resupply mission to Second Thomas Shoal. The Philippines confirmed that the CCG was present but disputed that it inspected the Philippines ships. The Philippine Coast Guard conducted its first resupply mission since the “provisional agreement” with the PRC on July 22. The Philippine Coast Guard (PCG) vessel MV Lapu-Lapu delivered supplies and new troops to the grounded warship BRP Sierra Madre on July 27 in the disputed Second Thomas Shoal while PRC forces observed nearby.[32] The PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs claimed the CCG conducted an “on-site” inspection of the Philippine vessel and allowed the vessel to complete its mission.[33] Philippine officials denied that they sought the PRC’s permission or that the PRC boarded any Philippine vessels in the supply mission.[34] The Philippine Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) stated that the PRC “mischaracterized” the South China Sea agreement and requested that the PRC stick to the agreed provisions.[35] Neither side has released the text of the agreement. Video evidence provided by the Philippines Coast Guard confirmed that PRC Coast Guard vessels were present nearby during the resupply mission but did not show PRC personnel boarding the Philippine vessels.[36]
The Sierra Madre is a derelict warship that acts as a Philippine military outpost on the Second Thomas Shoal, a submerged reef within the disputed Spratly Islands in the South China Sea. The PRC claims nearly all islands and maritime features within the South China Sea, including the Spratly Islands, as part of its “Nine Dash Line” territorial claims. The PRC has deployed coast guard, maritime militia, and naval vessels using a variety of “gray zone” tactics including physically surrounding, ramming, and firing water cannons at Philippine vessels to contest Philippine control over several PRC-claimed features including Second Thomas Shoal. It uses such tactics to gain control of the territories without provoking US intervention or outright war. The PRC claims to “allow” Philippine supply missions to Second Thomas Shoal to give the impression that it has legal jurisdiction over the shoal while pursuing de-escalation and humanitarian aims. The PRC opposes the delivery of any construction materials to reinforce the Sierra Madre, however, in hopes that the ship will eventually become incapable of supporting the Philippine presence.
The PRC MFA criticized the deployment of US intermediate-range missiles in the Philippines and a $500 million US military aid package to the Philippines. PRC Foreign Minister Wang Yi warned the Philippines during an ASEAN summit in Laos on July 27 that allowing the United States to deploy intermediate-range missiles to Philippine territory would “create tension and confrontation in the region and trigger an arms race,” against the interest of the Filipino people.[37] The United States deployed its intermediate-range Typhon missile system to Luzon in April for annual bilateral exercises. The Philippines announced that the missiles would return to the United States in September, however.[38] Philippine Foreign Minister Enrique Manalo denied the missile deployment would lead to an arms race and said the deployment was purely for defensive purposes.[39] MFA spokesperson Lin Jian claimed on July 30 that the Philippines allowing the deployment of the missiles is a “perverse act of cooperating with extra-regional forces to fuel regional tensions and confrontations, provoke geopolitical confrontation and arms races.” He urged the withdrawal of the missiles as soon as possible.[40]
Lin also criticized a $500 million military aid package that the United States announced during the 2+2 ministerial dialogues with the Philippines.[41] Lin said the United States is not a party to the South China Sea issue and has no right to intervene in the maritime issues between the PRC and the Philippines. He warned the Philippines that “wooing countries outside the region to provoke confrontation in the South China Sea” will only undermine regional stability, aggravate tensions, and make the Philippines into a “pawn.”[42]
Russia
The PRC is appealing to the “Global South” to legitimize its position as a mediator of Russia’s war in Ukraine. PRC MFA spokesperson Mao Ning announced a new round of “shuttle diplomacy” by Special Representative for Eurasian Affairs Li Hui on July 28, who will visit Brazil, South Africa, and Indonesia to confer with “important members of the Global South” on how to work toward establishing peace talks.[43] Mao claimed that the PRC and Brazil’s six-point “consensus” received widespread support from the international community, referring to a joint document that outlines vague steps toward peace, but fails to meet Ukraine’s base condition of Russia’s withdrawal from occupied territory.[44]
The PRC’s focus on ingratiating itself with non-European countries offers an alternative path to gaining recognition for its role as a conflict mediator despite failing to make headway with Ukraine-aligned countries. PRC Foreign Minister Wang Yi met with EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Josep Borrell at the ASEAN regional forum on July 26. The PRC readout of the meeting claimed that Borrell stated that the EU attaches importance to the PRC-Brazil peace initiative.[45] The EU readout of the meeting negated the PRC’s claim, stating that Borrell asked the PRC to use its influence on Russia to contribute to ending the war, but that “the joint statement with Brazil of May 2024 does not go in that direction.”[46] The PRC made a similar claim after Wang met with Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmitry Kuleba on July 24.[47]
The PRC did not attend a peace summit in Switzerland on June 15-16 due to Russia’s exclusion from the event.[48] Mao Ning stated that the summit does not meet the PRC’s three conditions for a peace conference, which include “recognition by both Russia and Ukraine, equal participation by all parties, and fair discussion of all peace plans.”[49] Mao stated that the PRC would continue to promote dialogue and lasting peace in “its own way.”
PRC banks have tightened restrictions on payments from Russia in response to Western sanctions. Russian business newspaper Kommersant reported on July 29 that around 80 percent of payments in Chinese yuan are being returned to Russia. PRC banks have increased restrictions on trade with Russia since at least December 2023, after the European Union imposed its 12th sanctions package against Russia and the United States authorized secondary sanctions on financial institutions that helped Russia evade sanctions. Three of the PRC’s “Big Four” state banks and many smaller PRC banks began rejecting payments from sanctioned Russian financial institutions since the start of 2024.[50]
The PRC’s tightening of restrictions on transactions with Russia shows the effectiveness of Western sanctions even as the PRC faces criticism for its support of Russia’s defense industrial base. PRC officials have repeatedly denounced unilateral sanctions as “illegal,” but PRC businesses and financial institutions are nonetheless deterred by the potential consequences of violating the sanctions on Russia. The restrictions by PRC banks in response to Western sanctions do entirely block transactions with Russia but can make them more difficult and expensive. Kommersant reported that Russian companies are being forced to use "trading houses” as intermediaries, which increases transactional costs by up to 10 percent. Cross-border trade can also make use of small local banks that are not involved in trade with the United States, or use PRC-based subsidiaries of Russian banks such as VTB Bank.[51]
China-Taiwan Weekly Update, July 25, 2024
Click here to read the full report
Authors: Matthew Sperzel, Daniel Shats, and Matthew Egger of the Institute for the Study of War; Alexis Turek of the American Enterprise Institute
Editors: Dan Blumenthal and Frederick W. Kagan of the American Enterprise Institute
Data Cutoff: July 24, 2024
Key Takeaways
- The CCG continued to expand its “law enforcement activities” to assert the PRC’s claim over the Taiwan Strait. The CCG intruded into Taiwan’s restricted waters around Kinmen and tried to expel Taiwanese fishing vessels near the middle of the Strait.
- Taiwan and the PRC agreed to resume negotiations about the February 14 capsizing incident that killed two PRC fishermen fleeing the Taiwanese Coast Guard near Kinmen.
- PRC officials and media slammed Taiwan’s Han Kuang military exercises as a futile attempt to “resist reunification.”
- The PRC held the Third Plenum of the 20th Party Congress, which focused on promoting economic development in alignment with national strategic goals.
- The PRC and Philippines reached a “provisional arrangement” for rotation and resupply missions to the Second Thomas Shoal, though significant points of disagreement remain.
- The PRC hosted a “reconciliation dialogue” for Palestinian factions in which Hamas and Fatah signed a joint declaration that stated their intention to form a temporary post-war unity government in Gaza and the West Bank.
Cross-Strait Relations
Taiwan
The CCG continued to expand its “law enforcement activities” to assert the PRC’s claim over the Taiwan Strait. Four CCG ships entered restricted waters in four different locations around Taiwan’s Kinmen island group on July 19. Kinmen is a Taiwanese island chain located just 10 kilometers (6 miles) from the PRC’s coast. Taiwan’s Coast Guard Administration (CGA) said this was the 32nd such incursion into Kinmen’s restricted waters in 2024.[1] On the same day, the CGA also discovered a CCG ship trying to expel Taiwanese fishing boats near the middle of the Taiwan Strait, around 48 miles west of Huayu Island of Taiwan’s Penghu archipelago.[2] The PRC claims Taiwan and all its associated waters to be Chinese territory and denies the existence of any restricted or prohibited waters around Taiwanese islands such as Kinmen. It claims the entire Taiwan Strait to be part of its Exclusive Economic Zone. TAO spokesperson Zhu Fenglian accused Taiwanese media that reported on CCG harassment of Taiwanese fishing boats of trying to “intimidate” Taiwanese fishermen and provoke cross-strait hostility by “distorting and smearing” normal law enforcement activities to enforce a summer fishing moratorium.[3]
The PRC began regular CCG patrols around Kinmen and incursions into Kinmen’s restricted and prohibited since February 2024 to assert its sovereignty over those waters and to punish Taiwan for electing President Lai Ching-te, whom the PRC considers a dangerous separatist. It substantially increased the frequency of incursions in May, around the time of Lai’s inauguration, and shifted from fixed-line patrols into Kinmen waters to designating “patrol areas” within which individual CCG ships can patrol in a less predictable pattern. Taiwanese media has also reported occasional instances of CCG ships harassing Taiwanese fishermen near the Penghu Islands, including one incident on July 5 that occurred 3.5 miles east of the Taiwan Strait median line.[4] The expansion of CCG “law enforcement” activities into Taiwan-controlled waters around Kinmen and eastward into international waters near Taiwan shows an intensifying PRC campaign to assert control over the waters near and around Taiwan.
Taiwan and the PRC agreed to resume negotiations about the February 14 capsizing incident that killed two PRC fishermen fleeing the Taiwanese Coast Guard (CGA) near Kinmen. The ROC Mainland Affairs Council (MAC) announced on July 23 that it will meet with PRC authorities at a hotel in Kinmen to further discuss a speedboat crash that killed two PRC fishers on February 14. Typhoon Gaemi's landfall in Taiwan and the PRC on July 23-24, however, halted ferry service between Xiamen and Kinmen, delaying negotiations as relatives of the deceased fishermen and other members of the PRC delegation were unable to travel to Kinmen on the day of negotiations. An MAC press release stated negotiations will continue once the PRC and ROC agree on a suitable date.[5] PRC Taiwan Affairs Office (TAO) spokesperson Zhu Fenglian said on July 24 that the PRC hoped to “resolve the relevant issues through proper negotiation” but did not provide further details about the talks.[6]
The focus of the negotiation surrounds an incident on February 14, 2024, when a PRC fishing boat in Taiwanese waters near Kinmen, a Taiwanese island around ten kilometers away from the PRC city of Xiamen, capsized while fleeing from a legal Taiwan Coast Guard pursuit. The incident resulted in the deaths of two of the fishing boat’s four crewmembers. The ROC took custody of the boat and the bodies. ROC and PRC representatives have held 15 rounds of negotiations to resolve disputes caused by the incident. Unresolved PRC demands from previous negotiations include the ROC revealing the truth behind the incident, returning the dead fishermen’s bodies and their boat to the PRC, and apologizing for the incident. According to Taiwan’s Coast Guard Administration (CGA), however, negotiations failed because the PRC demanded to interrogate CGA personnel and did not respect Taiwan’s maritime boundaries and law enforcement rights.[7] The Chinese Coast Guard (CCG) began patrolling the waters around Kinmen and making occasional incursions into Kinmen’s restricted or prohibited waters in the months after the incident, claiming it has the jurisdiction and responsibility to do so to protect the rights and safety of fishermen from both sides of the Taiwan Strait.
The PRC seeks to secure through negotiations the deceased fishermen’s bodies and boat, an apology from the ROC, and the release of detailed information about the February 14 incident and its causes.[8][9] The PRC blames Taiwan for the deaths and claimed in March that the negotiations would be postponed until after the conclusion of Taiwan’s judicial investigation into the incident concludes.[10]
The new round of negotiations may be an attempted quid pro quo by the ROC to free Taiwanese nationals detained by the PRC. Kinmen Kuomintang (KMT) Legislator Jessica Chen Yu-jen expressed hopes that the new round of negotiations could lead to an ROC fisherman surnamed Hu’s release from PRC detainment or PRC authorities allowing PRC tourists to visit Kinmen.[11] The CCG detained Hu in March after his boat ran out of fuel and drifted into PRC waters near Kinmen. Chen has negotiated with PRC officials to allow Hu’s family to visit him in Quanzhou, a PRC city near Kinmen, though there is no indication she will participate in the new round of negotiations.[12] The delayed negotiations were also scheduled to occur roughly three weeks after the CCG detained a Taiwanese fishing boat and its five-man crew in PRC territorial waters near Weitou, Fujian Province. The crew, three of which are ROC nationals, is still in detainment in Fujian despite ROC efforts to secure their release.[13]
PRC officials and media slammed Taiwan’s Han Kuang military exercises as a futile attempt to “resist reunification.” The ROC began its annual Han Kuang military exercises on July 22 and will hold them until July 26. The 2024 exercises are “unscripted” and will test Taiwan’s ability to protect critical infrastructure and conduct supply-delivery missions amid a PRC blockade.[14] The exercises also feature live-fire drills on Taiwan’s outlying islands of Kinmen, Matsu, and Penghu.[15] PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) spokesperson Mao Ning blamed tension in the Taiwan Strait on the DPP “provocation” and “seeking independence” with help from foreign forces. She stressed that any attempt to “seek independence by force” or “resist reunification by force” will inevitably fail.[16] An article in PRC state media Xinhua claimed that changes to make the exercises unscripted and decentralized, to make them better simulate the unpredictable conditions of real combat, were superficial changes that further “hijack” the lives and safety of Taiwanese people. MND spokesperson Senior Col. Wu Qian said on June 27 that the annual Han Kuang exercises were simply a “show” that cannot change the outcome of a war.[17] TAO spokesperson Zhu Fenglian accused the DPP on July 24 of exaggerating the threat from the PRC, squandering Taiwanese people’s money to buy weapons from the United States, tying Taiwan to the “‘Taiwan independence’ chariot” and using the Taiwanese people as “cannon fodder for Taiwan independence.”[18] State media Global Times cited PRC military expert Zhang Junshe who called the exercises a “show” and claimed the drills actually aim to ensure the survival of the DPP authorities, use the Taiwanese “general public” as shields, and await foreign reinforcements.[19]
Taiwan’s Constitutional Court issued an injunction on July 19 to temporarily suspend the implementation of most provisions of a controversial legislative reform law. The Kuomintang (KMT) and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), which hold a combined majority in the Legislative Yuan (LY), passed the set of reforms on May 28 despite opposition from the ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP). President Lai Ching-te of the DPP signed the bill into law on June 24 after the LY overrode his request for “reconsideration,” but the DPP filed for a “constitutional interpretation” of the law in hopes of preventing its implementation. The new law grants the LY enhanced oversight powers over the government. The law permits the LY to call on any public official to testify before an investigative committee, confirm political appointments, and impose fines or criminal charges for “contempt of legislature” against anyone who lies, refuses to answer questions, or talks back while testifying before the legislature. The law also requires the president of Taiwan to deliver a State of the Nation address and submit to a question-and-answer session by the LY.[20] The Constitutional Court ruled 13-2 to issue injunctions on the implementation of almost all these provisions while it completes a review of their constitutionality. There is no set date for the final decision. The Constitutional Court expressed concern that provisions in the new law could infringe upon the separation of powers between the LY and other branches of government, force people to express opinions or provide documents against their will, and grant the LY investigative powers that the Constitution does not stipulate.[21]
The court’s injunction order and the reasoning behind it suggest that it will find some or all of the suspended provisions unconstitutional in the final ruling. The KMT legislative caucus described the injunction ruling as “the death of judicial independence” and said it did not believe the justices who ruled to issue the injunction would be able to rule impartially on the law’s constitutionality.[22] TPP Chair Ko Wen-je called the injunction a “declaration of war” on the parliamentary system.[23] If the reforms pass constitutional review, they will increase the KMT and TPP opposition’s ability to check, investigate, and hinder the agenda and operation of President Lai’s DPP administration. The KMT and TPP together hold a majority of seats in the LY.
China
The PRC held the Third Plenum of the 20th Party Congress, which focused on promoting economic development in alignment with national strategic goals. The Third Plenum is one of seven meetings that the Central Committee of the CCP holds once every five years to chart a path for the PRC’s major economic and social policies. The unifying theme of the plenum was deepening comprehensive reform, ranging from fiscal policy, urban development, industrial policy, and more. The purpose of the reforms is to advance the PRC’s goal of achieving “socialist modernization” by 2035, which is a CCP-designated milestone that entails strengthening the PRC’s national power through the advancement of economic, military, and political influence.
The focus of the reforms reflects the PRC’s prioritization of calibrating the economy’s trajectory to support national security objectives. The PRC released a resolution on July 21 that summarized the plenum’s goals and planned reforms.[24] The resolution made frequent references to “high-quality development,” which is an emerging slogan that entails investment in innovation to drive growth, climbing the value chain in technology and manufacturing, and deepening market reforms for a more balanced economy. The PRC’s modernization drive is rooted in the construction of the so-called “integrated national strategy system,” which seeks to coordinate and harmonize economic development with national defense. This concept is a product of CCP General Secretary Xi Jinping’s pervasive “Overall National Security Outlook,” in which national security concerns permeate all facets of society.
The resolution stressed numerous priorities that reflect the PRC’s urgent drive to securitize economic growth to support national defense capabilities. The resolution highlighted scientific and technological frontiers as the “main battlefield” of the economy and called for concentrating state capital in important industries related to national security. These “strategic industries” include AI, aerospace, new energy and resources, advanced technology, and quantum computing. The resolution also called for hastening the progression of independent supply chains to enhance security in integrated circuits, industrial equipment, and other advanced technology. One of the measures to achieve supply chain security included transferring critical industries within the PRC and building a “national strategic hinterland.” The resolution also highlighted the need to improve access and production of “strategic minerals,” which are inputs in various technologies important to national and economic security.
These priorities are consistent with the PRC’s focus on insulating areas of strategic importance from what it sees as escalating efforts from hostile countries to suppress the PRC. The resolution acknowledged a “complex domestic and international situation,” and called for reforms to coordinate the two. In an explainer of the resolution released alongside it, Xi Jinping urged the PRC to adapt to the challenging global environment that is characterized by growing “external attempts to suppress and contain China.”[25] Xi claimed that deepening reform will help the PRC win the strategic initiative as challenges arise. The PRC began a drive to foster technology industries domestically in 2020 after the United States took measures to limit the PRC’s access to dual-use technologies that are critical for achieving the PRC’s ongoing militarization. Dual-use technologies are a cornerstone of the PRC’s military-civil fusion strategy, which aims to ensure that economic development supports military development.
The PRC removed sanctions from US satellite communications firm Viasat, which it had sanctioned for aiding Taiwan’s military. PRC MFA spokesperson Mao Ning announced on July 22 that the PRC has lifted its sanctions against the US communications company Viasat “since the circumstances based on which the countermeasures were issued have changed.” She did not comment on media reports that Viasat is seeking cooperation with PRC firms.[26] The PRC originally imposed sanctions on Viasat in January 2024 along with four other defense firms in response to the United States announcing a $300 million sale of equipment to Taiwan to help maintain Taiwan’s tactical information systems.[27] The sanctions froze the companies’ assets in the PRC and prohibited PRC organizations and individuals from doing business with them.[28] Taiwan’s Central News Agency (CNA) reported that this is the first time the PRC publicly announced the lifting of sanctions on a firm that sold military equipment to Taiwan.[29] Viasat’s PRC business has included a 2019 partnership with China Satellite Communications Co. to provide inflight wi-fi to PRC airlines and a sale of equipment to Sichuan Airlines in 2022. Viasat also acquired the British satellite communications company Inmarsat in 2023, which provided satellite services to China Central Television (CCTV).[30] It is unclear what “circumstances” changed to trigger the lifting of sanctions. Viasat has not commented on the removal of the sanctions as of July 24.
The PRC suspended arms control and non-proliferation talks with the United States, citing US arms sales to Taiwan. PRC MFA spokesperson Lin Jian cited repeated US arms sales to Taiwan as the reason for suspending negotiations.[31] The PRC has long been uninterested in the talks, however. National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan commented on the PRC’s disinterest in “substantive dialogue” on arms control and nuclear non-proliferation in June 2023. Sullivan stated that the PRC had little willingness to “compartmentalize strategic stability from broader issues in the relationship.”[32] Sullivan stated that the PRC has not shown interest in discussions regarding the changes it is making to its nuclear forces.[33]
The United States and the PRC held the last instance of arms control negotiations in Washington in November 2023 after a five-year hiatus.[34] The meeting occurred a week before President Joe Biden and CCP General Secretary Xi Jinping held a summit in San Francisco to stabilize bilateral relations. An unnamed US official familiar with the talks described the PRC’s level of engagement during that meeting as not substantive.[35] The US Under Secretary for Arms Control Bonnie Jenkins stated in Congressional testimony in May that the PRC declined a follow-on meeting and did not provide a substantive response to the risk reduction suggestions that the US side put forth during that meeting.[36] Lin rejected the notion that the PRC was dragging its feet and stated that the PRC is willing to uphold communication with the US on arms control on the condition that the US respects its “core interests.”[37]
The PRC frequently uses security dialogue as a bargaining chip to influence US behavior, rather than viewing it as a necessary aspect of bilateral relations. The PRC cut off high-level military talks with the United States after US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi visited Taiwan in August 2022. The PRC agreed to resume them at the presidential summit between US President Joe Biden and CCP General Secretary Xi Jinping in San Francisco in November 2023.
Southeast Asia
Philippines
The PRC and Philippines reached a “provisional arrangement” for rotation and resupply missions to the Second Thomas Shoal, though significant points of disagreement remain. The Philippines Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) released a statement on July 21, saying that this agreement was part of an effort to de-escalate the situation with China around the Second Thomas Shoal.[38] Tensions have been high since a territorial dispute occurred in June of this year when a Chinese Coast Guard (CCG) vessel collided with a Philippine supply ship during a routine transport mission to the grounded Sierra Madre.[39] Subsequent statements from both sides indicate that significant points of disagreement remain, however.
Neither the PRC nor the Philippines have released the details of the agreement, which has enabled the PRC to begin shaping the information environment to blame the Philippines for any failure to implement the agreement. PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) spokesperson Mao Ning remarked at a July 22 press conference that the Philippines and China had just completed a series of consultations on managing the situation at the Second Thomas Shoal, and had reached an agreement with the Philippines on humanitarian resupply activities based on three points guiding the PRC’s “principled position” on this issue.[40] First, China reiterates that the grounding of the Sierra Madre is a violation of PRC sovereign rights, and again calls for it to be removed from its current location. Second, China will allow humanitarian supply missions to the Sierra Madre if the Philippines informs China in advance and allows Chinese monitoring throughout the process. Third, China will not allow the Philippines to send construction materials to the Sierra Madre and/or attempt to build a permanent outpost in contested waters.
The DFA stated on July 22 that the MFA inaccurately characterized the agreement. The DFA contested that the Philippines must provide prior notification to the PRC and receive on-site confirmation before humanitarian supply missions can occur.[41] The DFA stated that the Philippines will continue to assert its rights within its exclusive economic zone (EEZ), including in the Second Thomas Shoal. However, the DFA made it clear that it is still ready to implement the agreement on rotation and resupply efforts.
Vietnam
Vietnam filed a claim at the United Nations to extend its continental shelf in the South China Sea. The claim aims to extend the continental shelf beyond the current 200 nautical miles, but not exceeding 350 nautical miles, from baselines in its territorial waters.[42] Vietnam also seeks through the submission to reaffirm its sovereignty over the disputed Paracel and Spratly archipelagos one month after the Philippines filed a similar claim. The DFA released a statement reaffirming the Philippines’ claims on its extended continental shelf but acknowledged that Vietnam has a right to submit claims establishing the limits of the continental shelf in accordance with UNCLOS.[43] The Philippines stated its desire to engage with Vietnam on possible ways to achieve a mutually beneficial solution to issues in the South China Sea.
The PRC MFA stated that it “firmly opposes” Vietnam’s filing.[44] MFA spokesperson Lin Jian stated that such actions by Vietnam and the Philippines infringe on China’s territorial sovereignty and maritime rights and interests and will only serve to intensify existing conflicts.[45]
Russia
PRC Foreign Minister Wang Yi met with Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmitry Kuleba from July 23-25. Wang stated that “both Ukraine and Russia have sent signals of willingness to negotiate to varying degrees,” but that the “timing is not yet ripe.”[46] The PRC readout stated that Ukraine appreciated the “positive and constructive role played by China in promoting peace and maintaining international order.” The Ukrainian readout of the meeting did not mirror the sentiments from the PRC readout, however. The Ukrainian readout stated only that Kuleba expressed conviction that peace in Ukraine corresponds to the PRC’s strategic interests and called the PRC’s role as a global force for peace important.[47]
The PRC’s readout aims to assert the narrative that Ukraine has confidence in the PRC to help negotiate an end to the war. The PRC released a vague 12-point peace plan in February 2023 that advocated for a political settlement to the war in Ukraine. Ukraine and Western allies regarded it as a non-starter due to its failure to demand Russia’s withdrawal from occupied territory. The PRC readout highlighted Ukraine’s regard for the PRC’s six-point “consensus” to reach a political solution that it jointly issued with Brazil on May 23, which lacks the same precondition for starting negotiations as the 12-point plan.[48] The PRC skipped a Ukraine peace summit in June in protest of Russia’s exclusion.[49]
The PRC’s efforts to showcase international support for its role as a mediator aim to rebuke NATO's accusations that the PRC is supporting Russia in the war against Ukraine. The PRC also seeks to promote its peace plan as an alternative outcome to the war than the resolution that NATO and Ukraine advocate for, which is Russia’s full withdrawal from Ukrainian territory.
PRC MFA spokesperson Lin Jian expressed support to Hungarian Foreign Minister Péter Szijjártó on July 17 for Prime Minister Viktor Orbán’s peace efforts, referring to the latter’s recent shuttle diplomacy between Ukraine and Russia.[50] The PRC highlighted alignment on the issue of Ukraine between the PRC and Hungary, an EU and NATO member, during a meeting between Xi Jinping and Orbán on July 8.[51] Lin used Orban’s appeal to European Council President Charles Michel to include the PRC in future EU peace negotiations by advocating for Russia’s involvement.
The PRC is taking parallel actions to undermine NATO on the world stage alongside its diplomatic efforts to influence the Ukraine crisis. The PRC conducted joint military exercises with Belarus near the Polish and Ukrainian border that simulated the seizure of an airport, which the two countries called “anti-terrorism operations.”[52] The exercises began on July 8, during the week of the NATO summit in Washington in which NATO heads of state labeled the PRC a “decisive enabler of Russia’s war against Ukraine.”[53] Lin Jian criticized NATO for reports that member states are considering nationalizing PRC-owned infrastructure and accused it of trying to expand its influence.[54] The PRC Ambassador to the UN Fu Cong also accused NATO of expansionism during a speech at a UN sustainability forum and stated that “history has amply proved that wherever NATO hands extend, turmoil and chaos will ensue.”[55]
Israel-Palestine
The PRC hosted a “reconciliation dialogue” for Palestinian factions in which Hamas and Fatah signed a joint declaration that stated their intention to form a temporary post-war unity government in Gaza and the West Bank.[56] Fatah is the dominant party in the Palestinian Authority (PA), which governs the West Bank. The eight-point declaration stipulates that a government involving Hamas would rule the Gaza Strip and West Bank until elections could be held at an unspecified future date.[57] The declaration reportedly does not address how or when the government will be formed, nor which party will maintain security in the Gaza Strip. Hamas has been adamant that it will keep its military wing.[58] The declaration stands in contrast to the position of the United States and other Western countries, which oppose Hamas’ involvement in the Palestinian government unless it recognizes Israel.[59] Israeli Foreign Minister Israel Katz accused Fatah leader Mahmoud Abbas of embracing terrorism by engaging with Hamas and denied that the government will form because Israel would crush Hamas.[60] The full text of the agreement has not been released at the time of writing.
PRC Foreign Minister Wang Yi lauded the declaration as a “historic moment for the cause of Palestinian liberation.[61] Wang stated that the PRC has never had any selfish interests in the Palestinian issue and has contributed “Chinese wisdom and solutions” through various proposals under Xi Jinping. Wang outlined a three-step process for resolving the current conflict, which entailed an immediate ceasefire, the international community’s acceptance of a post-war Palestinian government in Gaza, and Palestine’s full membership in the United Nations to begin working toward a two-state solution. PRC state media highlighted congratulations from the United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres and EU Special Representative for the Middle East Peace Process Sven Koopmans.[62]
The PRC’s early portrayal of the deal as a success is not easily reconcilable with the historic obstacles to the unification of the Palestinian factions. Past deals have failed to bring about substantive cooperation between Fatah and Hamas.[63] PRC MFA spokesperson Mao Ning responded to public skepticism over the declaration’s role in facilitating reconciliation and stated that “peace will not be achieved overnight.”[64]
The PRC is using engagement with Palestinian factions to portray itself as a successful global mediator that can resolve conflicts where the United States has failed. Hosting the intra-Palestinian talks is a relatively low-cost, low-risk way for the PRC to bolster its diplomatic reputation. A failure to bring about Fatah-Hamas reconciliation would amount to maintenance of the status quo and would not draw significant criticism of the PRC. Even without a material improvement in relations between Fatah and Hamas, the negotiations provide the PRC with an opportunity to tout its diplomatic credentials in a similar way to the Beijing-mediated Saudi Arabia-Iran rapprochement in March 2023.
The PRC’s diplomatic engagement could facilitate greater PRC economic and political influence in the Levant. The PRC first hosted intra-Palestinian reconciliation talks between Fatah and Hamas in Beijing on April 26.[65] MFA spokesperson Wang Wenbin stated on April 26 that the PRC supports strengthening the authority of the PA, which signals its intent to establish relations with the Palestinian factions that have roles in governing Gaza after the war. [66] Post-war reconstruction offers a path for the PRC to grow its economic influence. The PRC pledged $83 million to reconstruction efforts and humanitarian aid as of May.[67] Senior Hamas official Hassam Badran stated that a Palestinian unity government would oversee reconstruction efforts under the joint agreement that the PRC facilitated.[68]
China-Taiwan Weekly Update, July 19, 2024
Click here to read the full report
Authors: Matthew Sperzel, Daniel Shats, and Jackson Karas of the Institute for the Study of War;
Alexis Turek of the American Enterprise Institute
Editors: Dan Blumenthal and Frederick W. Kagan of the American Enterprise Institute
Data Cutoff: July 16, 2024
Key Takeaways
- Taiwan Affairs Office Spokesperson Chen Binhua accused the DPP of intentionally distorting information about the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) recent legal guidelines for punishing Taiwanese separatism and generating undeserved fear among the Taiwanese public.
- Taiwan’s Ministry of National Defense (MND) spokesperson Sun Li-fang warned about the PRC’s weaponization of AI and deepfakes to conduct cognitive warfare operations.
- PRC state media promoted “high-quality development,” self-reliance, and overcoming “obstacles” to economic reform ahead of the CCP Central Committee’s Third Plenum. The CCP is trying to shore up perceptions of a weak economy and lay the groundwork for upcoming economic reforms because its domestic legitimacy increasingly rests on its ability to deliver economic prosperity.
- A PRC-Philippine agreement signed after the Bilateral Consultation Mechanism on July 2 set up a direct presidential-level line of communication for bilateral crisis management. The hotline may provide a mechanism for escalation management but does not indicate a change in the PRC’s aggressive posture in the South China Sea.
- The PRC and Russia conducted joint naval exercises in the South China Sea concurrently with a joint naval patrol in the North Pacific.
Cross-Strait Relations
Taiwan
Taiwan Affairs Office (TAO) Spokesperson Chen Binhua accused the DPP of intentionally distorting information about the PRC’s recent legal guidelines for punishing Taiwanese separatism and generating undeserved fear among the Taiwanese public.[1] Chen stated that the recent regulations outlining severe punishment for “Taiwan independence forces” are not targeted at the vast majority of Taiwanese people but only against specific “die-hard elements.” Chen cited recent cross-strait exchanges as proof that the general public does not identify with the DPP’s alleged separatist policies.
The TAO announcement aims to assuage concerns with the legal guidelines that caused alarm in Taiwan over the prospect of arbitrary incarceration and prosecution for those who travel to the mainland. Chen’s specification regarding the focus of the legal guidelines aims to clarify the target of the PRC’s recent ire following intensifying coercion towards Taiwan after the inauguration of President Lai Ching-te, a DPP member whom the PRC regards as a separatist advancing Taiwanese sovereignty.
The guidelines follow a series of actions by the PRC to escalate pressure on Taiwan since the new administration, including large-scale military exercises around Taiwan in May, increasing encroachment on Taiwan’s Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) by military aircraft, and the erosion of Taiwanese jurisdiction in waters around its outer islands. The PRC’s messaging toward the DPP directly links the aggressive PRC behavior to the DPP. The PRC justified its most recent military exercises, which took place three days after Lai’s inauguration, as a “strong punishment for the separatist acts of ‘Taiwan independence’ forces.”[2]
There were at least 325 People’s Liberation Army (PLA) violations of Taiwan’s ADIZ in June and 289 in May, the second and third-highest monthly totals on record, respectively. The June total is the highest for any month without a large-scale PLA exercise. The heightened number of ADIZ violations reflects an intensified PRC pressure campaign against Taiwan under Lai’s administration. The high frequency of ADIZ violations drains Taiwan’s resources, exhausts military personnel, and degrades Taiwan’s threat awareness. Taiwan does not scramble aircraft in response to all PRC ADIZ violations, but it does put military personnel on standby to respond quickly if needed.
Four Chinese Coast Guard (CCG) ships entered Taiwan’s restricted waters around Kinmen on July 11.[3] The four ships approached the outer limits of Kinmen’s restricted waters in four different locations and simultaneously sailed across the boundary an hour later. This is the second instance that CCG ships have sailed simultaneously in multiple locations since a state media-affiliated social media account Yuyuan Tantian stated that the CCG was pursuing a “new model” of law enforcement patrols around Kinmen in June.[4] The social media account claimed that CCG patrols since June have moved away from fixed routes and to new formations consisting of single ships and pairs, which will increase the number of patrol areas. Yuyuan Tantian also stated that the CCG has increased the intensity of patrols and is conducting them around the clock. Violating Taiwan’s jurisdiction in multiple areas at once with individual CCG ships stretches Taiwanese Coast Guard resources and reduces its ability to respond to incursions, similar to ADIZ incursions.
Yuyuan Tantian stated that the original purpose of the CCG patrols was to defy Taiwan’s control over its restricted and prohibited waters. This contradicts the CCG’s stated purpose of their patrols in Kinmen’s waters, which is to “safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of Chinese fishermen, including Taiwan… and ensure normal navigation and operation in Kinmen-Xiamen waters.”[5] Taiwan does not formally claim any territorial waters around Kinmen partly due to its proximity to the PRC, but it designates “prohibited” and “restricted” waters around Kinmen, which it treats as equivalent to "territorial waters" and a "contiguous zone," respectively. The PRC does not officially recognize the existence of any restricted or prohibited waters around Taiwan’s outlying islands and claims the right to conduct law enforcement activities there, however.
The Taiwan Affairs Office of Shanghai is holding an annual summer program that provides Taiwanese college students with internships at prestigious companies in Shanghai’s central business district.[6] The program is one of countless sociocultural exchanges under the coordination of the PRC’s United Front agencies that aim to strengthen young Taiwanese people’s connection to the mainland and promote Chinese identity. The United Front is a whole-of-government and society effort to advance the CCP’s ideology and win the hearts and minds of the Chinese people by forming a thorough alliance between the CCP and the rest of society.
The program’s name, the “Stars Project,” mimics a well-respected Taiwanese program by the same name that helps promising high school students apply to universities in Taiwan.[7] The name is designed to leverage Taiwanese students’ association of the term with a prestigious program and encourage participation.
President of the Taiwan Professors Association Chen Li-fu stated that the PRC’s United Front activities directed at Taiwan’s youth aim to influence their national identity.[8] Chen warned that the focus of the PRC’s United Front work against Taiwan has shifted to young people after the Sunflower Movement in 2014. The Sunflower Movement was a primarily student-led wave of political activism in 2014 that rejected integration policies with the PRC and championed Taiwanese identity.
China-Taiwan Net, a news outlet that the TAO runs, features a constant stream of youth-focused cross-straits exchanges, demonstrating the emphasis of the PRC’s United Front work on reaching young Taiwanese people.[9] The PRC held the Cross-Strait Youth Summit in Beijing on July 3 and the Cross-Strait Youth Development Forum in Hangzhou and other cities on July 6.[10] The forums are annual events that the TAO and other United Front agencies host to promote cross-strait youth exchanges while pressuring attendees to adopt PRC-aligned political narratives, such as opposition to Taiwan's independence and acceptance of a shared national identity.
Taiwan’s Ministry of National Defense (MND) spokesperson Sun Li-fang warned about the PRC’s weaponization of AI and deepfakes to conduct cognitive warfare operations. Sun stated that the PRC’s cognitive warfare strategy is not limited to disseminating disinformation, but is closely integrated with the military operations of the PLA. The MND invited Academia Sinica Director of the Institute of Information and Communications Technology Huang Chin-i to advise on the PLA’s use of AI and disinformation to degrade the situational awareness and morale of its targets. Sun cited past examples of PRC disinformation targeted at Taiwan’s annual Han Kuang military exercise, including that the purpose of the exercises was for the commander-in-chief to plan an escape route, officers and soldiers defected due to the pressure of the exercises, and the equipment malfunctions casualties.[11]
Huang also detailed the PLA’s goal to use AI-enabled disinformation to create political polarization among the public and incite divisions. The PRC’s political warfare against Taiwan features constant information operations that aim to degrade support for the DPP and suppress Taiwanese sovereignty and identity. Governments and threat intelligence organizations have called repeated attention to sprawling PRC disinformation operations in coordinated campaigns such as Spamouflage.[12] A report from DoubleThink Labs, a Taiwanese firm that researches PRC influence operations, released a report in January that detailed the wide range of narratives that PRC threat actors propagate to negatively influence Taiwanese people’s perception of the DPP. The narratives opportunistically seize on topical controversies in Taiwanese politics to amplify criticism of the DPP government, including egg and pork import scandals, fraud cases related to Taiwan’s domestic submarine production, compulsory military service extensions, Indian migrant worker inflows, and false rumors about President Lai Ching-te’s supposed illegitimate child.[13]
China
PRC state media promoted “high-quality development,” self-reliance, and overcoming “obstacles” to economic reform ahead of the CCP Central Committee’s Third Plenum. The CCP’s 20th Central Committee held its Third Plenary Session from July 15-18. The Third Plenum for each CCP Central Committee, convened roughly every five years, sets the top economic policy agenda for the CCP’s next economic Five-Year Plan.[14] PRC state media including Xinhua and the CCP Central Party School journal Study Times called for the country to open itself to deeper economic reforms and to overcome “ideological rigidity” as well as “institutional and mechanistic” obstacles to reform.[15] A Study Times article on July 15, the first day of the Third Plenum, called for the party to push back on “misinterpretations” including the idea that reforms have stagnated.[16] An issue of the CCP theoretical magazine Qiushi released on the same day featured a series of excerpts from speeches by Xi Jinping that championed self-reliance and self-confidence.[17]
CCP leaders at the Third Plenum are likely trying to address of major economic challenges the PRC is facing, including a spiraling housing market, high local government debt, low consumer demand, weakening investor confidence, and slowing economic growth.[18] The PRC’s National Bureau of Statistics released new economic numbers on July 15 that showed that the economy grew 5.3% in the first quarter and 4.7% in the second quarter, underperforming expectations. A spokesperson for the bureau framed the economy’s performance as “relatively good” and stable. The spokesperson blamed the second-quarter slowdown in growth on recent floods as well as insufficient domestic demand and “lack of smoothness in domestic circulation.”[19] A spokesperson for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) called the semi-annual economic report “remarkable” and said it showed that the PRC withstood the pressures of global instability and continued its “steady and positive” trend of “high-quality development” and “high-level opening-up.”[20]
The CCP is trying to shore up perceptions of a weak economy and lay the groundwork for upcoming economic reforms because its legitimacy as the PRC’s one-party government increasingly rests on its ability to deliver economic prosperity. The Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) released a report on July 9 based on surveys of PRC citizens that showed that the PRC populace increasingly blames unequal opportunity and an unfair economic system for poverty, while citing “connections” and generational wealth as the top two reasons for a person to be rich. The results show a dramatic change since 2014, when surveyed people cited talent and hard work as the top two reasons for wealth, while lack of ability and effort were the top two reasons given for poverty.[21]
The PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) announced new sanctions on six US defense firms over arms sales to Taiwan. The MFA announced on July 12 that it was imposing “countermeasures” on six US defense firms and five senior executives for arms sales to Taiwan. The sanctions freeze the PRC-based assets of Anduril Industries, Maritime Tactical Systems, Pacific Rim Defense, AEVEX Aerospace, LKD Aerospace, and Summit Technologies Inc. They also bar three Anduril executives and two executives of the drone manufacturer AeroVironment from entering the PRC and freeze any PRC-based assets they hold The MFA announcement said that US arms sales to Taiwan “seriously violated the one-China principle,” interfered in China’s domestic affairs, and damaged China’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.[22] The PRC has imposed sanctions on at least nine other US firms and their executives for the same reason in 2024, including Boeing, Lockheed Martin, General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, and General Dynamics Land Systems.[23] A 2023 report by the German think tank Mercator Institute for China Studies (MERICS) found that the PRC has significantly increased its use of unilateral sanctions since 2018 against US individuals, groups, or companies it perceives to be interfering in its internal affairs.[24] The PRC has repeatedly expressed opposition to unilateral sanctions in general, however, including US sanctions against it and other countries such as Russia and Iran.[25]
Southeast Asia
Philippines
A PRC-Philippine agreement signed after the Bilateral Consultation Mechanism (BCM) on July 2 set up a direct presidential-level line of communication for bilateral crisis management. Philippine Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) Undersecretary Maria Theresa Lazaro and PRC Vice Foreign Minister Chen Xiaodong met in Manila on July 2 for talks about the PRC-Philippine disputes in the South China Sea as part of the ninth round of BCM talks. The two countries signed the Arrangement on Improving Philippines-China Maritime Communication Mechanisms.[26] The Associated Press reported on July 16 that the agreement included the opening of a direct line of communication between the presidential offices of both countries to better manage disputes in the South China Sea.[27] The PRC and the Philippines have had a series of tense confrontations over the past several months over control of disputed islands and maritime features in the South China Sea. The Chinese Coast Guard (CCG) has used increasingly aggressive tactics including ramming and water cannons to prevent Philippine government ships from reaching Scarborough Shoal and Second Thomas Shoal. The PRC has controlled Scarborough Shoal since 2012 but has not built any facilities there. The Philippines controls the Second Thomas Shoal using a beached derelict warship as an outpost. Both sides have avoided directly attacking each other’s personnel with weapons to prevent the dispute from escalating into a violent conflict, which could trigger the US-Philippine mutual defense treaty.
The establishment of a presidential-level hotline with the Philippines may provide a mechanism for escalation management but does not indicate a change in the PRC’s aggressive posture in the South China Sea. The PRC has continued its rhetoric regarding the Philippines’ “provocations” around PRC-claimed territories in the South China Sea since the July 2 agreement. It anchored its largest CCG vessel, CCG-5901, less than 800 yards from the Philippine Coast Guard ship at the Philippine-controlled Sabina Shoal on July 3, released a report on July 8 blaming the Philippine warship on Second Thomas Shoal for environmental damage, and deployed CCG vessels to assert PRC claims to Second Thomas Shoal while “allowing” the Philippines to perform a medical evacuation on July 9.[28] Additionally, it is unclear how or whether the PRC will use the new hotline to defuse crises. The Philippines said that it was unable to reach PRC officials through a preexisting “maritime communication mechanism” during a confrontation at Second Thomas Shoal in August 2023.[29] An unspecified “highly placed” Philippine source told the South China Morning Post that the pre-existing hotline has never been used during Philippine resupply missions, a common flashpoint for conflict with the PRC, but has been used to coordinate with the PRC for search-and-rescue missions.[30]
North America
Canada
The PRC denied Canada’s accusations that the PRC set up clandestine overseas police stations in Toronto to harass Chinese expatriates. A July 13 Bloomberg article cited two anonymous sources within Canada’s government who stated that Canada has mapped out the locations of clandestine PRC police stations in its territory including in three majority-Chinese areas of Toronto.[31] The anonymous sources stated that Canada intends to coordinate its response to covert overseas PRC police stations with other members of the G7. Among the G7, the United States, Germany, Italy, and the UK have each expressed concern about overseas PRC police presence in their territory in the previous two years.[32] The United States and Canada released a joint communique on July 12 that highlighted common concerns of foreign interference including “transnational repression-related cases” such as the 2022 indictment of 5 US persons accused of working for the PRC government to silence expatriate criticism of the PRC.[33]
Spain-based human rights organization Safeguard Defenders claimed in a 2022 report that the PRC operates 54 overseas police stations on 5 continents.[34] The report further stated that these covert police stations formed a part of a PRC campaign to establish extraterritorial control over Chinese expatriates while circumventing formal legal structures that would provide protection to the expatriates. Safeguard Defenders additionally noted that the PRC instead uses these covert police stations to threaten and harass expatriates to pressure them to return to the PRC. The location of the alleged PRC police bases in Chinese-majority areas of Toronto indicates that the PRC police presence in Canada is likely a component of the PRC’s wider effort to monitor and influence its expatriate community both extraterritorially and extralegally.
PRC MFA spokesperson Lin Jian denied the existence of overseas PRC police stations and urged Canada to stop “smearing” the PRC in his daily remarks on July 15.[35] The PRC Embassy in Ottawa likewise claimed that the PRC offices in Toronto are staffed by volunteers and aid Chinese people with documentation and stated that the PRC respects the “judicial sovereignty” of all nations.[36] These statements mirror recent PRC criticisms of the United States and its allies of overselling the “China threat theory” as an excuse to heighten cooperation targeted at the PRC’s influence abroad. The PRC also has painted itself as the victim of a growing “anti-China” coalition in the West.[37] The PRC response reflects growing concern over what the PRC views as increasing Western cooperation to "contain” the PRC, particularly if a joint-G7 effort to combat clandestine PRC police action abroad materializes.
Russia
The PRC and Russia conducted joint naval exercises in the South China Sea concurrently with a joint naval patrol in the North Pacific. The “Joint-Sea 2024” exercises began on July 14 at a port in Zhanjiang, Guangdong, the headquarters of the PLAN South Sea Fleet.[38] The joint exercises included air defense drills, anti-submarine drills, live-fire drills, and rescue training.[39] The Russian Navy corvettes Gromkiy and Rezkiy, Russian fleet oiler Irkut, PLAN destroyer Nanning, PLAN frigates Xianning and Dali, and PLAN supply ship Weishanhu, participated in the exercises.[40]
Joint patrols began in the East China Sea, near South Korea’s Jeju Islands, and transited through Japan’s Osumi Strait before sailing to the South China Sea. The joint China-Russia Naval Patrol entered the South China Sea through the Balintang Channel located near the Luzon Strait.[41] The Chinese Ministry of Defense (MOD) reported that the joint patrol was carried out by the PLAN destroyer Yinchuan, PLAN frigate Hengshui, Russian frigate Sovershennyi, and PLAN supply ship Weishanhu.[42] The participating vessels also participated in “search and arrest” and supply replenishment exercises.[43]
The PRC MOD denied that these exercises were in response to the recent NATO summit and stated that they were not intended to target any third party.[44] Instead, the PRC characterized them as a normal instance of cooperation between two militaries.
Annual “Joint-Sea” exercises have been an element of China-Russia military cooperation since 2012 and have focused on enhancing joint maritime operations and responding to security threats facing the two countries.[45] To date, 10 of the 13 ”Joint-Sea” exercises have transited through the Indo-Pacific, most commonly the Sea of Japan and East China Seas, strategically important locations for China and Russia.[46] “Joint-Sea 2016” was the only exercise before “Joint-Sea 2024” to occur in the South China Sea, taking place a few months after the Permanent Court of Arbitration ruled that China’s expansive claims in the South China Sea were invalid.[47] “Joint-Sea 2024” occurred after the end of the United States, Japan, and South Korean trilateral “Freedom Edge” exercise in the East China Sea near Jeju Island and amid escalating tensions between the PRC and the Philippines.
A Meeting between PRC National People’s Congress Standing Committee Chairman Zhao Leji and Russian President Vladimir Putin emphasized Sino-Russian strategic consensus. On July 13 Chairman of the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress (NPC) Zhao Leji met with Russian President Vladimir Putin in St. Petersburg.[48] The two discussed the strategic partnership between China and Russia, and the benefits that it has brought to both countries. Putin and Xi Jinping met earlier this month at the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) meeting in Astana and reportedly reached several consensuses, which Putin reiterated in his meeting with Zhao.[49] Given Zhao’s leadership position within the NPC, his affirmation of these points of consensus suggests continued Sino-Russian bilateral cooperation at the legislative level.
China-Taiwan Weekly Update, July 12, 2024
Click here to read the full report
Authors: Matthew Sperzel and Daniel Shats of the Institute for the Study of War; Alexis Turek of the American Enterprise Institute
Key Takeaways
- The PLA significantly increased its daily incursions into Taiwan’s Air Defense Identification Zone in July to expand the PRC’s coercive pressure on the ROC as “punishment” for the election of ROC President Lai Ching-te.
- The PRC is using cross-strait events such as the Cross-Strait Youth Summit to legitimize the Kuomintang as a negotiating partner on behalf of Taiwan and promote its pro-unification message.
- The PRC framed collaboration between NATO and Indo-Pacific states as a threat to regional security.
- CCP General Secretary Xi Jinping welcomed Belarus to the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) and advocated for Turkey to join the organization. Xi seeks to use the SCO to legitimize PRC-led institutions and undermine Western-led security frameworks.
- The PRC’s cyber defense agency issued disinformation about the US Intelligence Community and denied that the Volt Typhoon cyber threat actor is a PRC state-sponsored group.
- The CCG anchored its largest ship in the Philippines’ Exclusive Economic Zone as an intimidation tactic following reports of Philippine Coast Guard base construction in Sabina Shoal.
Cross-Strait Relations
Taiwan
The PLA significantly increased its daily incursions into Taiwan’s Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) in July to expand the PRC’s coercive pressure on the ROC as “punishment” for the election of ROC President Lai Ching-te. Taiwan’s Ministry of National Defense (MND) reported 232 ADIZ violations by PLA aircraft in the first ten days of July, more than the totals for most months on record. This included 56 violations on July 10, which is tied with October 4, 2021, as the highest daily total on record.[1] 36 of the aircraft involved in the July 10 incursions flew through the southern and southeastern part of the ADIZ on their way to the Western Pacific for air-sea joint training exercises with the Shandong aircraft carrier and other PLA Navy vessels.[2]
The high number of ADIZ violations in July is part of a trend of increased ADIZ violations after Lai Ching-te took office as president of Taiwan on May 20. There were at least 325 PLA violations of Taiwan’s ADIZ in June and 289 in May, the second and third-highest monthly totals on record, respectively. The June total is the highest for any month without a large-scale PLA exercise. The record for most ADIZ violations in one month was 446 in August 2022, when the PRC responded to then-US Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan with record-scale military exercises around Taiwan.[3] The number of ADIZ violations that Taiwan’s MND reports does not include PRC vessels and aircraft around Taiwan’s outlying islands such as the Kinmen and Matsu archipelagos.
The heightened number of violations reflects an intensified PRC pressure campaign against Taiwan under the new administration of Lai Ching-te, whom the PRC considers a dangerous separatist. The high frequency of ADIZ violations drains Taiwan’s resources, exhausts military personnel, and degrades Taiwan’s threat awareness. Taiwan does not scramble aircraft in response to all PRC ADIZ violations, but it does put military personnel on standby to respond quickly if needed.
A PLA drone flew near an airport on Taiwan’s Matsu Islands and disrupted two flights. The ROC Army Matsu Defense Command detected a PRC military drone hovering 5 nautical miles from Matsu’s Nangan Airport on July 2. The command notified the airport control tower, which alerted nearby aircraft and had two flights to delay their landing at the airport. The drone remained in the area for 20 minutes before leaving.[4] It did not enter the airspace above Matsu’s restricted or prohibited waters.[5] This is the first reported instance of a PLA drone approaching Taiwan’s outlying islands outside of a military exercise.
A Chinese Coast Guard (CCG) ship tried to expel Taiwanese fishing boats fishing near the Penghu Islands and east of the median line of the Taiwan Strait. A Taiwanese Coast Guard Administration (CGA) ship patrolling the median line of the Taiwan Strait on July 5 discovered a CCG ship 3.5 miles east of the median line trying to expel Taiwanese fishing boats there. The CCG ship was 30 miles northwest of Mudou Island, part of Taiwan’s Penghu archipelago, and within Taiwan’s claimed Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). It was not in the PRC’s territorial waters or contiguous zone. Taiwan’s CGA ship cut between the CCG and fishing boats and broadcast for the CCG to leave and stop interfering with Taiwanese boats.[6] The PRC claims Taiwan as its territory and considers the entire Taiwan Strait to be part of the PRC’s EEZ.
The PRC is increasing the frequency, scope, and aggressiveness of its “law enforcement” patrols around Taiwan as part of a pressure campaign against ROC President Lai and his Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) administration.[7] The CCG began conducting patrols around Taiwan’s outlying Kinmen archipelago, including into Kinmen’s restricted and prohibited waters, after two PRC fishermen died while fleeing a CGA pursuit in Kinmen waters in February 2024. It boarded and detained a Taiwanese fishing boat for illegally fishing in PRC waters near Kinmen on July 2, the first such detainment in 17 years, and continues to hold the crew as of July 9.[8] The PRC has detained since March an ROC soldier of the Kinmen Defense Command whose fishing boat drifted into PRC waters.[9] CCG operations in Taiwan-controlled waters and EEZ serve to enhance the PRC’s claims and erode Taiwan’s control over those waters and territories.
The ROC CGA expelled a PRC research vessel that entered “restricted or prohibited waters” off Taiwan’s east coast. The PRC scientific research vessel Tan Kah Kee, also known as the Jia Geng, sailed in waters near Taiwan’s Yilan County on July 7. At one point the vessel came within 20 nautical miles of Taiwan’s coast, which is within Taiwan’s contiguous zone. A CGA vessel expelled it from the area. Tan Kah Kee is a 3,600-ton research vessel owned by the PRC’s Xiamen University’s Marine Operations. It is equipped with acoustic sensors, weather radars, and submarine drones it can launch to map the ocean floor.[10] Taiwan’s National Security Bureau Director Tsai Ming-yen said the vessel did not cast any underwater equipment and was mainly there to collect hydrological data.[11] A Financial Times report from February 2024 noted that some such research vessels have ties to the PLA, however, and that the data they collect including meteorological data have military applications.[12] Taiwan will conduct its annual Han Kuang military exercises in July, including sensitive weapons tests and drills in Yilan County.[13]
The February 2024 Financial Times report found that PRC research vessels sailed into or along Taiwan’s eastern contiguous zone nine times between September 2023 and February 2024, an increase from previous years.[14] The incursion by the Tan Kah Kee into Taiwan’s contiguous waters is the first such incursion that ISW has noted since February. In addition to collecting data, the PRC may use ostensibly non-military and scientific vessels around Taiwan in tandem with near-daily air and naval violations of Taiwan’s Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) and increasing CCG patrols near Taiwan’s outlying islands to wear down Taiwan’s threat awareness and resources, forcing it to be selective in which perceived incursions it chooses to respond to. Blurring the lines between military and civilian activities also has the effect of making it more difficult for Taiwan to determine which activities are potential threats.
A Taiwanese government investigation found that three Taiwanese military facilities had installed banned PRC-made devices including routers. Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) Legislative Caucus Chair Huang Kuo-chang is leading an investigation into the Taiwanese military’s use of PRC technologies. The Ministry of National Defense's (MND) Armaments Bureau confirmed on July 4 that it had found two Huawei routers and a PRC-manufactured Advantech data reader installed at the army’s Hungchailin Camp. It also found 128 PRC-made inverters at solar installations at the Hungchailin base, the Pinghai Navy Base, and Tri-Service General Hospital’s Songshan Branch. Taiwan had banned the installation of these PRC-made devices at military facilities due to security concerns. The MND Armaments Bureau said it ordered the Taiwanese contractors who illegally installed these devices to remove the devices and would investigate them for breach of contract. Huang claimed in a press conference that the DPP administration had allowed its green energy initiative in the military to become a “fifth column for Beijing,” alluding to fears that the PRC could use the banned telecommunications devices to spy on Taiwanese bases.[15] Huang also accused Taiwan’s National Defense University of using PRC-made routers and computers and concealing this fact from the MND, which did not find PRC-made devices at the university. The MND also said on July 10 that it was investigating the military’s use of PRC-made dashcams and had already removed over 800 such dashcams from military vehicles. KMT legislator Hsu Chiao-hsin said Taiwan had blacklisted the vendor who won the army contract for the dashcams in 2021, on the same day the military placed its order.[16]
The PRC is using cross-strait events such as the Cross-Strait Youth Summit to legitimize the Kuomintang (KMT) as a negotiating partner on behalf of Taiwan and promote its pro-unification message. The CCP kicked off the Cross-Strait Youth Summit in Beijing on July 3 and the Cross-Strait Youth Development Forum in Hangzhou and other cities on July 6. The forums are annual events that the PRC’s Taiwan Affairs Office (TAO) and other agencies host to promote youth exchanges between the PRC and Taiwan and promote a message of cross-strait unity. KMT Vice Chairman Sean Lien Sheng-wen attended the Cross Strait Youth Summit and gave a speech in which he encouraged young people on both sides to connect in person and said the KMT hopes both sides of the strait can shelve their disputes and seek common ground.[17] Lien also told cross-strait media that any action that does not contribute to cross-strait exchanges and a friendly atmosphere is unnecessary. His comment referred to Taiwan’s Mainland Affairs Council’s (MAC) decision to upgrade its travel warning to the PRC after the PRC issued legal guidelines promising harsh punishments for “Taiwan independence diehards.”[18] Former KMT Chair and Taiwan President Ma Ying-jeou also spoke at the summit via video conference and urged young people to work together to “create a bright future for the Chinese nation.” About 600 people attended the forum including TAO Director Song Tao, who gave the opening speech.[19]
Song Tao also attended the opening of the Cross-Strait Youth Development Forum on July 6 together with former KMT Chair and current chair of the China Cyan Geese Peace Education Foundation Hung Hsiu-chu. Around 800 people attended in total.[20] Song met with Hung on July 8 in Hangzhou, Zhejiang Province. According to a PRC readout, Song and Hung both expressed the need to jointly oppose Taiwan's independence and promote national reunification and rejuvenation.[21]
The CCP invites KMT figures such as Lien, Hung, and Ma to participate in cross-strait events and negotiations as part of an effort to legitimize the KMT as an interlocutor on behalf of Taiwan in contrast to the DPP. The PRC cut off official exchanges with Taiwan after Tsai Ing-wen of the DPP became president of Taiwan in 2016. CCP officials have repeatedly met with KMT officials and invited them to PRC-hosted events during this time. Sean Lien and fellow KMT vice chairman Andrew Hsia are frequent participants in such meetings. The CCP insists that all cross-strait negotiations must be on the mutual basis of the “1992 consensus,” which Ma and the KMT recognize but Tsai and the DPP do not. The 1992 Consensus is an alleged verbal agreement between semi-official representatives of the PRC and the then KMT-ruled ROC following negotiations in 1992. It states that both sides agree there is only one China and that Taiwan is part of China. The CCP interprets this “one China” to be the People’s Republic of China, however, while the KMT interprets it to be the Republic of China.
China
The PRC framed collaboration between NATO and Indo-Pacific states as a threat to regional security. PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) spokesperson Lin Jian criticized NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg’s pledge on July 9 to expand NATO cooperation with Indo-Pacific partners Australia, Japan, New Zealand, and South Korea. Most of the leaders of these Indo-Pacific states are attending the NATO summit from July 9-11. The exception is Australia, which sent Deputy Prime Minister Richard Marles.[22] Lin accused NATO of “expanding its power across its boundaries, provoking confrontation, and engaging in hegemony and bullying.”[23] Lin stated that NATO’s strengthening of security ties with countries surrounding the PRC amounted to implementing the US “Indo-Pacific Strategy” and has undermined peace in the region.
Lin condemned the NATO summit declaration that held the PRC responsible for enabling Russia’s war against Ukraine.[24] Lin blamed the US for using NATO to spread false information and undermine PRC-EU relations. Lin claimed that the PRC’s “constructive role on the Ukrainian issue is widely recognized by the international community.” The PRC began military exercises with Belarus near the Polish border during the NATO summit.[25]
The PRC is also frustrated with the strengthening of defense cooperation between US allies in the Indo-Pacific. Lin criticized the signing of a Reciprocal Access Agreement between the Philippines and Japan that permits the temporary stationing of troops in each other’s territory for exercises and patrols. Lin stated that such cooperation instigated a “new Cold War” and highlighted Japan’s militaristic history.[26] Japan finalized a Reciprocal Access Agreement with Australia in August 2023.[27] The PRC’s dissatisfaction with security cooperation is based on the perception that collaboration between liberal democracies in the region has the potential to mount stronger resistance to PRC efforts to advance certain interests which it relies on maintaining a dominant military presence for, such as enforcing territorial claims over Taiwan and the South China Sea.
CCP General Secretary Xi Jinping welcomed Belarus to the Shanghai Cooperation Organization. Xi seeks to use the SCO to legitimize PRC-led institutions and undermine Western-led security frameworks. The SCO is a Eurasia-focused multilateral security forum established by the PRC and Russia in 2001. Belarus joined the SCO at the organization’s 2024 regional security forum on July 4 and is the first new member state since the SCO admitted Iran in 2023.[28] Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan stated that Turkey sought full membership in the SCO after a meeting with Xi on the sidelines of the summit. Erdoğan first expressed interest in Turkey joining the SCO in 2022.[29] Turkey would be the first NATO member to join the organization.
Xi called on member states to pursue change in an increasingly unstable world and strengthen ties with each other, especially security cooperation and exchanges that enhance mutual trust.[30] Xi’s appeal reflects the PRC’s goal to present the SCO as a viable alternative to the Western-led security architecture and highlight the need to pursue other security arrangements as the existing one fails to prevent instability. Xi’s comments reflect the PRC’s goal to build solid ties between the member states and bolster the SCO as a long-lasting alternative to the Western-led security architecture. Strong participation in PRC-led institutions is beneficial to the PRC’s ability to pursue its interests freely. Xi has used his platform at past SCO summits to advance PRC goals, including playing up the threat of terrorism in Xinjiang, advocating for Central Asian states’ participation in the Belt and Road Initiative, and “opposing interference in the internal affairs of other countries,” a phrase which PRC officials usually use in reference to Taiwan.[31]
Xi met separately with Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban and Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan during the week of the SCO summit. PRC readouts of the meetings highlighted alignment between Xi and the leaders of both countries on the war in Ukraine.[32] Orban later praised the PRC as a “key power” in promoting peace in Ukraine and stated that “China has a peace plan. America has a war policy.” The PRC released a vague 12-point peace plan in February 2023 that advocated for a political settlement to the war in Ukraine.[33] Ukraine and Western allies regarded it as a non-starter due to its failure to demand Russia’s withdrawal from occupied territory. The PRC’s publicization of meetings with the two leaders seeks to play up divisions among NATO members and show that there is no uniform policy on Ukraine. Praise from Orban also helps the PRC to rebuke NATO's accusations of the PRC’s responsibility for the crisis as Russia’s enabler.
The PRC’s cyber defense agency issued disinformation about the US Intelligence Community and denied that the Volt Typhoon cyber threat actor is a PRC state-sponsored group. The PRC’s National Computer Virus Emergency Response Center (CVERC) published a report on July 8 that responds to US and Five Eyes accusations of PRC state-sponsored hacking. The report alleges that the cyber threat actor Volt Typhoon is not a PRC state-sponsored group. It also claims that the US and FVEY assessments are sensationalist lies that US intelligence agencies fabricated to demonize the PRC and earn more funding from Congress. State media outlet Xinhua highlighted the US intelligence community’s motivation to enhance its surveillance powers.[34]
CVERC published the report in both Chinese and English, which is unusual for the agency’s announcements. CVERC’s release of an English version suggests the target audience includes the international community, as the PRC attempts to rebuff US and Five Eyes allegations of PRC misconduct in cyberspace. The PRC issued the report on the same day that the United States, Five Eyes partners, Germany, South Korea, and Japan published a joint advisory about malicious cyber operations of Advanced Persistent Threat 40 (APT40). The joint advisory includes the assessment that APT40 is affiliated with the PRC’s Ministry of State Security (MSS), marking the first such attribution by Australia, Japan, and South Korea.[35]
The CVERC report is the second part of a series first published on April 15 that followed US Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) advisories about Volt Typhoon in February and March.[36] The PRC’s accusation that the US advisories are disinformation is consistent with previous instances of flipping the narrative when its state-sponsored malign cyber activities become public. For example, MFA spokesperson Lin Jian responded to US and Five Eyes partner accusations about the PRC’s election-related hacking by citing PRC threat intelligence reports that supposedly exposed US-based APTs including several US intelligence agencies.[37] The PRC uses blame shifting to divert public attention from PRC malicious cyber activities and crowd the information space with narratives that target the United States and US allies.
Southeast Asia
Philippines
The China Coast Guard (CCG) anchored its largest ship in the Philippines’ exclusive economic zone (EEZ) near Sabina Shoal. The Philippine Coast Guard (PCG) reported that the CCG’s largest vessel, the CCG-5901, entered the Philippines’ EEZ on July 2. The CCG-5901 traveled through the Second Thomas Shoal and Panganiban Reef to its destination in the Sabina Shoal, where it has been anchored since July 3.[38] The PCG released a statement on July 6 accusing the PRC of attempted intimidation.[39] PRC MFA spokesperson Lin Jian responded that the CCG was operating within PRC sovereign territory per international law.[40] Lin did not comment on whether the CCG’s actions were in response to territorial disputes in Sabina Shoal.
Yang Xiao of the China Institute of Contemporary International Relations (CICIR), an arm of the Ministry of State Security, previously accused the PCG of attempting to build a permanent maritime base in Sabina Shoal. Yang stated that such behaviors would lead the PRC to increase its law enforcement presence around Sabina Shoal.[41] The anchoring of the CCG-5901 in Sabina Shoal serves the dual purpose of intimidating the PCG and acting on earlier CCG threats of increasing their law enforcement presence in the disputed territory. With the CCG-5901 anchored in Sabina Shoal, the PCG is unlikely to continue building a maritime base. Preventing the construction of a base in Sabina Shoal is in the best interest of the PRC, as a PCG base will allow the Philippines to enhance resupply capabilities to the Second Thomas Shoal and Sierra Madre.
The PRC released a report accusing the Philippines of causing environmental harm to coral reefs in Second Thomas Shoal. The PRC Ministry of Natural Resources released a report accusing the Philippines of causing “serious damage” to the coral reef ecosystem around Second Thomas Shoal.[42] The Ministry states that this damage is caused by the “illegal” beaching of the Philippine warships, including the BRP Sierra Madre. The Sierra Madre was grounded by Manila in 1999 to defend and enhance its territorial claims.[43] The report calls on the Philippines to remove its warships and halt further damage to underwater ecosystems. The Philippine task force on the South China Sea rejected the PRC’s accusation, instead placing the blame for any ecological damage on PRC actions. The task force called for an independent, third-party investigation into ecological damage in the South China Sea and its causes. PRC MFA spokesperson Lin Jian responded to the Philippines’ accusation on July 10.[44] Lin rejected the idea that the PRC caused any damage to coral reefs in the Second Thomas Shoal, and contrasted the damaged Second Thomas Shoal with the well-maintained and PRC-held Scarborough Shoal, reiterating the threat to coral reef ecosystems posed by the Philippines’ military activities.[45]
The PRC and Philippines have competing claims over the Second Thomas Shoal along with other regions of the South China Sea. If the Philippines were to remove the Sierra Madre it would improve the PRC’s ability to assert its claim over the Second Thomas Shoal. Preventing damage to marine environments is a stated component of CCG responsibilities and could serve as a justification for increased CCG presence in the Second Thomas Shoal and surrounding areas.[46]
China-Taiwan Weekly Update, July 3, 2024
Click here to read the full report
Authors: Matthew Sperzel and Daniel Shats of the Institute for the Study of War
Editors: Dan Blumenthal and Frederick W. Kagan of the American Enterprise Institute
Key Takeaways
- The PRC’s Taiwan Affairs Office downplayed the risk that the PRC will prosecute ordinary Taiwanese citizens after the PRC released legal guidelines that threaten advocates of Taiwanese independence with criminal penalties up to the death penalty.
- Chinese Coast Guard ships boarded a Taiwanese fishing boat for illegally fishing in PRC waters and escorted it to a naval port in Fujian province on July 2.
- PRC officials and media framed the ongoing RIMPAC exercises as provoking “bloc confrontation” in the Asia-Pacific and attempting to intimidate the PRC in support of Taiwan.
- The Philippines stated that the PRC interfered in the rescue of Philippine fishermen whose boat exploded near Scarborough Shoal. The PRC framed the role of the CCG positively to portray itself as the legitimate authority in the waters near the shoal.
- The PRC accused the Philippines of “undermining peace and stability” by resupplying a Philippine Coast Guard vessel “illegally stationed” on Sabina Shoal.
Cross-Strait Relations
Taiwan
The PRC’s Taiwan Affairs Office (TAO) downplayed the risk that the PRC will prosecute ordinary Taiwanese citizens after the PRC released legal guidelines that threaten advocates of Taiwanese independence with criminal penalties up to the death penalty. TAO Spokesperson Zhu Fenglian claimed that the guidelines only target “Taiwanese independence diehards” who engage in “separatist activities.” The guidelines outline the actions subject to criminal prosecution under the criminal code. They state that “Taiwan independence”-related activities punishable under Article 103 include:
- Forming a “Taiwan independence” organization or program;
- Directing people to carry out activities that “split the country or undermine national unity;”
- Attempting to change the “legal status of Taiwan as a part of China” by law;
- Attempting to create “two Chinas” or “one China, one Taiwan” in the international community by promoting Taiwan’s membership in international organizations that require statehood or by engaging in official exchanges or military contacts with other countries; and
- Using one’s official position to “wantonly distort or falsify the fact that Taiwan is a part of China” in education, culture, history, media, etc., or to “suppress” political parties, groups, or individuals that support peaceful cross-strait relations and “national reunification.”[1]
Taiwan’s Mainland Affairs Council (MAC) raised the travel warning severity for the PRC on June 27 in response to the legal guidelines, citing increased detention and interrogation of Taiwanese citizens under the PRC’s progressively strict national security laws in recent years. The MAC urged Taiwanese citizens to avoid travel to the mainland unless necessary.[2]
Zhu accused the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) government of “political manipulation” in response to the travel warning and claimed that the DPP was inciting confrontation to obstruct cross-strait exchanges.[3] Zhu encouraged Taiwanese people to participate in cross-strait exchanges and stated that there was no reason to worry when traveling to the mainland. The PRC’s accusations against the DPP serve to portray it as the instigator of cross-strait tensions while minimizing the severity of the legal guidelines, which threaten punishment up to the death penalty.
DPP spokesperson Justin Wu Cheng claimed on July 1 that there is a real risk for Taiwanese citizens to travel to the PRC because of the PRC’s history of weaponizing the law and arbitrarily detaining Taiwanese nationals. He cited the examples of Lee Meng-chu and Yang Chi-yuan, two Taiwanese citizens who were arrested “without reason” in the PRC on political grounds.[4]
PRC authorities arrested Lee in Shenzhen in August 2019 for taking pictures of police officers and withheld information about his detainment for weeks. The PRC labeled Lee an “independence activist” for his position as chairman of the Taiwan-United Nations Alliance (TAIUNA) and forced him to publicly confess his support for Hong Kong “thugs,” referring to pro-democracy protesters.[5] The PRC imprisoned him for one year and ten months for alleged spying for foreign countries on behalf of Taiwan. The PRC allowed him to return to Taiwan in July 2023.
PRC authorities detained Yang in August 2022, during then-Speaker of the US House of Representatives Nancy Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan, and held him without trial for eight months. The PRC charged Yang with “promoting Taiwan’s independence and accession to the United Nations” and convicted him of secessionism, marking the first case of the PRC prosecution for such an offense.[6] Yang remains imprisoned in the PRC.
PLA aircraft violated Taiwan’s Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) at least 325 times in June, the highest monthly total since August 2022. The June total is the second-highest monthly total on record and the highest for any month without a large-scale PLA exercise. The record for most ADIZ violations in one month was 446 in August 2022, when the PRC responded to then-US Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan with record-scale military exercises around Taiwan. There were 289 violations in May, of which 82 (28 percent) occurred on May 23 and 24 during the PRC’s Joint Sword 2024A exercise around Taiwan.[7] The number of ADIZ violations that Taiwan’s MND reports does not include PRC vessels and aircraft around Taiwan’s outlying islands such as the Kinmen and Matsu archipelagos.
The heightened number of violations reflects an intensified PRC pressure campaign against Taiwan under the new administration of Lai Ching-te, whom the PRC considers a dangerous separatist. The high frequency of ADIZ violations drains Taiwan’s resources, exhausts military personnel, and degrades Taiwan’s threat awareness. Taiwan does not scramble aircraft in response to all PRC ADIZ violations, but it does put military personnel on standby to respond quickly if needed.
Chinese Coast Guard (CCG) ships boarded a Taiwanese fishing boat for illegally fishing in PRC waters and escorted it to a naval port in Fujian province on July 2.[8] The Taiwanese fishing boat was within PRC territorial waters 11.5 nautical miles from the PRC coast when the CCG ships confronted it. It was also near the Taiwanese island of Kinmen, though not within Taiwan-controlled waters.[9] CCG spokesperson Liu Dejun said the fishing boat was suspected of illegally fishing in a prohibited area in violation of a summer fishing moratorium and was using equipment that did not comply with regulations.[10]
Two Taiwanese Coast Guard Administration (CGA) ships deployed to the scene of the arrest to rescue the fishermen and engaged in a standoff with four CCG ships who intercepted the pursuit and broadcast warnings not to interfere.[11] The Taiwanese Coast Guard stated that it halted the pursuit to avoid escalation of the situation. A CGA spokesperson called on the PRC to release the fishing boat and to avoid politicizing the issue.[12] Taiwanese media claimed that the site of the confrontation was an established location for Taiwanese fishermen to catch squid and the incident represented the violation of a years-long tacit understanding.[13] Taiwanese media stated that there were other Taiwanese fishing vessels in the vicinity, which other CCG ships monitored during the confrontation.[14]
The PRC and Taiwan have detained or expelled each other’s fishing boats for illegal fishing in their respective waters in the past.[15] The PRC has increased its patrols and law enforcement since February 2024 around Kinmen and some of Taiwan’s other outlying islands, however, in response to an incident in which two PRC fishermen died in a boat accident while fleeing a CGA pursuit in Kinmen’s prohibited waters. The PRC has made increasingly frequent incursions into Taiwan-controlled waters around Taiwan’s outer islands since February, primarily with CCG patrols but also including at least two PLA naval vessels.[16] The CCG boarded a Taiwanese sightseeing ship sailing around Kinmen on February 19 when it briefly strayed off course into PRC waters.[17] The PRC has detained one Taiwanese fisherman for over three months since March 18 after his boat ran out of fuel and drifted into PRC waters and the PRC discovered he was a soldier in the Kinmen Defense Command.[18]
China
PRC state media publicized a message of countering corruption and ensuring the military’s political loyalty to the CCP days after the CCP expelled two former defense ministers for corruption. The PRC announced corruption investigations against former Ministers of Defense Wei Fenghe and Li Shangfu and expelled both men from the CCP on June 27. The state news agency Xinhua announced that both men had “seriously violated political discipline,” failed in their political responsibilities, used their positions to benefit themselves, and accepted gifts and large amounts of money for favors. It also said that Wei had “seriously polluted the political ecology of the troops” and Li had “seriously polluted the political ecology of the equipment field.”[19] The PLA’s official newspaper PLA Daily published an editorial on July 1, three days after the announcements about the former defense ministers, that called for the PLA to “adhere to the Party’s absolute leadership over the military” under Chairman Xi Jinping, continue to deepen political training, and eradicate the “soil and conditions for the breeding of corruption.”[20]
Xi has pursued an extensive anti-corruption campaign in the military and government since he took power in 2013. Anti-corruption purges in the PLA in recent years have particularly focused on the PLA Rocket Force (PLARF) and equipment procurement. Many of the nine senior generals the PRC purged during the past year were also from the PLA Rocket Force (PLARF). Wei and Li are the latest purges in this trend.
Before becoming Ministers of Defense, Wei was the first commander of the PLARF, created in 2016 from the former Second Artillery Corps, while Li was the head of the PLA procurement department. Bloomberg reported in January 2024 that US intelligence assessments that graft in the PLA hindered military effectiveness and was a reason behind the PLARF purges, including a case in which investigators discovered some missiles that were filled with water instead of fuel.[21]
CCP General Secretary Xi Jinping portrayed the PRC as a force for global peace and justice on the 70th anniversary of the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence. The Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence are a set of principles dating back to the 1954 Sino-Indian Agreement that Xi said have since formed the “bedrock” of the PRC’s international relations. They are:
- Mutual respect for each other’s sovereignty and territorial integrity;
- Mutual non-aggression;
- Non-interference in each other's internal affairs;
- Equality and cooperation for mutual benefit; and
- Peaceful coexistence.[22]
Xi delivered a speech to an audience including representatives and former leaders from over 100 countries in which he pledged that “China's door to opening up will only open wider and wider” and that the PRC’s “determination to pursue a path of peaceful development will not change.” Xi framed the PRC’s vision to build a “community with a shared future for mankind” as the most effective way to “sustain, promote, and upgrade” the Five Principles in the “new circumstances.” He called on the Global South to work together and take the lead in building the “community with a shared future for mankind.”[23] Attendees of the event jointly issued a Beijing Declaration that said the Global South is a “key force in advocating and practicing the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence.” The declaration said the Five Principles are a “correction to imperialist, colonialist, and hegemonic systems” built on protecting the legitimate rights and interests of developing countries.[24]
The PRC is using the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence to persuade countries of the Global South to unite behind a Beijing-led international order. It contrasts these principles of non-interference and mutual respect for sovereignty with the colonialist past and what it calls the “hegemonic” policies of countries in the Western-led international order.
PRC officials and media framed the ongoing RIMPAC exercises as provoking “bloc confrontation” in the Asia-Pacific and attempting to intimidate the PRC in support of Taiwan. The biennial Ring of the Pacific (RIMPAC) multinational maritime exercise began on June 27 near Hawaii. Over 25,000 personnel from approximately 29 countries will participate in the exercise until August 1. The exercise will feature “experimentation” with new capabilities to sink the USS Tarawa, an 820-foot-long, 40,000-ton decommissioned amphibious assault ship.[25] PRC Ministry of National Defense (MOD) spokesperson Senior Colonel Wu Qian responded to media reports that the sinking of the Tarawa is preparation for an attack on PLA amphibious assault ships in case of war in the Taiwan Strait by accusing the United States of using the exercise to “frighten” the PLA, which Wu said was an “impossible task.” Wu stressed that solving the “Taiwan issue” is an internal matter for the PRC that will not allow external interference.[26]
State media outlet Global Times cited PRC military expert Fu Qianshao who said that there were “obvious” signs that RIMPAC exercise targets the PRC because there are few countries in the Asia-Pacific region that operate amphibious assault ships and are not US allies. Fu said using the USS Tarawa as a target can also be practice for sinking an aircraft carrier.[27] State media Xinhua published commentary by another military expert named Zhang Junshe who wrote that the true purpose of the exercise is for the United States to “coerce” other countries into joining its “small circle” and provoke “camp confrontation” against the PRC. He claimed that aside from a handful of countries such as Japan, Australia, and Canada that are willing to act as “thugs” of the United States, most participating countries do not want to be involved in a US-PRC confrontation and are participating because they do not wish to offend the United States.[28]
RIMPAC is the world’s largest naval exercise. It began in 1971 with participation from the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand and has since grown to include 29 participating nations in 2024. The United States invited the PRC to participate in RIMPAC in 2014 and 2016 but stopped inviting it ever since due to Beijing’s construction of military bases on disputed territory in the South China Sea.[29] The PRC views RIMPAC as part of a broader US-led effort to build a multinational coalition to “contain” the PRC in the Asia-Pacific region.
Southeast Asia
Philippines
PRC and Philippine officials held their ninth round of talks under the Bilateral Consultation Mechanism (BCM) on the South China Sea. Philippine Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) Undersecretary Maria Theresa Lazaro and PRC Vice Foreign Minister Chen Xiaodong met in Manila on July 2 for talks about the PRC-Philippine disputes in the South China Sea. Both sides described the talks as “frank and constructive.” The Philippine readout said both sides saw the need to rebuild trust and confidence and affirmed their commitment to de-escalate tensions. Lazaro told Chen that the Philippines will be “relentless in protecting its interests and upholding its sovereignty, sovereign rights, and jurisdiction in the West Philippine Sea.”[30] The PRC readout said the PRC reiterated its sovereignty over the Spratly Islands including the Second Thomas Shoal and urged the Philippines to stop its “maritime infringement and provocative acts.”[31] The Philippines and PRC also signed the Arrangement on Improving Philippines-China Maritime Communication Mechanisms and agreed to discuss how to operationalize this mechanism.[32]
The Philippines stated that the PRC interfered in the rescue of Philippine fishermen whose boat exploded near Scarborough Shoal. Two Philippine fishermen were severely injured on June 29 when the engine on their fishing boat exploded and nearly sank the boat around 17 nautical miles southwest of Scarborough Shoal. Philippine Coast Guard (PCG) spokesperson Rear Admiral Armando Balilo said CCG and PLA Navy vessels shadowed a PCG ship that sailed to respond but ceased their “harassment” when the Filipino crew informed them of the explosion. Balilo said the CCG ship launched two rigid-hull inflatable boats (RHIBs) and offered help to the half-submerged fishing boat.[33] PCG spokesperson for the West Philippine Sea Jay Tarriela claimed on June 30 that the CCG deployed its RHIBs to “hinder and obstruct” the PCG’s rescue operation, however. He claimed the PCG managed to outmaneuver the CCG boats to rescue the Filipino fishermen and tow their damaged boat.[34]
The PRC framed the role of the CCG positively to portray itself as the legitimate authority in the waters near the shoal. PRC state media Global Times later released a video showing personnel in the CCG boats tossing life jackets and lifebuoys to a person in the water. The video included an audio clip it claimed was the PCG thanking the CCG for its cooperation.[35] Some of the rescued fishermen told Philippine media that the CCG did nothing to help except to throw life vests at them, which was not useful because the fishermen were already transferring to the PCG ship at the time.[36]
Scarborough Shoal is a disputed territory in the South China Sea that the PRC and Philippines both claim. The PRC seized control of the shoal from the Philippines in 2012 and maintains a Coast Guard presence in the nearby waters, though it has not built infrastructure on the shoal itself.
The PRC accused the Philippines of “undermining peace and stability” by resupplying a PCG vessel “illegally stationed” on Sabina Shoal. CCG spokesperson Liu Dejun claimed the CCG “followed and monitored” three PCG ships that the Philippines sent to Sabina Shoal to transfer personnel and materials to a PCG ship stationed at Sabina Shoal.[37] The PCG ship at Sabina Shoal is the BRP Teresa Magbanua, the PCG’s largest and most advanced ship.[38] PRC state media Global Times published an article on July 2 with photos that appear to show the Philippines transporting cement to the Teresa Magbanua in addition to fuel and living supplies. It cited Yang Xiao, deputy director of the Institute of Maritime Strategy Studies under the China Institute of Contemporary International Relations (CICIR), who claimed the Philippines’ actions around Sabina Shoal indicate that Manila is planning to build a permanent maritime base there for operations in other parts of the South China Sea including resupply missions to the nearby Second Thomas Shoal. CICIR is an arm of the PRC’s Ministry of State Security. Yang accused the Philippines of trying to replicate the 1999 grounding of the Philippine warship BRP Sierra Madre, which the Philippines now uses as its outpost on Second Thomas Shoal. He claimed the Philippines’ actions are a “strategic blunder” that will trigger the PRC to increase its maritime law enforcement presence near the shoal.[39] Philippine Navy spokesperson for the West Philippine Sea Rear Admiral Roy Vincent Trinidad did not confirm or deny the Global Times’ allegations during a July 2 press conference and said that “these are actions the Philippines will pursue if and when necessary.”[40]
The Philippines accused the PRC in May of preparing for island reclamation at Sabina Shoal by dumping crushed coral there. It deployed the Teresa Magbanua to the shoal on May 12 to monitor PRC activity there.[41] The Philippines and the PRC both claim Sabina Shoal as their territory, although the shoal is located well within the Philippines’ Exclusive Economic Zone and the Philippines has de facto control of it. Sabina Shoal is roughly 37 miles east of Second Thomas Shoal and is the staging point for Philippine resupply missions to Second Thomas Shoal. A PRC-controlled Sabina Shoal would extend the PRC’s territorial claims in the South China Sea, improve the PRC’s ability to assert its claim over the Second Thomas Shoal, and enhance the difficulty of Philippine resupply missions to the Sierra Madre.
Europe
The PRC denounced the inclusion of PRC companies in the EU’s Russia-targeted sanctions as “having no basis in international law.” The European Union issued its 14th round of sanctions on Russia on June 24. The list of sanctioned entities included 19 PRC-based companies that the EU accused of supporting Russia’s military-industrial complex in the war in Ukraine.[42] The PRC Ministry of Commerce claimed on June 26 that these “unilateral sanctions” and application of “long-arm jurisdiction” had no international legal basis, were not authorized by the UN Security Council, and go against agreements reached by PRC and EU leaders.[43] The PRC has repeatedly denied that it provides material support to Russia’s war effort and has accused Western countries of unfairly targeting its “normal trade relations” with Russia. The PRC has also frequently expressed opposition to unilateral sanctions in general, claiming they are illegal.[44]
China-Taiwan Weekly Update, June 27, 2024
Click here to read the full report
Authors: Matthew Sperzel and Daniel Shats of the Institute for the Study of War
Editors: Dan Blumenthal and Frederick W. Kagan of the American Enterprise Institute
Data Cutoff: June 27 at 9am EST
The China–Taiwan Weekly Update is a joint product from the Institute for the Study of War and the American Enterprise Institute. The update supports the ISW–AEI Coalition Defense of Taiwan project, which assesses Chinese campaigns against Taiwan, examines alternative strategies for the United States and its allies to deter the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) aggression, and—if necessary—defeat the People’s Liberation Army (PLA). The update focuses on the Chinese Communist Party’s paths to controlling Taiwan and cross–Taiwan Strait developments.
Key Takeaways
- The PRC has increased its violations of Taiwan’s Air Defense Identification Zone since President Lai Ching-te’s inauguration on May 20.
- Four Chinese Coast Guard vessels entered restricted waters around Kinmen on June 25.
- A likely state-sponsored PRC cyber threat actor is conducting persistent network infiltration operations against various Taiwanese organizations.
- The PRC Supreme People’s Court and other institutions issued an authoritative legal opinion that threatens advocates of Taiwanese independence with criminal penalties up to the death penalty.
- Taiwan’s Legislative Yuan passed a controversial legislative reform bill unchanged after a government-mandated second review. President Lai Ching-te signed the bill into law but pledged to file for a constitutional interpretation.
- CCP General Secretary Xi Jinping convened a Military Commission Political Work Conference to emphasize the need to maintain strict military discipline and uphold Party governance.
Cross-Strait Relations
Taiwan
The PRC has carried out violations of Taiwan’s Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) more frequently since President Lai Ching-te’s inauguration on May 20. Taiwan’s Ministry of National Defense (MND) reported 305 ADIZ violations by PLA aircraft between June 1 and June 27. The June total to date is the second-highest monthly total on record and the highest for any month without a large-scale PLA exercise. The record for most ADIZ violations in one month was 446 in August 2022, when the PRC responded to then-US Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan with record-scale military exercises around Taiwan.[1] There were 289 violations in May, of which 82 (28 percent) occurred on May 23 and 24 during the PRC’s Joint Sword 2024A exercise around Taiwan. The number of ADIZ violations that Taiwan’s MND reports does not include PRC vessels and aircraft around Taiwan’s outlying islands such as the Kinmen and Matsu archipelagos.
The heightened number of violations reflects an intensified PRC pressure campaign against Taiwan under the new administration of Lai Ching-te, whom the PRC considers a dangerous separatist. The high frequency of ADIZ violations drains Taiwan’s resources, exhausts military personnel, and degrades Taiwan’s threat awareness. Taiwan does not scramble aircraft in response to all PRC ADIZ violations, but it does put military personnel on standby to respond quickly if needed.
Four Chinese Coast Guard (CCG) vessels entered restricted waters around Kinmen on June 25.
The ships sailed simultaneously in two groups of two into different areas of restricted waters. One group approached east of Beiding Island in the eastern part of the Kinmen archipelago, while the other approached south of Fuxing Islet in the southwest of the archipelago. Taiwan’s Coast Guard Administration (CGA) claimed that it chased the CCG ships out after about two hours.[2] The CCG announced a “regular law enforcement patrol in the waters near Kinmen” but did not provide more detail about where the patrol sailed.[3] PRC state media claimed the CCG was carrying out a “new model” of law enforcement by splitting ships on patrol into separate formations and by expanding patrols from fixed linear tracks to “extensive patrol zones.”[4]
Taiwan does not formally claim any territorial waters around Kinmen partly due to its proximity to the PRC, but it designates “prohibited” and “restricted” waters around Kinmen, which it treats as equivalent to "territorial waters" and a "contiguous zone," respectively. The PRC does not officially recognize the existence of any restricted or prohibited waters around Taiwan’s outlying islands and claims the right to conduct law enforcement activities there, however. The CCG began patrols in Kinmen’s restricted and prohibited waters in February after two PRC fishermen drowned while fleeing from a Taiwanese Coast Guard pursuit on February 14. The PRC pledged after the incident to strengthen law enforcement activities around Kinmen. The PRC has increased the frequency of CCG patrols in Kinmen’s waters and the volume of ships per event since it began routine violations in late February. The most recent publicly reported incursion was two PLA Navy landing craft that entered Kinmen’s restricted waters on May 29.[5] CCG and PLA incursions into Kinmen’s restricted waters assert PRC control over those waters while eroding Taiwan’s sovereignty.
A likely state-sponsored PRC cyber threat actor is conducting persistent network infiltration operations against various Taiwanese organizations. Recorded Future’s threat research division Insikt Group published a threat intelligence report on June 24 that detailed the threat actor’s targeting of mainly Taiwanese tech companies, educational institutions, and government entities over six months from November to April.[6] Insikt Group identified threat actor IP addresses that geolocated to Fuzhou in the PRC’s Fujian province across the Taiwan Strait, which is known to house the PRC’s Taiwan-focused non-kinetic operations centers such as the notorious Base 311.[7]
Microsoft first issued a report on the threat actor and its targeting of Taiwanese organizations in August 2023. That report noted that the threat actor, which it refers to as Flax Typhoon, has been active since 2021 and targets Taiwanese organizations in sectors spanning education, critical manufacturing, and information technology. The report also stated that Flax Typhoon has targeted Taiwanese government agencies.[8] Insikt Group noted the threat actor’s focus on the technology industry and pointed to attempted exploitation against a semiconductor company and two aerospace companies that have contracts with the Taiwanese military.
Microsoft and Insikt Group both assessed that the purpose of the threat actor’s operations is espionage, based on the observed behavior of gaining and maintaining access to networks for as long as possible. The threat actor’s emergence in 2021 and focus on conducting espionage against organizations involved in critical technology is a plausible reaction to US efforts to limit the PRC’s access to certain technologies, which gained momentum in 2020 as Taiwanese semiconductor manufacturers complied with US export controls to PRC companies.[9] Conducting espionage against Taiwanese research institutions and critical tech companies serves the dual purpose of hastening the development of the PRC’s domestic tech industry while undermining Taiwan’s established position in the market.
Insikt Group’s report also noted the threat actor’s interest in Taiwan’s trade policy and international affairs, having targeted three de facto embassies from South and Southeast Asian countries, two government departments focused on economic policy, two think tanks researching Taiwanese economic policy, and a trade promotion organization. Spying on these organizations can provide intelligence to inform PRC policies that target pressure points in Taiwan’s economy and further its isolation from the global economy.
The PRC Supreme People’s Court and other institutions issued an authoritative legal opinion that threatens advocates of Taiwanese independence with criminal penalties up to the death penalty. The PRC Supreme People's Court, Supreme People's Procuratorate, Ministry of Public Security, Ministry of State Security, and Ministry of Justice jointly issued the opinion on June 21 and ordered it to be implemented immediately. The opinion is an authoritative legal interpretation of Article 103 of the PRC’s criminal code, which delineates the crime of “splitting the State and undermining the unity of the country” but does not specifically reference Taiwan.[10] The opinion clarifies how Article 103 crime should be applied to issues of Taiwanese “separatism” and defines what types of actions in pursuit of Taiwanese independence would be subject to criminal prosecution under the criminal code. It states that “Taiwan independence”-related activities punishable under Article 103 include:
- Forming a “Taiwan independence” organization or program;
- Directing people to carry out activities that “split the country or undermine national unity;”
- Attempting to change the “legal status of Taiwan as a part of China” by law;
- Attempting to create “two Chinas” or “one China, one Taiwan” in the international community by promoting Taiwan’s membership in international organizations that require statehood or by engaging in official exchanges or military contacts with other countries; and
- Using one’s official position to “wantonly distort or falsify the fact that Taiwan is a part of China” in education, culture, history, media, etc., or to “suppress” political parties, groups, or individuals that support peaceful cross-strait relations and “national reunification.”
The opinion calls for criminal penalties up to life imprisonment or death for these crimes, depending on the seriousness of the case. The penalties increase if the crime involves collusion with foreign individuals. The opinion allows the PRC to try and convict suspects in absentia if they fail to show up to court in the PRC. It also allows for the case to be withdrawn if suspects “abandon their separatist stance,” however.[11]
The PRC’s new legal guidelines for punishing Taiwanese “separatists” are part of a pressure campaign against Taiwan’s new administration of Lai Ching-te and the ruling DPP. The opinion stresses the need to severely punish “‘Taiwan independence’ diehards,” a term the PRC has used to describe Lai, Vice President Hsiao Bi-khim, and other DPP officials. Multiple activities delineated in the opinion appear to target DPP policies, including the DPP’s fight for Taiwan’s participation in international organizations, reform of educational curriculum to emphasize Taiwan’s independent identity, and military cooperation with the United States and other countries. The opinion also references the use of official authority to “suppress” groups and individuals who support cross-strait peace and reunification, indicating that the PRC may interpret Taiwan’s application of its Anti-Infiltration Law and other counter-PRC legislation as a crime in the PRC.
The new legal standards will primarily affect DPP-affiliated Taiwanese nationals who travel to the PRC since the PRC cannot enforce its laws in Taiwan. Director of the Taiwan think tank’s China Research Center Wu Se-chih said that the PRC could try to further extend its jurisdiction over Taiwan by convicting Taiwanese nationals in absentia, issuing international arrest warrants, and pressuring other countries to extradite wanted Taiwanese “separatists” who travel to those countries. The PRC has extradition treaties with 39 countries including South Korea, Vietnam, and Thailand, which are popular destinations for Taiwanese tourists.[12] Taiwan’s Mainland Affairs Council (MAC) condemned the new PRC legal guidelines and stressed that “the Beijing authorities have no jurisdiction over Taiwan.”[13] The MAC issued an upgraded travel warning on June 27 advising Taiwanese nationals to avoid unnecessary travel to the PRC, including Hong Kong and Macao.[14]
The new legal guidelines are a form of “lawfare” against Taiwan and part of a broader multifaceted pressure campaign against Taiwan that has intensified since Lai Ching-te’s election victory on January 15 and even further after his presidential inauguration on May 20. The campaign has also included military exercises around Taiwan, increased intrusions into Taiwan’s Air Defense Identification Zone, heightened Chinese Coast Guard “law enforcement” activities around Taiwan’s outlying islands, tariffs on certain Taiwanese goods, “poaching” of one of Taiwan’s diplomatic allies, and other measures to punish the DPP and bolster opposition to the Lai administration.
Taiwan’s National Communications Commission (NCC) is investigating a media report that a Taiwanese political talk show took directions from a PRC state media reporter. Taiwan’s Liberty Times newspaper reported on June 24 based on an anonymous journalistic source that the PRC’s Taiwan Affairs Office (TAO) reached out to Taiwanese news channels to request PRC involvement in the production of news shows in exchange for commercial interests in the PRC. The source said one Taiwanese channel agreed and aired a series at the PRC’s behest in praise of former Taiwan President Ma Ying-jeou’s cross-strait policy. The series’ production team involved Zhao Bo, a reporter from the PRC state news agency Xinhua, who gave direction on the program’s topic selection and scripts. The NCC said it was investigating whether the news program had violated a code of ethics under the Satellite Broadcasting Act. Taiwan’s MAC Director Chiu Chui-cheng said that Taiwan would launch a multi-agency investigation into the case. He said the reporter Zhao had already been recalled to the PRC, however.[15] The TAO said on June 26 that Liberty Times’ report was “completely fake.” It accused the DPP of using the Green-leaning Liberty Times to deceive the people of Taiwan and incite cross-strait hostility.[16]
Taiwan’s Legislative Yuan (LY) passed a controversial legislative reform bill unchanged after a government-mandated second review. President Lai Ching-te signed the bill into law but pledged to file for a constitutional interpretation. The new law grants the LY enhanced oversight powers over the government. The law permits the LY to call on any public official to testify before an investigative committee, confirm political appointments, and impose fines or criminal charges for “contempt of legislature” against anyone who lies, refuses to answer questions, or talks back while testifying before the legislature. The law also requires the president of Taiwan to deliver a State of the Nation address and submit to a question-and-answer session by the LY.[17] The opposition Kuomintang (KMT) and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) could use the new reforms and their collective majority in the LY to hinder the Lai Ching-te administration’s policy agenda.
The KMT and TPP originally pushed the bill through on May 28 despite opposition from the ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP). Premier Cho Jung-tai, who heads the Executive Yuan (EY), received the bill and returned it to the LY for reconsideration. He claimed elements of the bill were unconstitutional or difficult to implement.[18] The LY voted on the bill and passed it again unchanged on June 21 with a vote of 51-62 along party lines, which obligated the president to sign the bill into law.[19] President Lai Ching-te signed the bill on June 24. He said he would apply for Taiwan’s Constitutional Court to perform a constitutional interpretation of the law, however, and to impose a preliminary injunction on the implementation of the law while the court reviews it. Lai said he supports legislative reform in general but characterized the new law as an unconstitutional expansion of legislative power that could threaten the separation of powers, violate the rights to privacy of people the LY calls to testify, or force companies to divulge company secrets to the LY.[20] The Constitutional Court finding the law unconstitutional is the DPP’s last chance to stop the law from taking effect.
China
The PRC announced additional sanctions against some subsidiaries and executives of Lockheed Martin for arms sales to Taiwan. The sanctions will freeze properties of Lockheed Martin Missile System Integration Laboratory, Lockheed Martin Advanced Technology Laboratory, and Lockheed Martin Venture Capital Company within the PRC. They will also bar Lockheed Martin President and CEO James Taiclet, COO Frank St. John, CFO Jesus Malave, and other senior executives from entering the PRC and freeze any assets they hold in the PRC.[21] The PRC previously placed sanctions on at least eight other US defense firms earlier in 2024.[22] A 2023 report by the German think tank Mercator Institute for China Studies (MERICS) found that the PRC has significantly increased its use of unilateral sanctions since 2018 against US individuals, groups, or companies it perceives to be interfering in its internal affairs.[23] The PRC has repeatedly expressed opposition to unilateral sanctions in general, however, including US sanctions against it and other countries such as Russia and Iran.[24]
CCP General Secretary Xi Jinping convened a Military Commission Political Work Conference to emphasize the need to maintain strict military discipline and Party governance.[25] Xi urged cadres to own up to shortcomings at risk of losing face and called for the military leadership to scrupulously root out hotbeds of corruption. By instilling an absolute commitment to the CCP in the PLA, Xi aims to ideologically fortify the ranks of the military to prevent the interests of individual members of the military from conflicting with Party interests, which prioritizes achieving the highest possible level of the PLA’s military effectiveness. Xi’s comments reaffirm similar sentiments from a whole-of-military Political Work Conference in 2014 that took place amid a sweeping corruption purge and military modernization drive to eliminate inefficiencies that could hinder the military’s effectiveness during wartime.
Xi’s messaging at the conference signals the continuation and possible widening of purges to remove corrupt military officials. Military purges during the past year included nine senior generals, many of whom were from the PLA Rocket Force (PLARF).[26] Former Defense Minister Li Shangfu was abruptly removed from his post in October after a prolonged disappearance. The CCP formally expelled Li and his predecessor Wei Fenghe for corruption and bribery on June 27.[27] Bloomberg cited unnamed US intelligence officials in January that spoke to Xi’s concerns about the PLA’s ability to fight a war following the discovery of extensive graft and mismanagement throughout the military and defense industrial base.[28] Bloomberg reported that US intelligence assessments raised examples of graft that hindered military effectiveness and were a reason behind the PLARF purges, including the discovery of missiles that were filled with water instead of fuel.
Xi’s calls to reinforce the “political construction” of the PLA and “uphold the Party’s absolute leadership” refer to the restoration of organizational integrity and the subordination of personal interests to those of the CCP. Xi is pursuing ideological reinvigoration as the solution to correct the loss of discipline after the abandonment of communist ideology-driven policymaking. Xi perceived corruption as the greatest threat to the CCP’s rule when he took power in 2013 and embarked on comprehensive efforts to recenter ideology in governance and revive the party-state. Ideological doctrines that strive to strengthen the CCP’s leadership over society permeate all facets of PRC governance under Xi, from the broad dogma of Xi Jinping Thought to tailored concepts such as the Fengqiao Experience, which urges Party advocacy at the grassroots level.
Southeast Asia
Philippines
PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) spokesperson Mao Ning accused the Philippines of being the provocateur after a dramatic confrontation on June 17. PRC Coast Guard vessels resorted to a series of violent actions to board and disarm a Philippine navy supply boat, resulting in injuries for eight of the Philippine crew members. Mao urged the Philippines to stop misleading the international community in response to the Philippines President Ferdinand Marcos Jr.’s defiance of the PRC’s violent actions.[29]
PRC state media has repeatedly circulated statements from US foreign policy critic and former Marine intelligence officer Scott Ritter that the United States was only using the Philippines as a tool to create conflict with the PRC and would abandon the Philippines if war ensued.[30] The news articles featured direct quotes stating "China is not your enemy. China is your neighbor. China is your friend. China doesn't want war."[31]
The PRC’s portrayal of the US as a destabilizing force in the region is consistent with PRC efforts to detract from its own escalatory actions. PRC state-owned tabloid Global Times framed US intentions to deploy a Marine Littoral Regiment to Guam as evidence of the US’s aggressive intentions in the Indo-Pacific region. The Global Times further stated that the US intends to create instability in East Asia while using the Philippines and Japan as “cannon fodder.”[32]
China-Taiwan Weekly Update, June 21, 2024
Click here to read the full report
Authors: Matthew Sperzel and Daniel Shats of the Institute for the Study of War
Editors: Dan Blumenthal of the American Enterprise Institute
Data Cutoff: June 20 at 12pm ET
Key Takeaways
- The PRC hosted the 16th annual Straits Forum to promote stronger cross-strait linkages with the Taiwanese business community, civil society, and opposition political parties.
- Taiwanese internet celebrities are calling attention to CCP efforts to recruit them to facilitate United Front work.
- The PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs used revelations about a US information operation against the PRC’s COVID-19 vaccine to discredit other negative US narratives about the PRC.
- The PRC forcefully blocked a Philippine resupply mission to Second Thomas Shoal two days after the implementation of a new CCG regulation that permits more aggressive “law enforcement” in the South China Sea. A CCG and Philippine boat collided, and the CCG boarded, towed, emptied, and damaged two Philippine supply boats.
- The PRC and Australia agreed on June 17 to improve military-to-military communication to avoid future standoffs
Cross-Strait Relations
Taiwan
The PRC hosted the 16th annual Straits Forum to promote stronger cross-strait linkages with the Taiwanese business community, civil society, and opposition political parties. Deputy Director of the Straits Forum Organizing Committee Office Chen Zhiyong stated that the forum was focused on realizing the PRC’s goals for social and economic cross-strait integration. The goals are supported by the various initiatives in the PRC’s ambitious plan to increase Taiwan’s connectivity with the mainland’s Fujian province with infrastructure linkages and preferential economic programs for Taiwan residents.[1]
Taiwan’s Mainland Affairs Council (MAC) Deputy Minister Liang Wen-chieh stated that the Straits Forum is a United Front platform for the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). He reminded the public that the law forbids anyone from participating in any activities that involve the PRC’s “One Country, Two System” political vision for integrating Taiwan.[2] The United Front is a whole-of-government and society effort to advance the CCP’s ideology and win the hearts and minds of the Chinese people by forming a thorough alliance between the CCP and the rest of society.
The Straits Forum is an informational tool for the PRC to portray itself as the purveyor of peaceful and prosperous cross-strait relations, as well as highlight Taiwanese attendants’ conformity to CCP platitudes about cross-strait relations and national identity. The PRC’s Taiwan Affairs Office (TAO) claimed that more than 7,000 people from Taiwan attended, including representatives from political parties, various industries, and community leaders, in defiance of what it called the DPP’s “green terror” restrictions.[3] The forum did not result in any official policy outcomes for advancing cross-strait relations.
Kuomintang (KMT) Vice Chairman Sean Lien attended the forum, where he met with CCP Politburo member Wang Huning. PRC state media highlighted Lien’s alignment with CCP cross-strait narratives and opposition to formal Taiwanese independence. Wang stated in his speech that the PRC maintains the capability and will to “crush separatist plots for Taiwan’s independence.”[4] Past Straits Forums have featured similar meetings between CCP and KMT officials.[5] The CCP and KMT maintain regular political exchanges, which sometimes result in the CCP granting concessions that are beneficial to Taiwan’s economy. Such meetings serve to legitimize the KMT as the political party that is capable of managing a healthy cross-strait relationship, in contrast to the ruling DPP, with which the PRC severed contact in 2016 for its alleged “separatist” policies.
Wang is Chairman of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC), the foremost United Front work organization, as well as deputy leader of the Central Leading Group for Taiwan Affairs, making him one of the top CCP officials responsible for overseeing the PRC’s policy toward Taiwan.
CCP General Secretary Xi Jinping highlighted KMT-CCP cooperation, expressed opposition to Taiwanese independence, and promoted cross-strait unification in his congratulatory letter to the Whampoa Military Academy centennial celebration on June 17.[6] The Revolutionary Committee of the Kuomintang, a non-ROC, CCP-controlled entity that holds the designation of “political party,” emphasized the shared ideals between the KMT and the CCP to achieve national rejuvenation.[7] The PRC’s portrayal of the CCP-KMT relationship as one of cooperation and shared values is consistent with the PRC’s efforts to showcase the KMT’s legitimacy as the representative of Taiwan rather than the democratically-elected DPP government. The CCP’s emphasis on shared values and history between the two parties presents the CCP-KMT relationship as the hopeful path to cross-strait unification.
Minister of the ROC’s Veteran Affairs Retired and retired General Yen Teh-fa stated that few retirees of the ROC military went to the mainland to participate in the PRC’s anniversary event. Yen warned against accepting media interviews for those who did travel to the PRC and highlighted the risk of falling for tricks of the CCP’s cognitive warfare and united front tactics.[8] Former chairman of the disbanded Huang Fu-hsing wing of the KMT Chi Lin-lien was among the attendees.[9] The Chairperson of the KMT Cultural Communication Association distanced the KMT from Chi’s participation by stating that he held no party position.[10]
Taiwanese internet celebrities are calling attention to CCP efforts to recruit them to facilitate United Front work. YouTuber Potter King first claimed that the CCP is spending considerable resources to lure Taiwanese internet celebrities to the PRC under the pretense of traveling to film content.[11] Several other YouTubers and online celebrities subsequently confessed to being contacted by the CCP and published the contract letters that outlined goals to influence Taiwanese politics. YouTuber Ba Jiong revealed that the contract he received discussed a plan to establish a “Taiwan Support Party” that artists would join as honorary members to shape the future of PRC-Taiwan relations.[12] The terms stated that the CCP would invest millions of dollars to enable Taiwanese artists to put on shows and events that promoted CCP-aligned narratives of cross-strait relations. The contract encouraged Taiwanese artists with verified accounts to publish open invitations to the Taiwan Support Party. Taiwan’s Ministry of the Interior issued an announcement that urged individuals not to break the law by accepting instructions and funding from foreign forces that would compromise Taiwan’s national security.[13]
The PRC has targeted pop culture icons as an avenue to influence Taiwanese politics in the past. Reuters reported on December 28 that the PRC pressured the popular Taiwanese band Mayday to support the PRC’s claim that Taiwan is a part of China.[14] Reuters cited an anonymous source who provided access to an internal security note that details the PRC’s threats to fine the band for lip-syncing, a fraudulent offense in the PRC. A Taiwanese security official involved in the leak asserted that the PRC’s intimidation of Mayday was to influence Taiwan’s youth vote in the presidential elections.
China
The PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) used revelations about a US information operation against the PRC’s Covid-19 vaccine to discredit other negative US narratives about the PRC. A Reuters report on June 14 revealed that the US Department of Defense carried out clandestine psychological operations on Twitter from 2020 to 2021 to discredit the PRC’s Sinovac vaccine in the Philippines. The operation was intended to counter growing PRC influence in the Philippines.[15] MFA spokesperson Lin Jian said the operation was part of a “consistent practice” of the United States “manipulating social media to spread false information, poison public opinion, and smear the image of other countries.” Lin said the United States uses such tactics to discredit countries it wishes to “contain and suppress.” He claimed this approach applied not only to narratives about the Sinovac vaccine but also to US criticism of the PRC’s Belt and Road Initiative and that the PRC has “overcapacity” in its electric vehicle industry.[16]
The MFA deflected concerns about the PRC’s expanding nuclear arsenal by claiming the United States is the real threat to nuclear strategic stability. The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) released a report that estimated that the PRC’s nuclear warhead arsenal grew from 410 to 500 between 2023 and 2024, making it the world’s fastest-growing nuclear arsenal.[17] MFA spokesperson Lin Jian declined to comment on the PRC’s nuclear expansion except to say the PRC’s nuclear strategy is defensive and “maintains a high degree of stability, continuity, and predictability.” He claimed instead that the US investment in upgrading its nuclear triad, increase in “nuclear sharing,” and extended deterrence deserve more attention as the “major issues that truly concern global strategic stability.”[18] “Nuclear sharing” likely refers to the US-UK-Australia cooperation on nuclear-powered submarines, which the PRC has framed as a threat to the international nuclear non-proliferation regime.[19]
SIPRI’s estimate of the PRC’s nuclear arsenal aligns with estimates presented in the US Department of Defense’s China Military Power Report in 2023. The Department of Defense assessed that the PRC could reach 1,000 warheads by 2030 and 1,500 warheads by 2035.[20]
Southeast Asia
Philippines
The PRC forcefully blocked a Philippine resupply mission to Second Thomas Shoal two days after the implementation of a new CCG regulation that permits more aggressive “law enforcement” in the South China Sea. A CCG and Philippine boat collided, and the CCG boarded, towed, emptied, and damaged two Philippine supply boats. CCG, PLA Navy (PLAN), and Chinese Maritime Militia (CMM) vessels disrupted a joint Philippine Coast Guard and Navy resupply mission to Second Thomas Shoal on June 17. The Philippines controls Second Thomas Shoal and has troops stationed aboard the grounded warship Sierra Madre, but the PRC also claims the shoal as its territory. The Philippine supply ship and a PRC vessel collided during the confrontation. The PRC and the Philippines blamed each other for the collision.[21] The CCG also boarded, inspected, and towed away two Philippine inflatable boats carrying supplies and confiscated some of the supplies, including rifles. CCG personnel damaged the hulls of the boats with bladed weapons and abandoned them. At least eight Philippine personnel were injured during the clash, including one who lost a thumb.[22]
The Philippines accused the PRC of using “physical attacks and violence” against Philippine soldiers to prevent the resupply mission. The Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) released videos of the incident which showed the CCG deploying tear gas, blaring sirens, flashing strobe lights, and ramming the Philippines navy supply boats.[23] This is the first time the PRC has used bladed weapons or boarded a Philippine government vessel during its confrontations with the Philippines in the South China Sea.[24] It is the second time the Philippine military reported that the CCG had seized its supplies. The first time was on May 19, when the Philippine military said the CCG seized food and medicine it had airdropped to Second Thomas Shoal.[25]
The CCG claimed that the Philippines sent ships to “illegally” enter PRC waters around Second Thomas Shoal, which the PRC calls Ren’ai Reef and the Philippines calls Ayungin Shoal, and that the CCG acted in a “reasonable, legal, professional, and standard” way to warn, intercept, board and inspect, and forcibly expel the Philippine vessels.[26] The PRC MFA claimed the Philippine supply delivery included construction materials, which would be used to reinforce the Sierra Madre.[27] The PRC aims to prevent the delivery of construction materials to Second Thomas Shoal because the Philippines’ ability to maintain a presence on the shoal depends on the structural integrity of the Sierra Madre, a World War II-era ship that is severely dilapidated. The PRC most likely believes that preventing the delivery of supplies to the Sierra Madre will eventually force the Philippines to abandon the shoal as the Sierra Madre becomes uninhabitable.
The confrontation happened two days after the CCG officially implemented new procedures first announced on May 15 that authorize it to detain for up to 60 days any foreign national that illegally intrudes into the PRC’s claimed territory and to board and inspect the cargo of foreign vessels traveling to the PRC’s claimed waters. ISW previously assessed that the procedures were intended to enhance PRC efforts to assert its sovereignty claims in the South China Sea.[28] Armed Forces of the Philippines Chief Romeo Brawner urged Filipino fishermen to ignore the CCG’s restrictions and continue fishing operations as normal.[29] It is unclear whether the CCG attempted to arrest any of the Philippine personnel involved in the June 17 supply mission.
The PRC claims all the islands and maritime features within its delineated “nine-dash line” as PRC territory, including the Spratly Islands and nearly all other land features in the South China Sea. Other countries including the Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei, and Taiwan dispute some or all of the PRC’s claims in the region. A 2016 decision by the Permanent Court of Arbitration declared the PRC’s maritime claims within the nine-dash line to be legally invalid, but the PRC rejects this ruling. The PRC has deployed coast guard, maritime militia, and naval vessels using a variety of “gray zone” tactics including physically surrounding, ramming, and firing water cannons at Philippine vessels to contest Philippine control over several PRC-claimed features including Second Thomas Shoal. It uses such tactics to gain control of the territories without provoking US intervention or outright war.
The CCG claimed that it took “restrictive measures” against Philippine boats that landed on Sabina Shoal in the South China Sea. PRC state media Global Times reported on June 14 that the CCG confronted a Philippine ship that “intruded” into waters near Sabina Shoal and released small boats to “illegally” land on sandbars there. The CCG warned the Philippine ships of the PRC’s claimed sovereignty over the Spratly Islands, of which Sabina Shoal is a part, and took unspecified “restrictive measures.” Global Times did not specify when this incident occurred.[30] Philippine Coast Guard spokesperson Jay Tarriela asserted Philippine sovereignty over Sabina Shoal and denied that the CCG took any “regulatory actions” against the Philippine ship there, which he identified as the BRP Teresa Magbanua.[31] The Philippine Coast Guard deployed the Teresa Magbanua to Sabina Shoal on May 12 to monitor PRC activity in the area.[32] The Philippines has accused the PRC of dumping crushed coral at Sabina Shoal as a preparatory step to begin reclamation and build facilities there.[33]
Sabina Shoal is roughly 37 miles east of Second Thomas Shoal and is the staging point for Philippine resupply missions to Second Thomas Shoal. The Philippines and the PRC both claim it as their territory, although the shoal is located well within the Philippines’ Exclusive Economic Zone and the Philippines has de facto control of it. A PRC-controlled Sabina Shoal would extend the PRC’s territorial claims in the South China Sea and improve the PRC’s ability to assert its claim over the Second Thomas Shoal. A PRC-controlled Sabina Shoal would also provide the PRC with the opportunity to build a military facility to the east of the Second Thomas Shoal. This would surround the Second Thomas Shoal with PRC military facilities, which would enhance the difficulty of Philippine resupply missions to the Sierra Madre.
The PLA Navy (PLAN) deployed an amphibious assault ship to the Spratly Islands for the first time as part of an intensifying PRC effort to assert control over disputed South China Sea territories. Manila Times and PRC state media Global Times reported that a Type 075 helicopter landing dock, which is a type of PLA amphibious assault ship, was spotted for the first time near Subi Reef in the Spratly Islands. Subi Reef is a disputed territory and hosts one of the PRC’s main military bases in the South China Sea. Global Times cited unspecified “experts” who claimed the deployment was preparation for “emergency response” amid “repeated provocations” from the Philippines. The ship made its maiden voyage to the Spratly Islands shortly after another PLA amphibious assault ship held hovercraft drills around Sabina Shoal on June 4.[34] Philippines Coast Guard spokesperson Jay Tarriela said the deployment on June 4 was to disrupt the activities of Philippine scientists surveying Sabina Shoal.[35]
The PRC MFA claimed that the Philippines' application to delimit an extended continental shelf (ECS) in the South China Sea violated PRC sovereignty. The Philippines submitted a delimitation case for an ECS with the UN Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf on June 15. An ECS would grant the Philippines exclusive rights to resource exploration and exploitation within the extended boundaries. The Philippines Maritime and Ocean Affairs Department said it was entitled under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) to delimit the outer limits of its continental shelf beyond 200 nautical miles but less than 350 nautical miles from its shores. It did not specify how far out it seeks to delineate the extended shelf.[36] PRC MFA spokesperson Lin Jian called the Philippines’ “unilateral” submission of an ECS case a violation of “China’s sovereign rights and jurisdiction” and claimed the UN Commission would not review the case if it involved delimitation of disputed waters.[37] The PRC previously ignored and rejected a 2016 decision by the Permanent Court of Arbitration that its territorial claims within the Nine Dash Line have no legal basis. It would likely reject a UN Commission decision that grants the Philippines an extended continental shelf if the ECS overlaps with PRC territorial claims.
Oceania
The PRC and Australia agreed on June 17 to improve military-to-military communication to avoid future standoffs. Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese announced the agreement after a state visit from PRC Premier Li Qiang.[38] This marks the second high-level visit from a PRC official to Australia during the last three months and since Foreign Minister Wang Yi met with Albanese in March.[39]
The PRC has used confrontational intimidation tactics to deter Australian military presence in waters it deems to be its neighborhood, resulting in several tense encounters. Australia’s Department of Defence revealed a Chinese warship sent out a sonar pulse in proximity to an Australian naval vessel in the East China Sea on November 14, injuring a diver.[40] A PRC fighter jet released flares in the path of an Australian naval helicopter on May 4 during an Australian mission to ensure sanctions enforcement against the DPRK. PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) spokesperson Lin Jian claimed that the Australian helicopter deliberately flew close to the PRC’s airspace in a provocative manner.[41] The PRC has used this tactic to instigate confrontations with other foreign militaries in the past. The Canadian Ministry of Defence claimed that a PRC fighter jet launched flares in front of one of its military helicopters in the South China Sea on October 29.[42]
Both Li and Albanese signaled the meeting represented a stabilization of the relationship, following a period of turmoil in which the PRC imposed a series of economic trade restrictions against Australian goods, which were in response to tensions involving COVID-19 and PRC influence in domestic Australian politics. The two countries also signed a pact to improve cooperation in various areas, including visa exemptions, education, and climate change.[43] Li toured lithium processing plants in the province of Western Australia following his meeting with Albanese, highlighting the PRC’s interest in maintaining access to Australia’s critical minerals sector that supplies key inputs for the PRC’s electric vehicle production.[44]
China-Taiwan Weekly Update, June 13, 2024
Click here to read the full report.
Authors: Nils Peterson, Matthew Sperzel, Daniel Shats, and Joseph Su of the Institute for the Study of War
Editors: Dan Blumenthal and Frederick W. Kagan of the American Enterprise Institute
Data Cutoff: June 12 at Noon ET
Key Takeaways:
- Taiwan’s Executive Yuan returned a bill that would expand legislative oversight over the government to the Legislative Yuan for a second vote. The reform bill is very likely to pass the second review and become law.
- A PRC civilian drone dropped flyers and broadcast a video in the airspace over the Taiwanese outlying island of Kinmen
- Taiwanese officials said the PRC could use ROC military veterans who attend the Whampoa Military Academy centennial celebration in the PRC to facilitate espionage and promote pro-unification narratives.
- The United States, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom published a joint bulletin detailing how the People’s Republic of China’s People’s Liberation Army is recruiting current and former Western-trained fighter pilots and associated personnel to train its respective counterparts.
- The PRC blamed a Philippine medical evacuation for a Chinese Coast Guard coercive operation at the Second Thomas Shoal.
- The PRC denied Palau President Surangel Whipps Jr’s assertion that it would interfere with Palau’s general election in November 2024.
- PRC Foreign Minister Wang Yi met separately with acting Iranian Foreign Affairs Minister Ali Bagheri Kani and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov at the BRICS foreign ministers meeting in Nizhny Novgorod, Russia on June 10.
- The PRC and Russia are using the BRICS platform to advance alternative financial architecture that aims to insulate their trade from US sanctions.
Cross-Strait Relations
Taiwan
Taiwan’s Executive Yuan (EY) returned a bill that would expand legislative oversight over the government to the Legislative Yuan (LY) for a second vote. The Legislative Yuan passed the reform bill on May 28. The bill would grant the LY the ability to confirm political appointments, call any official to testify before the LY, and impose fines or criminal charges on anyone it deems to be in “contempt of legislature” for talking back or lying during testimony. The ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), which holds a minority in the LY, opposed the bill. [1] EY President (Premier) Cho Jung-tai with the approval of ROC President Lai Ching-te officially requested on June 11 that the LY conduct a second review of the bill and vote on it again.[2] The EY said elements of the bill were too broad, unconstitutional, or difficult to implement.[3] The LY has 15 days to vote on the bill again. If a majority in the LY votes for the bill, it will become law with no option for the EY or the president to veto it. If they vote against the bill or fail to vote within 15 days, the bill will not become law.
The reform bill is very likely to pass the second review and become law. The Kuomintang (KMT) and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) have stated they will support the reform bill on the second review despite opposition from the DPP. The KMT and TPP jointly hold a majority in the LY and were the parties that advanced and passed the reforms the first time.[4] DPP leaders including LY caucus whip Ker Chien-ming and President Lai Ching-te have stated that they will request a constitutional interpretation of the bill if it becomes law. The Constitutional Court finding the law unconstitutional would prevent its implementation.[5]
A PRC civilian drone dropped flyers and broadcast a video in the airspace over the Taiwanese outlying island of Kinmen. The Fujian-based PRC firm Zhongli Technology flew a drone into the airspace of the main island of Kinmen on June 8 and filmed a video that it broadcast on its Douyin account.[6] Douyin is the PRC’s domestic version of TikTok. The drone flew near the Mashan Observation Post in northeastern Kinmen and dropped leaflets urging Taiwan to “come back” and conveying holiday wishes for the Dragon Boat Festival.[7] Mashan Observation Post is a historic ROC military site that the ROC once used to broadcast propaganda encouraging PRC soldiers to surrender and join the ROC.[8] The PRC’s Taiwan Affairs Office (TAO) said the incident was the “spontaneous action by mainland netizens to express their hope for reunification and opposition to ‘Taiwan independence.’”[9] There have been several past instances of ostensibly civilian drones from the PRC violating Kinmen’s airspace and filming videos or dropping flyers over military facilities. The ROC military claimed that some of these past instances were part of the PRC’s “cognitive operations” against Taiwan.[10]
Taiwanese officials said the PRC could use ROC military veterans who attend the Whampoa Military Academy centennial celebration in the PRC to facilitate espionage and promote pro-unification narratives. The PRC and ROC are holding rival centennial celebrations for the Whampoa Military Academy on and around June 16. The PRC’s Whampoa Military Academy Alumni Association said that it invited 3,000 alumni from Taiwan to attend the celebration in the PRC.[11] ROC Veterans Affairs Council minister Yen Teh-fa said he expects fewer than 100 retired Taiwanese military officers to attend, however, while around 10,000 retired ROC officers will attend the celebration in Taiwan.[12] Defense Minister Wellington Koo urged Taiwanese retired officers not to attend the PRC event due to the risks of leaking personal information.[13] An unnamed ROC official told Taiwanese media that the retired Taiwanese officers who attend the PRC events will be required to get PRC residency documents, driver’s licenses, and bank accounts and would be given cellphones with pre-downloaded applications to allow them to access transportation and other services in the PRC. The unnamed official said these measures could enable PRC espionage when the retired officers return to Taiwan, as Taiwan cannot monitor PRC financial institutions or telecommunications. Another unnamed source said the CCP’s United Front Work Department arranged the retired officers’ itinerary in the PRC to feature World War II memorials, a memorial for the Nanjing Massacre, as well as the Whampoa Academy’s former site in Guangzhou to build a narrative that the Taiwan and PRC militaries are one entity and Japan is their common enemy.[14]
The PRC TAO publicized comments by retired Taiwanese general Chi Lin-lien, who spoke in favor of “expelling Taiwan independence and reviving China.” Chi will attend the Whampoa Military Academy centennial events in the PRC. Chi is the former chairman of the KMT’s veteran-dominated Huang Fu-hsing faction, which the KMT disbanded earlier in 2024. The TAO spokesperson claimed that Chi’s comments aroused “deep patriotism” and praise from people on both sides of the Taiwan Strait and proved that the DPP’s efforts to “de-Sinicize” Taiwan cannot “weaken the Chinese feelings of compatriots on both sides of the Taiwan Strait.” [15]
The Whampoa Military Academy has historic importance to both the ROC and PRC. The ROC founded the academy in 1924 in Guangzhou, which is now part of the PRC, and included both KMT and Communist Party members among its faculty and student body. Many Whampoa faculty and alumni became members of the ROC and CCP militaries who fought in the Chinese Civil War and World War II. The school’s first superintendent was Chiang Kai-shek, who later became the president of the ROC. The academy relocated to Kaohsiung, Taiwan after the Chinese Civil War but remains an important historical site in the PRC.[16]
PRC officials “firmly opposed” the US sale of F-16 parts to Taiwan. The US Department of State approved two potential sales of $300,000 of F-16 parts and related equipment to Taiwan on June 6.[17] Spokesperson for the PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) and Ministry of National Defense (MOD) both said the PRC is “strongly dissatisfied and firmly opposed to” the sales. They claimed the sale violated the one-China principle, harmed the PRC’s sovereignty, and undermined peace in the Taiwan Strait.[18]
China
The United States, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom published a joint bulletin detailing how the People’s Republic of China’s People’s Liberation Army (PLA) is recruiting current and former Western-trained fighter pilots and associated personnel to train its respective counterparts.[19] The bulletin warned that the PLA is continuing its efforts to recruit current and former personnel from NATO and Western countries to enhance its air operations while also gaining insight into Western aerial tactics, techniques, and procedures. It noted that while the most sought-after personnel were fighter pilots, the PLA has also targeted flight engineers, air operations center staff, and technical experts for recruitment. The bulletin warned the PLA Air Force (PLAAF) and PLA Navy (PLAN) are actively recruiting Western personnel through private companies across the globe in Africa, the Middle East, and China. It also warned that providing unauthorized training or expertise can face civil or criminal penalties under the US Arms Export Act.
The five countries that published the bulletin have reported cases of PLA efforts to recruit their military aviation personnel during the last two years. In October 2022, the UK Ministry of Defense announced up to 30 former Royal Air Force pilots had trained PLA aviators with compensation reported as high as USD 270,000.[20] In October 2022, New Zealand’s Ministry of Defense told the Financial Times that four former pilots were employed by a now US-sanctioned South African flight school that reportedly has trained PLA pilots.[21] The Australian Ministry of Defense also launched an investigation in 2022 into reports that Australian pilots had accepted training roles for the PLA.[22] An unspecified PRC Embassy spokesperson in the United States declined to comment on the bulletin, but stated that “some US officials have been quick to accuse China and smear the normal exchanges and cooperation between China and the US.”[23]
Southeast Asia
Philippines
The PRC blamed a Philippine medical evacuation for a Chinese Coast Guard coercive operation at the Second Thomas Shoal. Two Chinese Coast Guard (CCG) ships, two smaller ships, and two rubber vessels harassed a Philippine medical evacuation operation from the grounded Sierra Madre on May 19. One CCG ship fired a water cannon and rammed a Philippine rubber boat.[24] The incident did not become public knowledge until Philippine media reported on it during the first week of June.[25] PRC MFA Spokeswoman Mao Ning stated on June 7 that the Philippines did not notify the PRC in advance, which the PRC claims is a necessary prerequisite due to its territorial claim over the Second Thomas Shoal.[26] Philippine Coast Guard (PCG) Spokesman Jay Tarriela stated on June 6 that the PCG informed the CCG via radio and public address system about the “humanitarian nature of our mission for medical evacuation.”[27] Philippine National Security Adviser Secretary Eduardo M. Año stated on June 8 that the CCG actions on May 19 were “barbaric and inhumane.”[28]
The PRC is conducting a campaign to enforce its territorial claims over disputed maritime features in the South China Sea. The PRC deployed research vessels and divers to the Sabina Shoal in early May, potentially as part of a campaign to prevent the Philippines from defending its claim to the Second Thomas Shoal. This is a change from April when the PRC deployed the Chinese Coast Guard to block Philippine ships from reaching Second Thomas Shoal and did not conduct efforts to reclaim Sabina Shoal.[29] The PRC also conducted its largest-ever blockade at Scarborough in an attempt to block a fleet of Philippine civilian ships from resupplying fishermen near Scarborough Shoal.[30] The Chinese Coast Guard also released new law enforcement procedures on May 15, which it could use to justify the arrest and detainment of non-PRC nationals and vessels, such as Philippine resupply ships or Filipino fishermen, within the boundaries of PRC territorial claims.[31]
Oceania
The PRC denied Palau President Surangel Whipps Jr’s assertion that it would interfere with Palau’s general election in November 2024. Whipps said in a Reuters interview that his recognition of Taiwanese sovereignty makes him an enemy of the PRC in the PRC’s view.[32] Palau is one of 12 countries that maintain diplomatic relations with the Republic of China (Taiwan).[33] PRC MFA Spokeswoman Mao Ning denied on June 6 that the PRC would interfere in Palau’s general election and urged Palau to abandon diplomatic relations with Taiwan.[34]
Palau is part of a sea line of communication (SLOC) that provides a security route connecting American allies and partners, such as the Philippines and Taiwan, to the US territory of Guam and the state of Hawaii. The United States Indo-Pacific Command (USINDOPACOM) defines SLOCs as “the principal maritime routes between ports, as used for trade, military, or other purposes.”[35] Palau’s relationship with the United States is governed by a Compact of Free Association (COFA). The COFA grants the United States extensive military access throughout Palau’s territories.[36]
Russia and Iran
PRC Foreign Minister Wang Yi met separately with acting Iranian Foreign Affairs Minister Ali Bagheri Kani and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov at the BRICS foreign ministers meeting in Nizhny Novgorod, Russia on June 10. The Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) and Chinese MFA both stated that Lavrov and Wang discussed diplomatic coordination in international organizations such as the United Nations Security Council.[37] Wang stated China is willing to work with Russia to “maintain strategic focus” and “promote the steady and long-term development of bilateral relations.”[38] Wang and Bagheri Kani both emphasized a willingness to build a multilateral world order and enhance the voice of the Global South in international affairs.[39] Wang viewed the purpose of the meeting as strengthening BRICS multilateralism in international affairs, “safeguard[ing] peace and security,” as well as enhancing BRICS economic, technological, and cultural exchanges.[40]
The PRC and Russia are using the BRICS platform to advance alternative financial architecture that aims to insulate their trade from US sanctions. Kremlin aide Yury Ushakov announced on March 5 that BRICS will work to create an independent payment system based on digital currencies and blockchain.[41] PRC efforts to de-dollarize international trade have made little progress to date. The PRC created the Cross-Border Interbank Payment System (CIPS) in 2015 as a settlement and payment clearing system for international transactions that use the yuan. Approximately 30 Russian banks are direct participants in CIPS.[42] Average daily transactions on CIPS increased roughly 50 percent in the 12 months following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, albeit from a small base.[43] Despite the increased volume of cross-border payments under CIPS, the system has not gained sufficient traction to make up for Russia’s lost access to the international financial system after Western sanctions limited Russian banks’ participation in the dominant infrastructure.
The PRC and Russia are branding the new payment system as a BRICS-wide initiative to establish the legitimacy of the system and make their criticisms of US dollar dominance in global trade appear as a shared concern across the international community. Foreign Minister Wang Yi made concerns about economic security a focus during the BRICS summit. Wang criticized the “securitization” of economic issues and increasing unilateral sanctions and urged the world to support BRICS efforts to promote multipolarity and fight anti-globalist and unipolar hegemony.[44] White House National Security Communications Adviser John Kirby told reporters on June 11 that the Group of Seven (G7) summit in Italy would “address the PRC’s support for the Russian defense industrial base.”[45]
China-Taiwan Weekly Update, June 6, 2024
Click here to read the full report with maps
Authors: Matthew Sperzel, Daniel Shats, Joseph Su, and Nils Peterson of the Institute for the Study of War
Editors: Dan Blumenthal and Frederick W. Kagan of the American Enterprise Institute
Data Cutoff: June 5 at Noon ET
The China–Taiwan Weekly Update is a joint product from the Institute for the Study of War and the American Enterprise Institute. The update supports the ISW–AEI Coalition Defense of Taiwan project, which assesses Chinese campaigns against Taiwan, examines alternative strategies for the United States and its allies to deter the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) aggression, and—if necessary—defeat the People’s Liberation Army (PLA). The update focuses on the Chinese Communist Party’s paths to controlling Taiwan and cross–Taiwan Strait developments.
Key Takeaways
- The PRC is exerting greater pressure on Taiwan across domains following the inauguration of President Lai Ching-te in May
- Two People’s Liberation Army naval ships entered Taiwan’s restricted waters near Kinmen Island on May 29, a move that signals escalating PRC efforts to assert control over the waters
- The PRC suspended tariff exemptions on 134 Taiwanese goods included in the Cross-strait Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement.
- PRC Defense Minister Dong Jun and a Ministry of National Defense (MoD) spokesperson expressed opposition to “rampant” US freedom of navigation activities and criticized them as illegitimate.
- The PRC MFA condemned the trilateral United States-Japan-South Korea defense ministers meeting as provocatively targeting the PRC.
- The PRC framed the Philippines as provoking regional instability at the Shangri-La Dialogue as part of an effort to justify PRC coercion targeting the Philippines in the South China Sea.
- PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs Spokeswoman Mao Ning announced China will not attend the upcoming Russia-Ukraine War peace summit in Switzerland from June 15-16.
- The People's Republic of China seeks to diversify its energy supply chains through negotiations with Russia on the proposed Power of Siberia 2 pipeline and diplomatic outreach to Middle Eastern states.
Cross-Strait Relations
Taiwan
The PRC is exerting greater pressure on Taiwan across domains following the inauguration of President Lai Ching-te in May. PRC officials signaled after Taiwan’s presidential election in January that it views the incoming DPP administration as hostile separatists who instigate cross-strait tensions. The PRC escalated its military and economic lines of coercion against Taiwan after Lai’s inauguration on May 20. PRC officials have maintained fierce rhetoric accusing Lai and the DPP of antagonism to justify the PRC’s actions since the inauguration.
Two People’s Liberation Army (PLA) ships entered Taiwan’s restricted waters near Kinmen Island on May 29, a move that signals escalating PRC efforts to assert control over the waters.[1] Kinmen is a Taiwan-controlled island with a large military garrison roughly 3 kilometers from the coast of the PRC. The incursion follows months of Chinese Coast Guard (CCG) ships violating Taiwan’s restricted and prohibited waters around its outer islands, which is aimed at eroding Taiwan’s sovereignty over waters where it holds jurisdiction. Taiwan does not formally claim any territorial waters around Kinmen partly due to its proximity to the PRC, but it designates “prohibited” and “restricted” waters around Kinmen, which it treats as equivalent to “territorial waters” and a “contiguous zone,” respectively. The PRC has normalized the presence of CCG ships in Kinmen’s restricted and prohibited waters since February, increasing both the frequency of incursions and the number of ships. PRC presence in Taiwan-controlled waters around Kinmen peaked in May before President Lai Ching-te’s inauguration, when five CCG ships conducted drills with seven official PRC ships near the island.[2]
Taiwanese security analysts such as Institute for National Defense and Security Research Director Szu Tzu-yan noted the structure of the ships indicated that they were landing craft.[3] Taiwanese media outlet China Times cited unnamed military officials who stated that this was the first time in ten years that a PLA ship entered Kinmen’s restricted waters.[4] One retired general noted the significance of the event as a gray zone operation and distinguished it from occasional instances in which PRC ships cut corners through Kinmen’s restricted waters to save time.[5] The PRC’s deployment of PLA ships in Taiwan-controlled waters represents a tangible manifestation of recent PRC pressure against Taiwan. The incident follows large-scale PLA exercises that encircled Taiwan from May 23–24 after Lai’s inauguration on May 20. Ministry of Defense spokesperson Wu Qian stated that the exercises were aimed at combating the arrogance of "Taiwan independence" and deterring external interference and intervention. Wu stated that the exercises were “completely reasonable, legal, justified, and necessary.”[6] CCG ships concurrently entered Taiwan-controlled waters around two islands in the Matsu archipelago.
The PRC suspended tariff exemptions on 134 Taiwanese goods included in the Cross-strait Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA).[7] The goods are primarily chemical products, industrial metals, machinery, rubbers, and plastics. Taiwanese exports to the PRC constitute a large share of the total in these categories.[8] This is the PRC’s second suspension of ECFA tariff exemptions on similar products since December 21, just weeks before Taiwan’s presidential elections. At that time, the PRC targeted 12 hydrocarbon and petrochemical products.[9]
The PRC implements trade restrictions in a coercive or punitive manner to weaken political support for the ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), which it regards as a threat due to the DPP’s proactive resistance to PRC efforts to undermine Taiwan’s sovereignty. The PRC adopted bans on Taiwanese fish and pomelo imports as a form of economic punishment after then-US Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi arrived in Taiwan in August 2022.[10] The PRC also makes economic concessions to increase political support for the opposition Kuomintang (KMT), which it favors due to the KMT’s willingness to pursue closer cross-strait relations. The PRC Deputy Director of the General Administration of Customs Zhao Zenglian announced on April 28 during a meeting with KMT Caucus Whip Fu Kun-chi that the PRC would lift its ban on Taiwanese pomelos and fish imports.[11] PRC state media highlighted Fu’s acceptance of the 1992 Consensus in his meeting with Zhao. The PRC established the 1992 Consensus as a pre-condition for cross-strait cooperation. It states that both sides agree there is only one China, and that Taiwan is part of the only China.
Taiwan Affairs Office (TAO) spokesperson Chen Binhua framed the measures as necessary retaliation in response to Taiwan’s alleged “unilateral adoption of discriminatory trade restrictions” on more than 2,500 products from the PRC.[12] The CCP’s blaming Taiwan for the deterioration of trade relations is consistent with its efforts to style itself as the party pursuing economic cooperation that is beneficial for both sides of the strait. Chen highlighted a series of cross-strait economic initiatives that the PRC is pursuing during a TAO press conference on May 29. Chen framed the initiatives as successful modes to attract people from Taiwan to the mainland despite recent cross-strait tensions, which it claims are a product of the DPP government’s destructive cross-strait policies.[13]
The PRC also uses economic coercion to achieve Taiwan’s diplomatic isolation. The PRC rejected imports of Guatemalan coffee and macadamia nuts in May to punish Guatemala for maintaining diplomatic relations with Taiwan.[14] Guatemala is one of twelve states that have formal diplomatic relations with Taiwan. PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) Spokesman Wang Wenbin criticized Guatemalan Foreign Minister Carlos Martínez for attending ROC President Lai Ching-te’s inauguration on May 20.
PRC Defense Minister Dong Jun threatened Taiwanese “separatists” and their foreign supporters in his speech at the Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore. Dong gave a speech on “China’s Approach to Global Security” at the dialogue on June 2 in which he claimed Taiwan’s DPP administration was “pursuing separation in an incremental way” and had recently made “fanatical statements that show their betrayal of the Chinese nation and their ancestors.” Dong also accused “some external interfering forces” of using a “salami-slicing strategy” to hollow out the One China Principle through arms sales and Taiwan-related legislation. He was most likely referring to the United States. He said these forces’ attempts to “embolden Taiwan independence separatists” are “dragging Taiwan into a dangerous situation.” Dong said that the PRC is still committed to peaceful reunification, but that this prospect is being eroded by “separatists” and foreign forces. He stressed that “whoever dares to split Taiwan from China will be crushed to pieces and invite their own destruction.”[16] Dong’s rhetoric regarding Taiwan mirrors persistent and aggressive diatribes against the DPP and “Taiwan separatists” from PRC officials since Lai’s inauguration.[17] PRC messaging seeks to justify the PRC’s actions amid increasing pressure to shape the narrative of cross-strait relations.
The ROC Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Mainland Affairs Council condemned Dong’s comments on Taiwan. They accused the PRC of violating the UN Charter’s provision against the use or threats of force and of increasing risks to Asia-Pacific peace and security.[18]
China
PRC Defense Minister Dong Jun and a Ministry of National Defense (MoD) spokesperson expressed opposition to “rampant” US freedom of navigation activities and criticized them as illegitimate. MND spokesperson Col. Wu Qian said on May 30 that the PRC the US notion of “freedom of navigation” is a “false proposition.” Wu claimed the South China Sea is one of the freest and safest waterways in the world and that the PRC has always respected freedom of navigation and overflight under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). He said that “navigation cannot be ‘rampant’ and freedom cannot be ‘reckless,’” however. He said the PRC opposes “rampant freedom” and accused the United States of using freedom of navigation as an excuse to interfere in regional affairs, maintain US hegemony, and undermine other countries’ sovereignty.[19]
Defense Minister Dong Jun claimed in the question-and-answer session following his June 2 speech at the Shangri-La Dialogue that “some countries” that have not signed UNCLOS are using freedom-of-navigation operations (FONOPs) to enter the territorial sea of other countries. He was referring to the United States conducting FONOPs through waters around the Paracel Islands and other PRC-claimed islands which the PRC considers to be its territorial waters. Dong compared this practice to “driving through others’ houses” instead of driving on the main road. He claimed that “we [countries of the Asia-Pacific region] are all victims of these kinds of operations” and denied that they should be considered “freedom of navigation.”[20]
The PRC most recently accused the United States of illegally intruding into its territorial waters during a US FONOP in waters around the Paracel Islands on May 10. The PRC claims straight archipelagic baselines around the Paracel Islands, which means it considers all the water between the islands as its territorial waters. The PRC also requires foreign ships to get permission or provide advance notification when they sail through its territorial waters. The UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) does not permit countries to restrict “innocent passage” through their territorial waters, however. “Innocent passage” is uninterrupted transit through the waters without other activities such as fishing, research, intelligence collection, or military activities. UNCLOS also only permits designated archipelagic states to draw straight-baseline claims around their islands. Non-archipelagic states, such as the PRC, can only claim waters up to 12 nautical miles from their shores as their territorial sea.[21]
PRC Defense Minister Dong Jun met with US Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin on May 31 on the sidelines of the Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore. This was the first in-person meeting between US and PRC defense ministers since 2022. MoD spokesperson Wu Qian described the meeting as “positive, practical, and constructive.”[22] A US readout said that Austin emphasized the importance of maintaining open lines of military-to-military communication, expressed concern about recent PLA activity around Taiwan, discussed the PRC’s support for Russia’s defense industrial base, and expressed concerns about recent provocations from North Korea including direct contributions to Russia’s war in Ukraine.[23] Dong said the purpose of military-to-military communication is to enhance understanding, eliminate misunderstandings, and accumulate mutual trust. He expressed hope that the United States will be “consistent in words and deeds” and explore a “correct way” for the two sides to get along in line with common interests. Dong emphasized the PRC’s bottom line on Taiwan and Second Thomas Shoal. The PRC readout did not mention the other issues that Austin brought up.[24] PRC media reported that Dong also expressed strong opposition to the US deployment of intermediate-range missiles to the Philippines during an exercise, though the official readout did not mention this issue.[25] MoD spokesperson Wu said on May 30 that the missile deployment “brought huge risks of war to the region.”[26]
PRC Vice Foreign Minister Ma Zhaoxu met US Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Kurt Campbell in Washington, DC on May 30. Ma expressed a range of PRC grievances with the United States on Taiwan, the South China Sea, economic issues, and Ukraine. The US readout said the “candid and constructive” meeting was part of an effort to maintain open lines of communication to manage bilateral competition. Campbell raised US concerns about the PRC’s “destabilizing actions” in the Taiwan Strait, East China Sea, and South China Sea, as well as PRC support for Russia’s defense industrial base.[27] Ma agreed to maintain high-level exchanges but said "the practice of the United States seeking dialogue and cooperation while undermining China's interests is not feasible and cannot be done.” He said the PRC will never agree to contain, suppress, and deprive the PRC of its legitimate right to development. Ma called Taiwan the “insurmountable red line” in US-PRC relations and urged the United States to abide by the one-China principle if it wanted to maintain cross-strait peace. Ma also urged the United States to stop “politicizing” economic issues, stop “instigating and supporting infringement and provocation” in the South China Sea, and stop “smearing and pressuring China” on the Ukraine war.[28]
The Ma-Campbell meeting came one day after Campbell briefed NATO partners and framed China’s material assistance to Russia as “already having chosen a side.” Campbell said that PRC economic support for Russia is a “sustained, comprehensive effort that is backed up by the leadership in China” to support Russia “to the hilt” and allow Russia to “reconstitute elements of their military force,” including long-range missiles, artillery, UAVs, battlefield awareness, and other capabilities.[29] The United States has accused the PRC of supplying Russia with dual-use components including machine tools and nitrocellulose, which is used in propellants.[30] The PRC has officially presented itself as neutral on the war in Ukraine and framed its economic support of Russia as “normal trade relations.” It has largely adopted Russian framing of the war including portraying US aid to Ukraine as “adding fuel to the fire,” however.[31]
Northeast Asia
Japan and South Korea
The PRC MFA condemned the trilateral United States-Japan-South Korea defense ministers meeting as provocatively targeting the PRC. The United States, Japanese, and South Korean ministers committed to trilateral cooperation to create a Free and Open Indo-Pacific. They also condemned North Korean missile launches and regional provocations.[32] PRC MFA Spokeswoman Mao Ning accused the United States of instigating confrontation in the region. She stated the PRC aimed for the maintenance of peace on the Korean peninsula but declined to condemn North Korean provocations.[33]
Southeast Asia
Philippines
The PRC framed the Philippines as provoking regional instability at the Shangri-La Dialogue as part of an effort to justify PRC coercion targeting the Philippines in the South China Sea. Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr stated during his May 31 keynote address that the Philippines was on the front line to assert the integrity of UNCLOS against “assertive actors who aim to propagate excessive and baseless claims through force, intimidation, and deception.”[34] The PRC MFA stated in response that the Philippines was fully responsible for the escalation in the South China Sea. The PRC MFA also rejected the 2016 UNCLOS Arbitration Tribunal ruling that rejected the legitimacy of PRC claims to territory inside of the nine-dash line and land reclamation activities.[35] PRC Minister of National Defense Dong Jun claimed in his June 2 speech that “a certain country [Philippines], emboldened by outside powers [United States], has broken bilateral agreements and its own promises, made premeditated provocations and created false scenarios to mislead the public.”[36]
The PRC is conducting a campaign to enforce its territorial claims over disputed maritime features in the South China Sea. The PRC deployed research vessels and divers to the Sabina Shoal in early May, potentially as part of a campaign to prevent the Philippines from defending its claim to the Second Thomas Shoal. This is a change from April when the PRC deployed the Chinese Coast Guard to block Philippine ships from reaching Second Thomas Shoal and did not conduct efforts to reclaim Sabina Shoal.[37] The PRC also conducted its largest-ever blockade at Scarborough in an attempt to block a fleet of Philippine civilian ships from resupplying fishermen near Scarborough Shoal.[38] The Chinese Coast Guard also released new law enforcement procedures on May 15, which it could use to justify the arrest and detainment of non-PRC nationals and vessels, such as Philippine resupply ships or Filipino fishermen, within the boundaries of PRC territorial claims.[39]
Oceania
Palau President Surangel Whipps Jr. accused the PRC of conducting a cyberattack that stole 20,000 government documents, including military information related to the United States and Japan. The documents appeared on the dark web in early April. These documents included the location of a U.S. radar installation in Palau, crew lists of Japanese Navy ships that visited Palau, and unspecified details about Palau’s diplomatic relationship with Taiwan.[40] President Whipps emphasized the strength of Palau’s relationship with Taiwan in response to the hack.[41] The Republic of China condemned the cyberattack and began working with Palau to strengthen cybersecurity against “authoritarian infiltration.”[42] The PRC MFA denied responsibility for the attack and accused Palau of lacking evidence for their conclusion.[43]
Europe
The PRC Ministry of State Security (MSS) claimed to have uncovered two spies working for the British intelligence agency MI6. The MSS said one of the spies surnamed Wang studied abroad in the UK in 2015, where MI6 bribed him. He induced his wife, Zhou, to become a spy as well, according to the MSS.[44] The MSS accusation comes as two employees of the Hong Kong Economic and Trade Office will go to trial on espionage charges in the United Kingdom.[45]
The PRC United Front Work Department provided financial support to the Dutch political party NL Plan, which is participating in the European Parliamentary elections from June 6–9. The United Front Work Department is a CCP organization that blends influence activities and intelligence operations to shape a target’s political environment and policies to the CCP’s benefit.[46] NL Plan received 42,000 euros (45,643 USD) from organizations affiliated with the United Front, such as the Chinese Council for Peaceful National Reunification in the Netherlands.[47]
United Front-supported parties, such as NL Plan, sitting in the European Parliament could aid the PRC in blocking EU actions, such as sanctions against the PRC. Prominent NL Plan member Dong Lili stated that “whether you are inside or outside of China, we should all put our energy into making our motherland stronger.”[48] The European Parliament endorses the EU’s annual budget as well as international agreements.[49]
Russia-Ukraine War
PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs Spokeswoman Mao Ning announced China will not attend the upcoming Russia-Ukraine War peace summit in Switzerland from June 15–16 due to the absence of Russia.[50] PRC MFA Spokeswoman Mao Ning stated that China does not believe the summit will meet China’s three proposals.[51] China’s stated requirements for an international peace summit are recognition by both Russia and Ukraine, equal participation by all parties, and fair discussion of all peace plans.[52] Mao instead said China would continue to promote dialogue and lasting peace in “its own way” and that China’s position of non-attendance is “fair and just, not directed at any party, and certainly not at this summit.” [53]
PRC President Xi Jinping met with German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, French President Emmanuel Macron, and President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen in April and May. All three European leaders urged Xi to pressure Russia to end its war against Ukraine.[54] The PRC's decision not to attend the upcoming peace summit signifies the failure of these efforts so far to convince Xi to use his leverage over Russia to this end.
The People's Republic of China (PRC) seeks to diversify its energy supply chains through negotiations with Russia on the proposed Power of Siberia 2 (PS-2) pipeline and diplomatic outreach to Middle Eastern states. The Financial Times (FT) reported on June 2 that three unspecified sources familiar with the matter stated that the PRC and Russia are in stalled negotiations regarding the PS-2 gas pipeline. The PRC wants to pay prices near Russia's subsidized domestic gas prices and to commit only to buying a small part of the pipeline's planned capacity.[55] Russia seeks higher prices to make up for lost LNG exports to the EU following a unified EU drive to move away from Russian energy products. The EU is on track to import roughly 82 percent less LNG from Russia in 2024 than in pre-war 2021.[56] The PRC is simultaneously pursuing greater access to oil and natural gas resources in the Middle East, such as through the China-Arab States Cooperation Forum (CASCF) on May 30. PRC diplomatic efforts with the UAE and Iraq at the CASCF included discussions about expanding cooperation and Chinese investment in the oil and natural gas industries.[57]
The PRC seeks to diversify its energy supply chains to meet increasing domestic demand beyond 2030. Columbia University's Center on Global Energy Policy stated that the PRC will mostly or entirely be able to meet its projected increased demand for imported gas with existing supply contracts until 2030, but that the PRC's demand for imported gas will exceed the capacity of its existing contracts by roughly 150 billion cubic meters, 50% of China’s predicted imports of 300 billion cubic meters by 2040.[58] The PRC’s state-owned China National Petroleum Company projected China’s total natural gas demand would sit at roughly 605.9 billion cubic meters with domestic Chinese production fulfilling the additional 300 billion cubic meters required.[59
The European Union is finalizing a sanctions package against Russia, which may grant leverage to the PRC in its negotiations over the PS-2 pipeline. European Commissioner for Energy Kadri Simson stated on June 3 that the EU aims to finalize its 14th sanctions package against Russia in June. This will be the first sanctions package to target the Russian liquid natural gas (LNG) trade.[60] This would provide the PRC with greater economic leverage over the Russian energy market as Russia would have fewer avenues to sell over 18 billion cubic meters of LNG to the EU, as it did in 2023, after the sanctions.[61]
China-Taiwan Weekly Update, May 30, 2024
Click here to read the full report
Authors: Nils Peterson, Matthew Sperzel, and Daniel Shats of the Institute for the Study of War
Editors: Dan Blumenthal and Frederick W. Kagan of the American Enterprise Institute
Data Cutoff: May 30 at 9am ET
The China–Taiwan Weekly Update is a joint product from the Institute for the Study of War and the American Enterprise Institute. The update supports the ISW–AEI Coalition Defense of Taiwan project, which assesses Chinese campaigns against Taiwan, examines alternative strategies for the United States and its allies to deter the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) aggression, and—if necessary—defeat the People’s Liberation Army (PLA). The update focuses on the Chinese Communist Party’s paths to controlling Taiwan and cross–Taiwan Strait developments.
Key Takeaways
- Taiwan’s opposition-led Legislative Yuan passed legislative reforms to strengthen the legislature’s oversight powers over the government.
- At least 45 Taiwanese musicians, actors, and other celebrities shared a post by PRC state media CCTV on the social media platform Weibo in support of “reunification.”
- The CCP rejected opportunities that the ROC government has offered to restart cross-strait exchanges and cool down tensions.
- The PRC Ministry of Defense and state media selectively publicized comments from the UN Secretary-General’s spokesperson to bolster its stance that Taiwan is a part of the PRC under international law.
- A PRC delegation led by Minister of National Defense Dong Jun attended the Shangri-La Dialogue.
Cross-Strait Relations
Taiwan
Taiwan’s Legislative Yuan (LY) passed legislative reforms to strengthen the legislature’s oversight powers over the government. The bill that the Kuomintang (KMT) and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) proposed included amendments to the Law Governing the Legislature's Power. The reforms permit the LY to call on any public official to testify before an investigative committee and confirm political appointments. They also mandate that the president give an annual national address on the state of the nation followed by a question-and-answer session with legislators. The reforms impose fines of up to NT$200,000 ($6,206) for “contempt of legislature.” The LY can impose these fines on anyone who fails to appear at a legislative hearing, refuses to answer questions, asks questions back to legislators, fails to provide requested documents, or lies.[1] The LY also passed an amendment to Taiwan’s Criminal Code to make lying to the LY a criminal offense punishable by a fine of up to NT$200,000 ($6,206) and up to one year in prison.[2] The new reforms that strengthen the legislature’s oversight powers will increase the KMT and TPP opposition’s ability to check, investigate, and hinder the agenda and operation of President Lai’s DPP administration. The KMT and TPP together hold a majority of seats in the LY.
The LY approved the bill amid large-scale protests. Around 70,000 protesters in Taipei and thousands more in other cities gathered to protest the legislative reforms on May 28. A crowd of 100,000 previously gathered around the LY during the bill’s second readings on May 24. Some of the protesters used slogans such as “I am in contempt of legislature” and “no discussion, no democracy” to signal their opposition to the contents of the reforms and their view that there was not enough discussion before the vote.[3] A Taiwan Public Opinion Foundation poll found that 57.5% of Taiwanese respondents supported criminalizing “contempt of legislature,” however.[4]
The LY will send the bill to the Executive Yuan (EY) and ultimately the president to sign the bill into law. The EY has ten days to pass the bill or to send it back to the LY for reconsideration with approval from the president. “Reconsideration” means that the LY will vote on the bill again or revise it. If a majority of the LY votes to pass the bill unchanged at this second review, the president and EY must sign it into law.[5]
EY President (Premier) Cho Jung-tai said he may ask the LY to conduct a second review of the bill, which would likely delay but not stop the bill's passage to law. Cho expressed concern that the bill does not clearly define “contempt of legislature” and could be used to unreasonably persecute officials the LY summons or even prevent them from fully clarifying policies. Cho also said the provisions allowing the LY to confirm political appointments and summon the president to address the LY could lead to excessive LY interference in executive power.[6] The KMT-TPP coalition in the LY has the majority needed to pass the bill again if required to do a second review, however.
The DPP is considering a constitutional challenge to the reforms, which could block the bill. DPP legislative caucus whip Ker Chien-ming said on May 27 that the DPP would request a constitutional interpretation of both the content of the reforms and the procedures through which they advanced. Ker and other DPP politicians argued that the new reforms give the LY an unconstitutional amount of power over the government. They also argued that the KMT and TPP forced their reforms through without allowing sufficient discussion or transparency about the content of the bill.[7] A constitutional review that results in Taiwan’s Constitutional Court finding the reforms unconstitutional is likely the DPP’s last hope to stop the reforms from passing into law, since an EY-mandated “reconsideration” would still allow the KMT and TPP to pass it again with a simple majority. President Lai Ching-te said he supports both the EY’s recommendation to send the bill back for a second review and the DPP caucus’s request for a constitutional review.[8]
The KMT and TPP countered that the reforms will strengthen Taiwan’s democracy. KMT Chair Eric Chu said the bill’s passage was a “milestone” for Taiwan’s democracy and would give full play to the legislature’s constitutional role in imposing checks and balances on the government, in line with the public’s expectations.[9] KMT legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi said the KMT and TPP will form a joint investigative team to use the LY’s new investigative powers to crack down on corruption.[10] TPP Chair Ko Wen-je said the new reforms would strengthen Taiwan’s democracy and that he “never imagined” the DPP would try to block them, as the DPP had supported some similar reforms when it was in the opposition.[11] Ko said he opposed Fu Kun-chi’s proposal for a joint KMT–TPP anti-corruption investigative team, however.[12] The TPP holds a decisive 8 seats in the LY, which were essential to passing these reforms. No party holds a majority of seats.
At least 45 Taiwanese musicians, actors, and other celebrities shared a post by PRC state media CCTV on the social media platform Weibo in support of “reunification.” The post from May 22, two days after Taiwan President Lai Ching-te’s inauguration, read: “Taiwan has never been a country and will never be a country. ‘Taiwan independence’ is a dead end and the motherland’s reunification cannot be resisted. China will eventually achieve complete reunification.”[13] Some of the celebrities added their own pro-reunification slogans or reposted a post from the official CCP newspaper People’s Daily with a similar message. CCTV highlighted these reposts on its account on May 25.[14]
The ROC Ministry of Culture said these Taiwanese artists “had no choice” because the PRC was pressuring them to publicly express a political stance in favor of Taiwan “returning” to China. Many of the Taiwanese artists make their living performing in the PRC or have large PRC fanbases.[15] The PRC Taiwan Affairs Office (TAO) spokesperson claimed on May 29 that nearly 100 Taiwanese celebrities shared the CCTV post and that these reposts were “natural expressions of true feelings.” The spokesperson accused President Lai and the DPP of deliberately creating cross-strait tensions by claiming that the celebrities were “forced” to share the posts.[16]
The PRC has previously pressured Taiwanese celebrities to make statements favorable to the CCP’s political stance on Taiwan. The agent of Taiwanese actress Wu Mu-hsuen told Taiwanese media in early May that the film crew on a PRC drama Wu had finished filming told her she must sign an agreement that “Taiwan is part of China” or the show would not be aired. Wu signed the agreement and the show aired in 2023. The agent said forcing Taiwanese actors working in the PRC to sign such agreements has become common practice. The agent said PRC officials review the identity and political commitments of Taiwanese artists before allowing them to perform in the PRC.[17] Reuters reported on December 28, 2023, that the PRC’s National Radio and Television Administration pressured the Taiwanese band Mayday to publicly support the PRC stance on Taiwan. The TAO denied the allegation.[18] The case of Mayday in December and the large number of celebrities sharing Weibo posts on May 22 occurred at politically sensitive times. The first was right before Taiwan’s January 2024 election and the second was right after Lai Ching-te’s inauguration as Taiwan’s president.
Recent polls show that the CCP’s stance is not popular in Taiwan. A Taiwan Public Opinion Foundation (TPOF) poll found that 74.3% of Taiwanese respondents agreed with President Lai Ching-te’s statement that “the ROC and PRC are not subordinate to one another.” 47.2% supported “Taiwan independence” compared to only 12.4% who supported reunification and 28.5% who supported the “status quo.”[19]
The CCP rejected opportunities that the ROC government has offered to restart cross-strait exchanges and cool down tensions. President Lai Ching-te said in his inauguration speech on May 20 that the PRC should cooperate with Taiwan to resume cross-strait tourism based on reciprocity and allow PRC university students to study in Taiwan. Lai said on May 27 that he hoped to promote mutual understanding, reconciliation, and forgiveness through cross-strait exchanges and cooperation.[20] Taiwan’s Mainland Affairs Council (MAC) issued a statement on May 24 calling for the PRC to resume allowing its degree students to study at Taiwanese universities.[21] ROC Transport Minister Li Men-yen said on May 24 that the Ministry of Transportation would discuss resuming cross-strait group tourism on a reciprocal basis.[22] The PRC has rejected these overtures, however. TAO Spokesperson Zhu Fenglian claimed that Lai’s calls for cross-strait dialogue and exchange lack sincerity.[23] Zhu responded to Lai’s call for understanding, reconciliation, and forgiveness on May 29 by saying that Lai must immediately abandon his “Taiwan independence” stance, cease “separatist provocations,” and return to the 1992 Consensus.[24] The 1992 Consensus is an alleged verbal agreement between semi-official representatives of the PRC and the then KMT-ruled ROC following negotiations in 1992. It states that both sides agree there is only one China, and that Taiwan is part of China. The CCP interprets this “one China” to be the People’s Republic of China, while the KMT interprets it to be the Republic of China.
The PRC Ministry of Education suspended all programs that sent PRC students to study in Taiwan in 2020, citing the COVID-19 pandemic and bad cross-strait relations.[25] The PRC and ROC both halted group tourism during the pandemic.[26] Taiwan’s Tourism Administration initially planned to resume Taiwanese group tours to the PRC on March 1 but canceled this policy in February after the PRC unilaterally adjusted a flight route in the Taiwan Strait to fly closer to Taiwan.[27]
The ROC Kinmen Defense Command said a PRC civilian drone that dropped pro-unification fliers on an ROC military base on Erdan Island was a “cognitive warfare trick.” A drone dropped a box containing pro-unification fliers on a pier of an ROC military base on the island of Erdan. The fliers said both sides of the Taiwan Strait belong to “one China,” and urged the readers not to use force to resist unification or sacrifice their lives for “Taiwan independence.” Erdan is a small island with a military garrison that is part of Taiwan’s Kinmen County, a series of islands located a few miles from the mainland of the PRC. A PRC netizen posted a video of himself on YouTube packaging the fliers into a box and using an aerial drone to drop them on Erdan from the PRC.[28] The Kinmen Defense Command said the flier drop from a drone “beyond visual range” was a “typical cognitive warfare trick” with the intent to attract attention, stir debate, and increase social media traffic.[29]
PRC civilian drones have flown over and filmed ROC facilities on Erdan and other nearby islands on previous occasions including on March 30 and April 8. ROC Army Chief of Staff Chen Chien-yi said on April 3 that such drones constituted “gray zone intrusions” and “cognitive operations” by the PRC to undermine Taiwanese and international confidence in Taiwan’s military. Chen at the time dismissed the possibility that “mainland civilian bloggers trying to gain popularity on the Internet” were responsible for the drone incursions.[30]
The PRC expressed firm opposition to US Congressional delegations that visited Taiwan after President Lai Ching-te’s inauguration. A US House of Representative delegation led by House Foreign Affairs Committee Chair Michael McCaul arrived in Taiwan on May 26 for a week of talks on US-Taiwan relations with the new administration. A US Senate delegation led by Senator Tammy Duckworth arrived in Taiwan on May 29 for a two-day visit. Both groups met President Lai and other government officials.[31] McCaul said Congress would work to speed up US weapons shipments to Taiwan.[32] Duckworth said she and other senators would introduce a bill to require US sanctions on the PRC if it invades Taiwan.[33] These were the first two delegations of US officials to Taiwan since President Lai’s inauguration on May 20. No sitting US officials attended the inauguration itself. A PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) spokesperson said on May 27 that the PRC strongly opposed McCaul’s delegation’s visit and made “serious protests” to the United States. She said the Congresspeople who visited Taiwan violated the one-China principle and the US government’s commitment to maintain only unofficial relations with Taiwan and sent a “severely wrong signal” to “Taiwan independence forces.”[34]
China
The PRC Ministry of Defense and state media selectively publicized comments from the UN Secretary-General’s spokesperson to bolster its stance that Taiwan is a part of the PRC under international law. Spokesperson for the UN Secretary-General Stéphane Dujarric said at a press briefing on May 23 that “on the issue of China, [the UN is] guided by the General Assembly resolution of 1971.” He clarified in response to a journalist’s question that the UN Resolution in question is relevant “in terms of our standing on Taiwan as a province of China” but denied that this means that “China can take over Taiwan anytime.” Dujarric responded to the PRC’s military exercises around Taiwan on May 23 by urging “relevant parties to refrain from acts that could escalate tensions in the region.”[35] UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 admitted the PRC as the sole representative of “China” and expelled the ROC from this seat in 1971. The resolution did not mention Taiwan. PRC state media Xinhua and other state media outlets reported that Dujarric had reiterated the UN stance that Taiwan is a province of China but did not report any further context of his comments, including his call to avoid escalation in the region and his rejection of the stance that “China can take over Taiwan anytime.”[36] Ministry of National Defense (MOD) spokesperson Col. Wu Qian cited Dujarric’s comment along with UN Resolution 2758 on May 30 to refute Lai Ching-te’s line in his inaugural speech that the ROC and PRC are “not subordinate to each other.”[37] The PRC has repeatedly argued that UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 is equivalent to an international legal consensus that Taiwan is part of the PRC.[38]
Broader international acceptance of PRC arguments that Taiwan is part of the PRC under international law would serve to further undermine Taiwan’s sovereignty. It would hamper Taiwan’s international participation, lend legitimacy to PRC coercive actions against Taiwan as a “domestic issue,” and lend credence to PRC arguments that the United States and other countries’ engagement with Taiwan without PRC consent is illegal.
A PRC delegation led by Minister of National Defense Dong Jun attended the Shangri-La Dialogue. The Shangri-La Dialogue is a defense summit that the International Institute for Strategic Studies organizes and holds annually in Singapore. This year’s conference will take place from May 31 – June 2.[39] Minister of National Defense Dong Jun will represent the PRC and deliver a speech on the PRC’s Global Security Outlook and meet with foreign counterparts, including United States Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin.[40]
Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr.’s keynote speech on May 31 called out “illegal, coercive, aggressive, and deceptive actions” that violate the Philippines’ sovereignty, and vowed to defend the Philippines’ sovereignty “to the last square inch.” PLA Major General Xu Hui publicly responded to Marcos’ speech during the Q&A session. Xu emphasized the importance for Southeast Asian states to maintain a policy of centrality and suggested that the Philippines’ behavior was a threat to regional peace.[41]
The CCP is also signaling its intent to stabilize relations with the United States by agreeing to resume communication between PLA and US theater commanders. This agreement is the latest in a trend since November 2023, when Biden and Xi agreed at their San Francisco summit to restore bilateral military meetings. The PLA has participated in the required meetings since that agreement. The PLA participated in the US–China Defense Policy Coordination talks in early January.[42] The PLA then participated in the Military Maritime Consultative Agreement in early April. [43] The US Department of Defense announced that Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin reaffirmed with Dong that the two sides’ respective theater commanders would resume communication by phone “in the coming months.” The PRC frames the core of the “San Francisco Vision” as stabilizing PRC–US relations while engaging in governmental exchange groups and consultations on regional hotspots.[44] The PRC has continued to drive regional tensions in the South China Sea and Taiwan since this summit.
The United States views military-to-military talks as a means of escalation management to prevent and control crises. The CCP views these talks, at least in part, as a bargaining chip that it can use to influence US behavior to the party’s benefit, however. A US action that the CCP deems unfavorable would be grounds to cut off military-to-military dialogue, in the party’s view. The party previously did this by cutting off high-level military dialogue in the aftermath of then-Speaker Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan in August 2022.[45] This precedent indicates the possibility that the CCP will continue to use military-to-military dialogue opportunities to shape United States behavior.
Northeast Asia
Japan and South Korea
PRC Premier Li Qiang focused on reducing trade barriers during a trilateral summit with leaders from Japan and South Korea on May 27. The summit, which included Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida and South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol, was the first trilateral meeting in four years. Li maintained a distinct focus on economic matters and proposed deepening trade connectivity to maintain stability in supply chains.[46] Li also proposed strengthening scientific and technological cooperation and resuming negotiations on a three-way free trade agreement. Li’s representation at the summit instead of Xi Jinping reinforces the PRC’s emphasis on trade over security, as the premier is traditionally responsible for overseeing economic affairs.
Li advocated for upholding “strategic autonomy,” promoting multipolarity, and opposing “camp politics” during a joint press conference after the summit, referencing Japan and South Korea’s cooperation with the US.[47] Li expressed his opposition to “turning economic matters into political games and security issues,” rejecting protectionism, and preventing the decoupling of supply chains.[48] The PRC views the alignment of technology industry leaders from countries such as Japan and South Korea with US measures to limit the PRC’s access to critical technologies as a national security risk.
The United States, Japan, and South Korea agreed in August 2023 at the trilateral Camp David summit to cooperate on the regulation of sensitive technologies to ensure their safe application, including by coordinating export controls.[49] Japan announced earlier in March 2023 a raft of export restrictions on semiconductor manufacturing equipment with the stated objective of preventing its application for military use.[50] Japan’s former Minister of Economy, Trade, and Industry (METI) Yasutoshi Nishimura denied speculation that the measures were aimed at the PRC specifically and downplayed the notion that Japan’s actions followed the United States’ lead.[51] Japan expanded export restrictions on semiconductor technology on April 26, which METI again stated was to better regulate the export of components with potential military applications.[52] The Biden administration announced further restrictions on technology imports from the PRC on May 15, including semiconductor and electric vehicles.[53]
Kishida separately raised concerns with Li in a bilateral meeting a day earlier over the PRC's “intensifying military activity” in the South China Sea and East China Sea, noting the PRC’s military cooperation with Russia in the region. Kishida also stated that Japan was closely monitoring the PRC’s military activities around Taiwan and stressed the importance of maintaining peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait.[54] Kishida asked Li for the PRC to immediately lift a ban on the import of Japanese seafood products, which the PRC banned on health grounds after Japan released treated wastewater from the Fukushima nuclear plant into the Pacific Ocean.[55] The PRC’s withholding of certain trade concessions acts as a lever to discourage Japan from taking further steps that the PRC regards as harmful to its national security.
Southeast Asia
Cambodia
The PRC and Cambodia held annual joint “Golden Dragon” naval exercises in the Gulf of Thailand from May 16-30. The PRC and Cambodia have held the exercises annually six times since 2016. PRC state media stated that the exercises focused on joint counterterrorism and humanitarian rescue.[56] 16 ships participated in the exercises, including 5 People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) ships, marking a record number of PRC military ships operating in Cambodian waters.[57] The joint naval exercises follow recent high-level meetings between PRC and Cambodian officials. PRC Foreign Minister Wang Yi met with Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Manet on April 24, where the two agreed to strengthen bilateral defense cooperation and continue conducting joint military exercises.[58]
The PLAN has maintained a near-uninterrupted presence at Cambodia’s Ream Naval Base since December.[59] Cambodian Ministry of Defense spokesperson Chhum Socheat stated on May 8 that two corvettes were stationed in Ream during the last six months and were there to participate in the Golden Dragon exercises.[60] The Wall Street Journal reported in 2019 that the PRC and Cambodia signed an agreement that granted the PRC access to the base for thirty years, citing US officials who had seen a draft of the document.[61] Cambodian officials have consistently denied that the PRC has privileged access to Ream Naval Base, which would violate Cambodia’s constitution.[62] The PRC MFA previously denied the PRC’s involvement with the base and used the opportunity to criticize the US for its large overseas military presence.[63]
The PRC funded an expansion of Ream Naval Base in 2022 that accommodates larger ships to dock there.[64] The PRC has also funded a series of other big-ticket infrastructure projects in Cambodia, including two airports, and accounts for 40% of Cambodia’s external debt.[65]
Europe
Two employees of the Hong Kong Economic and Trade office will go to trial on espionage charges in the United Kingdom. PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) Spokesman Wang Wenbin accused the United Kingdom on May 24 of fabricating charges under the guise of national security in response.[66] Chung Biu Yuen and Chi Leung Peter Wai are charged with undertaking information gathering and surveillance to assist a foreign intelligence service in the period of December 2023–May 2024.[67] Thames Valley Police found the third man charged in the case, former Royal Marine Matthew Trickett, dead in Grenfell Park, Maidenhead, on May 21. A police investigation into his death is ongoing.[68]
Russia-Ukraine War
The PRC and Brazil announced six points of consensus to de-escalate the Russia-Ukraine War that are similar to the PRC’s 2023 proposal. The PRC’s 2023 plan called for the cessation of hostilities, protection of civilians and nuclear power plants, avoiding using chemical or biological or nuclear weapons, stopping sanctions, vague calls to respect national sovereignty, and “prevent[ing] bloc confrontation.”[69] The Sino-Brazilian 2024 plan called for the cessation of hostilities at a peace conference recognized by both Russia and Ukraine, protection of civilians and nuclear power plants, avoiding using chemical or biological or nuclear weapons, and opposition to dividing the world into “close political or economic groups.”[70]
Middle East
The PRC held the China-Arab States Cooperation Forum (CASCF) in Beijing on May 30.[71] The heads of state from Bahrain, Egypt, Tunisia, and the United Arab Emirates attended the forum.[72] PRC Vice Foreign Minister Deng Li stated on May 27 that the objectives of the CASCF included promoting cooperation in “various fields” via the Belt and Road Initiative.[73] The $2 billion sale of bonds by the Beijing-based Lenovo Group to the Saudi Arabian sovereign wealth fund on May 28 combined with the PRC-based FAW Group aiming to manufacture electric vehicles in Egypt demonstrates that economic cooperation will be a central component of the CASCF.[74] The states adopted the Beijing Declaration and China-Arab States Cooperation Forum 2024–2026 Implementation Action Plan at the forum, which aims to deepen cooperation in areas such as finance, aerospace, and artificial intelligence.[75]
PRC Vice Foreign Minister Deng Li and PRC Foreign Minister Wang Yi reiterated the PRC’s position on May 27 and May 30, respectively, on the Israel–Hamas War calling for an immediate ceasefire and creation of an independent Palestinian state.[76] The joint Sino-Arab statement on Palestine issued at the forum echoes this view.[77] The PRC has repeatedly criticized Israel’s military operations in Gaza and US support for Israel while calling for an internationally mediated ceasefire.[78] The PRC’s Palestine policy position combined with the hosting of talks between Fatah and Hamas in late April reflects the PRC’s intent to play an active diplomatic role in the resolution of the Israel–Hamas War and the broader Israeli-Palestinian conflict.[79]
Guatemala
The PRC rejected imports of Guatemalan coffee and macadamia nuts to punish Guatemala for maintaining diplomatic relations with the Republic of China (Taiwan). The Guatemalan Exporters Association reported on May 23 that seven containers of macadamia nuts could not enter the PRC. Reuters stated unspecified Guatemalan traders had been told macadamia and coffee would be denied entry to the PRC.[80] Guatemalan President Bernardo Arévalo stated on May 24 that this trade issue could be related to Guatemala holding diplomatic relations with Taiwan.[81] PRC MFA Spokesman Wang Wenbin criticized Guatemalan Foreign Minister Carlos Martínez for attending ROC President Lai Ching-te’s inauguration on May 20. Wang also criticized Guatemalan President Bernardo Arévalo for holding a videoconference with President Lai on May 21.[82]
Guatemala sought to engage in trade with the PRC while also maintaining formal diplomatic relations with the Republic of China (Taiwan).[83] Guatemalan President Bernardo Arévalo stated on February 8 that he does not intend to switch diplomatic recognition from the ROC to the PRC.[84] PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs Spokesman Wang Wenbin’s February 6 statement that Guatemala would need to recognize the one-China principle to “conduct cooperation” between the two countries underscores the difficulty Arévalo will face holding that position.[85] The one-China principle is the People’s Republic of China’s position that it is the sole legitimate representative of China and that Taiwan is a part of China. Guatemala accepting the PRC’s one-China principle would mean breaking its diplomatic relations with Taiwan.
The PRC accounts for 2.66 percent of total Guatemalan exports, which suggests that the PRC rejecting coffee and macadamia nuts will not have a substantial impact on the Guatemalan economy.[86] The PRC policy to deny imports of Guatemalan coffee and macadamia nuts is a signal to President Arévalo of the costs to continued diplomatic relations with the ROC, however. The PRC is aiming to make it difficult for Arévalo to pursue both trade with the PRC and maintain diplomatic relations with the ROC.
The PRC’s long-term objective is for Guatemala to switch diplomatic recognition from the ROC to the PRC. Guatemala and Belize are the only countries in Central America that recognize the Republic of China. The other five Central American countries broke relations with the Republic of China between 2007 and 2023. Guatemala and Belize are also 2 of the 12 countries, including Vatican City, that recognize the ROC.
The CCP’s efforts to diplomatically isolate the ROC are part of a campaign to degrade the ROC’s legitimacy on the international stage. The loss of full diplomatic relations for the ROC supports the CCP’s attempts to increase pressure on Taiwan to unify with the PRC without prompting an international backlash. Undermining international recognition of the ROC buttresses the CCP’s argument that the ROC is not a state, but rather a province of the PRC.
China-Taiwan Weekly Update, May 24, 2024
Click here to read the full report with maps
Authors: Nils Peterson, Matthew Sperzel, and Daniel Shats of the Institute for the Study of War
Editors: Dan Blumenthal and Frederick W. Kagan of the American Enterprise Institute
Data Cutoff: May 24 at Noon ET
Key Takeaways
- Tens of thousands of demonstrators gathered outside the Legislative Yuan on May 21 and May 24 to protest the advancement of a controversial legislative reform bill in the Legislative Yuan.
- The PRC launched two days of joint military exercises around Taiwan to “punish” Taiwan for the election of President Lai Ching-te and what the PRC deemed separatist “provocations” in Lai’s inauguration speech. PRC and ROC media cited analysts who said that the exercise’s name, Joint Sword 2024A, suggests that there may be additional exercises in the series later this year.
- The Fujian branch of the Chinese Coast Guard (CCG) conducted “law enforcement” drills that entered restricted waters around the Taiwanese Wuqiu and Dongyin islands. The CCG coordinated the drills with PLA joint exercises on May 23 and May 24. The CCG also carried out drills east of Taiwan on May 24.
- The PRC announced new sanctions on three US defense firms over arms sales to Taiwan.
- The PRC referenced UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to block Taiwan’s participation in the World Health Organization’s 2024 annual assembly.
- The Chinese Coast Guard (CCG) released new law enforcement procedures on May 15 likely as part of PRC efforts to assert territorial claims in the South China Sea.
Cross-Strait Relations
Taiwan
Tens of thousands of demonstrators gathered outside the Legislative Yuan on May 21 and May 24 to protest the advancement of a controversial legislative reform bill in the Legislative Yuan. The Legislative Yuan (LY) began voting on the joint Kuomintang (KMT) and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) reform bill on May 17, which would grant the LY the ability to call on anyone to testify before an investigative committee, establish penalties for perceived non-compliance or dishonesty in responses, confirm political appointments, and mandate the president to give an annual national address on the state of the union.[1] The “Contempt of Congress” aspect of the bill is a focal point of the controversy, as it entails punishment such as fines and jail time for individuals whose compliance with LY investigators’ inquiries is deemed unsatisfactory, including government officials. Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) legislators opposed the reform bill in the LY on May 17, which climaxed in a physical confrontation between members of the legislature. Mass demonstrations took place outside the LY on May 21 and 24 as the general assembly continued voting on the bill’s provisions.[2] The LY is set to continue voting on the bill on May 28.
DPP legislators have criticized the bill as unconstitutional and labeled it a political tool that the KMT and TPP will abuse to expand their power. DPP Caucus Whip Ker Chien-ming articulated the threat that the bill poses to the executive branch, calling it a “limitless expansion of powers” and a “constitutional monster” whose purpose was to weaponize the legislature.[3] KMT Caucus Deputy Secretary-General Lin Szu-ming, one of the main authors of the reform bills, earlier highlighted the LY’s need to possess “strong weapons” to supervise the government.[4] DPP Caucus Secretary-General Rosalia Wu stated on April 1 that the DPP will fight against the law with all its strength, and would request action from the justices of the Constitutional Court if the bill passed the LY.[5]
The DPP China Affairs Department highlighted the Contempt of Congress aspect of the bill among a series of KMT actions that benefitted CCP interests.[6] DPP legislator Puma Shen criticized the Contempt of Congress law during LY proceedings on May 24 for granting legislators excessive penal authority and claimed that the law could be used arbitrarily to punish those with opposing views, including individuals that the CCP might accuse of separatism.[7] Ker claimed that the bill amounted to Taiwan’s “Hong Kong-ization,” referring to the territory’s democratic backsliding and political assimilation with the PRC.[8] The DPP argues that the law carries national security risks, as military or government officials could be compelled to disclose confidential information during questioning from an LY investigative committee or face indictment under the law.[9] The bill includes a stipulation that exempts sensitive national security information from disclosure.[10]
The DPP and protestors are also condemning the KMT and TPP for using opaque and undemocratic methods to advance the reforms in the legislature. The DPP accused the KMT of automatically advancing the bill to the general assembly without proper review in the relevant committee on April 15.[11] The KMT and TPP introduced an amended version of the bill on the morning of May 17, which the parties did not make available to the public or disseminate to the general assembly before initiating voting.[12] TPP Caucus Whip Huang Kuo-chang stated in an interview on May 17 that the amended version was “top secret.”[13] Huang later pushed back against the DPP and protesters’ accusations of opacity and circumvention of legislative procedures and criticized the DPP for using violence to obstruct the bill’s advancement.[14]
KMT Chairman Eric Chu expressed the party’s strong resolve to achieve its political objectives in defiance of what it views as an uncooperative DPP. Chu stated on May 19 that the KMT would no longer be “restrained and courteous” in its fight to achieve reform and invoked the KMT’s mandate to carry out the public’s expectations for reform, which is based on the party’s dominant presence in the LY.[15] Chu criticized the DPP on May 22 for staging the protests to obstruct democracy and the will of the majority.[16] KMT Caucus Whip Fu Kun-chi, who spearheaded the bill’s sponsorship, vowed on May 24 to finalize its passage next week after the LY proceedings continued into the night.[17]
The PRC framed ROC President Lai Ching-te’s inaugural address as hostile and provocative for cross-strait relations. Lai took office on May 20, marking the start of the DPP’s third consecutive term in power. Lai’s inaugural address emphasized the importance of upholding Taiwan’s sovereignty and democracy.[18] PRC Taiwan Affairs Office (TAO) spokesperson Chen Binhua rejected Lai’s assertions of Taiwan’s sovereignty and self-determination as “separatist fallacies” that made clear his desire to realize Taiwan’s formal independence.[19] Chen described Lai as a separatist zealot who poses a danger to cross-strait peace and does not represent mainstream public opinion in Taiwan. Chen criticized countries that sent representatives to attend Lai’s inauguration and warned against foreign interference in Taiwan that violates the recognition of the PRC as the sole government of China.[20] Chen specifically called out the United States for having diplomatic relations and “official exchanges” with Taiwan. There were no official government representatives in the US delegation and the United States does not have official diplomatic relations with Taiwan. PRC Foreign Minister Wang Yi, speaking at a foreign ministers’ summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, stated that nothing can stop the PRC from reunifying with Taiwan, and that “separatists will be nailed to a pillar of shame.”[21]
PRC state broadcaster CCTV claimed widespread disapproval of Lai’s alleged independence-minded rhetoric in Taiwan.[22] The segment featured spokesperson Yu Chih-pin of Taiwan’s New Party, a pro-unification party that grew out of the KMT, who framed the DPP as the antagonist in cross-strait relations and criticized Lai for stating that “neither side of the strait was subordinate to the other.” The piece highlighted a Taiwanese poll released on May 20 that showed more than half of respondents did not have confidence in Lai’s ability to manage cross-strait relations.[23]
China
The PRC launched two days of joint military exercises around Taiwan to “punish” Taiwan for the election of President Lai Ching-te and what the PRC deemed separatist “provocations” in Lai’s inauguration speech. The People’s Liberation Army (PLA) Eastern Theater Command (ETC) carried out two days of joint military exercises around Taiwan on May 23-24. The exercises, titled “Joint Sword 2024A,” took place in nine distinct locations in the waters to the north, south, and east of the main island of Taiwan and around the Taiwanese islands of Kinmen, Matsu, Wuqiu, and Dongyin. ETC spokesperson Senior Colonel Li Xi said that the ETC was organizing services including the army, navy, air force, and rocket force for the joint drills. Li said the drills would focus on joint sea-air combat-readiness patrol, joint seizure of comprehensive battlefield control, and joint precision strikes on key targets. He also said the exercises would involve the patrol of vessels and planes closing in on areas around Taiwan and “integrated operations” inside and outside the island chain to test the joint combat capabilities of the ETC’s forces.[24] The ETC also released a map of the exercises on May 23 that showed PLA Navy (PLAN) warship formations approaching Taiwan from five directions on all sides of the main island.[25]
Taiwan’s Ministry of National Defense (MND) reported 49 PLA aircraft around Taiwan on May 23, the first day of the joint exercises. 35 of the aircraft crossed the median line of the Taiwan Strait and entered the north, central, and southwest parts of Taiwan’s Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ).[26] It did not report on the number of ships that day. The MND again reported 49 PLA aircraft along with 19 PLAN vessels and 7 Chinese Coast Guard vessels around Taiwan on May 24, the second day. 35 of the aircraft crossed the median line and entered Taiwan’s southwest ADIZ that day.[27]
ETC spokesperson Li said the second day of the exercise on May 24 drilled vessel-aircraft coordination, sea assault, and land attack, and tested the forces' combat capabilities including multi-domain coordination and joint strike. PLA Rocket Force units conducted mock fire strikes with modularized long-range rocket systems in eastern Fujian Province, which faces the Taiwan Strait. PLAN warships around Taiwan conducted mock strikes on maritime targets. PLA bombers and fighter jets took off carrying live missiles.[28] The ETC also released a video showing a 3D simulation of strikes on the Taiwanese cities of Taipei, Hualien, and Kaohsiung by PLA air, naval, and rocket forces.[29]
The political purpose of this exercise is to punish Taiwan for its election of Lai as president and what the PRC deemed “provocations” in Lai’s inauguration speech. The exercises began three days after Lai’s inauguration as president of Taiwan. ETC spokesperson Li said that the drills serve as a “strong punishment for the separatist acts of ‘Taiwan independence’ forces” and a “stern warning against the interference and provocation by external forces.”[30] TAO spokesperson Chen Binhua elaborated in stating that the exercise was a punishment for “provocations seeking independence” in Lai’s inauguration speech on May 20.[31] Ministry of National Defense (MOD) spokesperson Senior Colonel Wu Qian claimed that Lai “seriously challenged the one-China principle, blatantly sold the ‘two-state theory,’ and attempted to ‘seek independence through force’ and ‘seek independence through foreign forces’” as soon as he took office. Wu warned that “every time ‘Taiwan independence’ provokes, our countermeasures will be pushed forward until the complete reunification of the motherland is achieved.”[32]
The exercises also signal a message of deterrence both to Taiwan’s DPP administration and to “external forces” that support Taiwan to not make further moves toward Taiwan’s independence. The military purpose of the exercise is to improve the joint interoperability of various services under the ETC, including joint sea-air patrols, joint battlefield control operations, and joint precision strikes.[33] These capabilities are integral to executing several of the PLA’s joint operational war plans as identified in PLA military texts, including Joint Firepower Strike Operations against Taiwan, Joint Blockade Operations against Taiwan, and Joint Attack Operations against Taiwan.[34]
PRC state media, including Xinhua and Global Times, cited PLA Academy of Military Science (AMS) expert Tong Zhen who said that the exercise demonstrated the PLA’s ability to “strike all directions of the island without any blind spots,” pinning down Taiwan from all sides.[35] PLA National Defense University (NDU) Professor Major General Meng Xiangqing noted in an article in the English-language state newspaper China Daily that the Joint Sword 2024A exercises were larger in scale, number of troops, and area covered than previous exercises and made several “breakthroughs.” First, PLA ships reached the Taiwanese outlying islands of Wuqiu and Dongyin for the first time. Second, PLA ships and planes came “as close as ever” to the main island of Taiwan in their combat-readiness patrols. Third, the drill showed joint and integrated operations to seize “comprehensive control of the sea, land, and air,” including cooperation with the Chinese Coast Guard (CCG) and “many new forces” including “network forces, information support forces, and information systems.”[36] Lieutenant Colonel Zhang Chi of the NDU’s Centre of Strategic Studies wrote in the same article that the drills to the north, south, and east of Taiwan have specific meanings. The drills to the north send warning signals to “important political and military targets,” including the ruling DPP, based in Taiwan’s capital Taipei in northern Taiwan. The exercise to the south is a “political attack” and an “economic blockade” of the city of Kaohsiung, which is a DPP stronghold and Taiwan’s largest port as well as an important garrison for Taiwan’s maritime forces. The exercise to the east is aimed at blocking the “lifeline for Taiwan’s energy imports,” a possible escape route for Taiwan’s “independence forces,” and support lines for the United States and allies to aid Taiwan. All these lines rely mainly on the eastern Taiwanese port of Hualien.[37]
The exercises are comparable to the PLA’s large-scale exercises around Taiwan in August 2022 in response to then-US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan and the Joint Sword exercises in April 2023 after then-Taiwan President Tsai Ing-wen met then-US House Speaker Kevin McCarthy in California. The 2022 exercises featured a larger number of military assets and involved the firing of ballistic missiles over Taiwan. Those exercises initially lasted five days from August 4-7, with additional drills until August 10.[38] The 2023 exercises lasted three days, compared to the two days of Joint Sword 2024A. The Joint Sword 2024A exercise expanded the area of operation compared to previous joint exercises, however, operating in nine distinct areas including around Taiwan’s outlying islands compared to six areas not including outlying islands during 2022. Joint Sword 2024A also came closer to Taiwan’s east coast than previous exercises.[39]
The MND condemned the exercises and called them an “irrational provocation” that would destabilize regional peace and security.[40] Taiwan President Lai and representatives of the DPP, KMT, and TPP all condemned the PLA drills.[41]
PRC and ROC media cited analysts who said that the exercise’s name, Joint Sword 2024A, suggests that there may be additional exercises in the series later this year. Follow-on exercises would be named Joint Sword 2024B, Joint Sword 2024C, and so on.[42] The PLA held only one Joint Sword exercise in 2023, the first in the series.[43]
The Fujian branch of the Chinese Coast Guard (CCG) conducted “law enforcement” drills that entered restricted waters around the Taiwanese Wuqiu and Dongyin islands. The CCG coordinated the drills with the PLA Joint Sword exercises on May 23 and May 24. The CCG also carried out drills east of Taiwan on May 24. CCG spokesperson Gan Yu announced the drills on May 23 and said they were intended to test the Fujian CCG’s joint patrol, rapid response, and emergency handling capabilities. The CCG released maps that showed its patrol routes around the islands. The maps showed a route that passed within 2.8 nautical miles north of Wuqiu and another route that passed within 3.1 nautical miles east and south of Dongyin.[44] The routes entered the “restricted waters” around the islands but not the “prohibited waters.”[45] The CCG also conducted patrols in restricted waters around Wuqiu and Dongyin on May 24 but did not release a map that day.[46] Taiwan does not claim territorial waters around Wuqiu and Dongyin partly due to their proximity to the PRC. It instead designates “prohibited” and “restricted” waters around the islands, which it treats as equivalent to "territorial waters" and a "contiguous zone," respectively. The Fujian CCG has conducted similar patrols that intruded into prohibited and restricted waters around the Taiwanese island of Kinmen on multiple occasions since February 2024.[47] The PRC does not recognize any “restricted” or “prohibited” waters around Taiwan’s outlying islands.
The CCG also carried out law enforcement exercises in waters east of Taiwan on May 24. The exercises focused on training in verification, identification, warning, and expulsion and testing joint patrol and emergency response capabilities. It released photos of the exercises but no map.[48] It is not clear how close the CCG vessels came to Taiwan’s coast.
The PRC state-owned tabloid Global Times cited an unnamed “source close to the matter” who said this was the first time CCG vessels had entered the “restricted waters” around Dongyin and Wuqiu. The source said the exercise and the published maps sent a message of deterrence to Taiwan. The source said the PRC might replicate the “Kinmen model” if the Taiwan government remains “obstinate,” which could include entering the prohibited waters around the Wuqiu and Dongyin islands or boarding and inspecting Taiwanese vessels in the waters around the islands. The source said Wuqiu and Dongyin are of “high strategic importance” and military value because they are close to the mainland PRC, oversee key transportation routes in the Taiwan Strait, and are the front line for Taiwan’s defense operations. The same source also said the CCG patrols showed heightened coastguard-military coordination, as PLA forces concurrently carried out exercises around the islands.[49] PRC authorities did not release maps showing the precise movements of the PLA forces. NDU Professor Major General Meng Xiangqing noted in his China Daily article that PLA forces also approached the islands of Dongyin and Wuqiu for the first time during the Joint Sword 2024A exercises. He said the exercises near those islands sent a warning that if “‘Taiwan independence’ forces escalate their provocation, the PLA may enter the ‘prohibited waters to carry out inspections of Taiwan ships in the area and conduct combat-readiness patrols.”[50] There are no known instances of the PRC using military forces to inspect Taiwanese ships in this way.
Wuqiu and Dongyin are administratively part of Taiwan’s Kinmen and Matsu regions, respectively. The CCG’s patrols around Wuqiu and Dongyin mark the seventh and eighth CCG intrusions into the restricted waters of Kinmen or Matsu in May 2024.[51] The CCG has normalized patrols in restricted waters around the main islands of Kinmen since an incident on February 14 in which two PRC fishermen drowned while fleeing from a Taiwan Coast Guard pursuit.[52] These CCG patrols serve to erode Taiwan’s control over waters around its territory.
The PRC announced new sanctions on three US defense firms over arms sales to Taiwan. The PRC Ministry of Commerce (MOFCOM) announced that it was adding General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, General Dynamics Land Systems, and Boeing’s Defense, Space & Security unit to an “Unreliable Entity List” for selling arms to Taiwan. MOFCOM made the announcement on May 20, the same day Lai Ching-te was inaugurated as President of Taiwan. The PRC forbids entities on the Unreliable Entity List from conducting export and import business with the PRC and from making new investments in the PRC. The sanctions also ban senior managers of the companies from entering or staying in the PRC. Lockheed Martin and Raytheon’s Missile and Defense division have been on the Unreliable Entity List since February 2023.[53] The PRC previously froze the assets of General Atomics Aeronautical Systems and General Dynamics Land Systems held in the PRC in April 2024. It imposed sanctions on Boeing Defense, Space, and Security President and CEO Ted Colbert in September 2022 over Boeing’s sale of Harpoon missiles to Taiwan.[54]
The PRC opened an anti-dumping investigation against polyoxymethylene (POM) copolymers from the United States, European Union, Japan, and Taiwan. The PRC Ministry of Commerce launched the investigation on May 19 after six major PRC POM copolymer producers applied for the investigation on April 22.[55] POM copolymer, also known as polyformaldehyde copolymer or acetal copolymer, is a thermoplastic resin widely used in various industries ranging from auto parts to electronics.[56] Imports supplied nearly 45 percent of the PRC’s POM copolymer demand in 2022. The EU, Taiwan, Japan, and the United States were the third through sixth largest sources of the material, respectively, in the first quarter of 2024.[57]
PRC state-owned tabloid Global Times denied Western media speculation that the “regular and normal anti-dumping investigation” was retaliatory. It said the application to begin the investigation predated US President Joe Biden’s new tariffs on the PRC and that the broader anti-dumping investigation in this industry actually began in 2016, leading to duties on POM copolymer imports from South Korea, Thailand, and Malaysia in 2017.[58] The article claimed that US media speculation that the investigation was retaliatory shows that the United States fears PRC countermeasures to the new tariffs.[59]
The PRC referenced statements from the UN Special Rapporteur on unilateral coercive measures to bolster its opposition to unilateral Western sanctions. The special rapporteur on the negative impact of the unilateral coercive measures on the enjoyment of human rights, Alena Douhan, visited the PRC from May 6 to May 17. She met with government departments, enterprises, civil groups, and other entities in Beijing, Shenzhen, and Xinjiang to study the negative impact of unilateral sanctions on the PRC. Douhan concluded that unilateral sanctions against the PRC as well as the “over-compliance” of foreign businesses with those sanctions have harmed the human rights of “vulnerable groups” by increasing unemployment and causing other economic disruptions in affected regions like Xinjiang. She claimed that any “unilateral sanctions” that are not retaliatory and implemented without authorization of the UN Security Council are illegal. She further said that all secondary sanctions imposed on individuals and entities as punishment for circumventing sanctions regimes on third countries are illegal. She said that unilateral sanctions should not be used as a foreign policy tool and a means of economic coercion.[60]
The PRC is using Douhan’s credentials as a UN expert to strengthen its rhetoric against Western sanctions and human rights narratives. PRC Assistant Foreign Minister Miao Deyu, MFA spokesperson Wang Wenbin, and state media such as Xinhua and Global Times publicized and echoed Douhan’s views that “unilateral coercive measures” against the PRC violate international law and human rights.[61] Wang urged “relevant countries” to immediately lift their “illegal unilateral sanctions.”[62]The claim that unilateral sanctions are illegal and the conflation of economic development with human rights, which are core premises in the special rapporteur’s mandate and reports, parallel longtime CCP rhetoric.[63]
The Special Rapporteur on unilateral coercive measures is not an impartial expert or authority, however, and the PRC may have shaped the outcome of her study to support PRC narratives. The UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) created the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on unilateral coercive measures in 2014 to study the negative impact of unilateral coercive measures on the enjoyment of human rights and to work with UNHRC and other bodies to minimize the negative effects of unilateral coercive measures.[64] Iran introduced the mandate for the special rapporteur on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement.[65] The United States and most of its allies opposed the mandate.[66] A Special Rapporteur is an unpaid independent expert that the UN Human Rights Council appoints to produce reports on a specific theme. Douhan is a professor of international law at Belarus State University who took up the post of Special Rapporteur on the negative impact of unilateral coercive measures on the enjoyment of human rights in 2020.[67] She has previously urged the lifting of unilateral sanctions on Qatar, Iran, Venezuela, Zimbabwe, and Syria.[68] A 2022 report by the nonprofit UN Watch found that Douhan received a $200,000 donation from the PRC government in 2021.[69]
The PRC used UN General Assembly Resolution 2758, which admitted the PRC to the UN as the sole representative of China and expelled the ROC from the UN in 1971, to block Taiwan’s participation in the World Health Organization’s 2024 annual assembly. PRC officials including the PRC ambassador to the United Nations and spokespeople for the MFA and TAO have claimed that the resolution confirms the “one China principle” in international law by definitively establishing the PRC as the only legal government of all of China, of which Taiwan is a part.[70] The MFA cited the resolution on May 13 and May 24 when explaining the PRC’s decision to block Taiwan from participating in the World Health Organization’s 2024 World Health Assembly (WHA), which begins on May 27. It argued that because Taiwan is part of China and the PRC is the sole legal representative of China, Taiwan cannot participate in international organizations without permission from the PRC's central government. It claimed that Taiwan’s DPP government has “stubbornly adhered to the separatist stance of ‘Taiwan independence’” since it took power in 2016 and thus invalidated the political basis for Taiwan’s participation in the WHO. [71] The PRC has repeatedly cited Resolution 2758 in its reasoning for blocking Taiwan’s participation in the WHO since 2017.[72] Taiwan participated as an observer in the WHA under the name “Chinese Taipei” during the presidency of Ma Ying-jeou from 2009-2016, however.[73]
PRC officials strongly criticized statements by US officials such as State Department China Coordinator Mark Lambert and various US senators which refuted the PRC’s interpretation of UNGA 2758.[74] An MFA spokesperson claimed on May 20 that “some people in the United States maliciously spread fallacies” in arguing that the UN resolution did not resolve Taiwan’s status and does not prevent Taiwan’s participation in international organizations. The spokesperson said such “absurd and dangerous” arguments “not only challenge China's sovereignty and territorial integrity, but also challenge “international justice and conscience” and the post-war international order.”[75] The same spokesperson claimed on May 15 that the US “distorting and slandering” of UNGA Resolution 2758 showed that the United States uses international law inconsistently to maintain its “hegemony.”[76]
Broader international acceptance of PRC arguments that interpret UNGA Resolution 2758 as an international legal consensus that Taiwan is part of the PRC would serve to further undermine Taiwan’s sovereignty. It would hamper Taiwan’s international participation, lend legitimacy to PRC coercive actions against Taiwan as a “domestic issue,” and lend credence to PRC arguments that the United States and other countries’ engagement with Taiwan without PRC consent is illegal.
The PRC’s use of UNGA 2758 in tandem with the 1992 Consensus to block Taiwan from participating in international organizations could also support its legal argument for its broader effort to legitimize the KMT over the DPP as a negotiating partner on behalf of Taiwan. It did not block Taiwan’s participation in the WHO during the KMT administration of Ma Ying-jeou because Ma and his party officially accept the “1992 Consensus” that Taiwan and mainland China are part of “one China.” The PRC may return to this more permissive policy under the next KMT administration in Taiwan, with the argument that the KMT recognizes the supposed “international legal consensus” of the One China principle and the DPP does not.
PRC Foreign Minister Wang Yi attended the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) Foreign Minister’s Summit in Astana, Kazakhstan. The SCO is a Eurasian regional cooperation organization that the PRC and Russia established in 2001 with several central Asian countries. It now also includes India, Pakistan, and Iran.[77] The Foreign Minister’s meeting was primarily in preparation for a full SCO summit in July. Wang called on the SCO the bolster security cooperation, information sharing, joint operations, and personnel training. He accused “a few countries” of pursuing hegemony, forming “small circles,” interfering with and suppressing other countries, “decoupling,” and even fueling the “three forces” in the region with the aim of suppressing the strategic autonomy of the Global South.[78] The “three forces” is a reference to terrorism, separatism, and religious extremism. Wang did not specify which countries he was talking about, but most of his rhetoric echoed criticisms the PRC commonly directs at the United States. Wang met individually with many other foreign ministers at the summit including Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov.[79] Lavrov confirmed that Russian President Vladimir Putin and CCP General Secretary Xi Jinping would meet again at the SCO meeting in Astana on July 3-4.[80]
Southeast Asia
Philippines
The Chinese Coast Guard (CCG) released new law enforcement procedures on May 15 likely as part of PRC efforts to assert territorial claims in the South China Sea. The CCG released the Coast Guard Administrative Law Enforcement Procedures (CGALEP), which states that the CCG can arrest and detain foreigners illegally entering or exiting PRC territorial boundaries for up to 30 days without trial. The CCG has the option to extend detentions up to 60 days in “complicated cases.”[81] The procedures will come into force on June 15.[82] The CCG announced the new procedures as the PRC is increasingly asserting its claims over disputed maritime features in the South China Sea, such as Scarborough and Second Thomas Shoal, amid heightened tensions with the Philippines. The PRC deployed research vessels and divers to the Sabina Shoal in May, potentially as part of a campaign to prevent the Philippines from defending its claim to the Second Thomas Shoal. This is a change from last month when the PRC deployed the Chinese Coast Guard to block Philippine ships from reaching Second Thomas Shoal and did not conduct efforts to reclaim Sabina Shoal.[83] The PRC also conducted its largest-ever blockade at Scarborough Shoal in May in an attempt to block a fleet of Philippine civilian ships from resupplying fishermen near Scarborough Shoal.[84]
The CCG could use the new law enforcement procedures to justify the arrest and detainment of non-PRC nationals and vessels, such as Philippine resupply ships or Filipino fishermen, within the boundaries of PRC territorial claims. The Philippine civilian group Atin Ito sent a convoy to resupply Filipino fishermen near Scarborough Shoal from May 14 to May 16. An advance party of the Atin Ito convoy delivered 1,000 liters of fuel and 200 food packs near Scarborough Shoal on May 16.[85] The convoy leaders declared the mission accomplished on May 16 in light of this news and decided not to sail closer to Scarborough Shoal.[86] The CCG also fired water cannons and collided with Philippine ships in March while attempting to block a Philippine resupply mission to Second Thomas Shoal.[87] These confrontations show the situations in the South China Sea under which the CCG could detain Philippine nationals under the CGALEP. Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. condemned the CGALEP and called it “completely unacceptable to the Philippines” and pledged “to always protect our citizens.”[88]
The map below depicts the PRC's claims of sovereignty over the South China Sea islands within the “nine-dash line” maritime boundary with the 12-nautical mile territory boundary depicted around each of the maritime features that the PRC claims. The map does not depict contiguous zones, economic zones, and continental shelves that the PRC also claims because these do not constitute territorial waters.[89] These island groups include the Spratly Islands (Nansha Islands), Paracel Islands (Xisha Islands), Pratas Island (Dongsha Islands), as well as Macclesfield Bank and Scarborough Shoal (Zhongsha Islands).[90] In addition to territorial waters within 12 nautical miles of each maritime feature, the PRC claims straight baselines around the Paracel Islands as a group, which means it considers waters between these islands to be its internal waters even when they are more than 12 nautical miles from any individual island. The Permanent Court of Arbitration ruled in 2016 that there is no legal basis for the PRC’s nine-dash line claims and that the PRC’s actions had violated the Philippines’ sovereign rights.[91] The PRC rejected the ruling.[92]
Europe
The PRC threatened to impose retaliatory tariff controls on European agricultural goods in response to EU subsidy investigations into PRC firms. This threat is part of a PRC campaign to dissuade the European leaders from implementing more hawkish economic policies that run counter to the PRC’s interests. The China Chamber of Commerce to the EU stated on May 18 that it “was informed… if the EU continues its actions [subsidy investigations into PRC firms in the electronic vehicle, wind turbine, and security equipment sectors], the Chinese side will have no choice but to implement a series of retaliatory measures.” It also stated that “European wine and dairy products may find themselves caught in the crossfire.”[93] The PRC wine and dairy imports are less than three percent of all of the PRC’s imports from the EU.[94] EU Agriculture Commissioner Janusz Wojciechowski’s visit to the PRC in late April aimed to increase food exports to the PRC.[95] The PRC threat of agricultural tariffs is one means to oppose this EU policy goal and coerce it into eliminating investigations into PRC companies at minimal cost to the PRC. The PRC is the EU’s third largest export market for agricultural products, at six-point-four percent, however.[96]
Russia
United Kingdom Defense Minister Grant Shapps stated on May 22 that US and UK intelligence have evidence that the PRC “is now or will be” providing lethal military assistance to Russia, a statement that US National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan questioned.[97] Shapps stated that this evidence is a “significant development” as the PRC has previously presented itself as a “moderating influence” but did not provide further information about the supposed intelligence. Sullivan stated during a press conference that he has previously warned that the PRC may supply Russia with lethal military assistance but that the US has “not seen that to date.”[98] Sullivan stated that he will speak with his British counterparts to ensure that the US and UK have a “common operating picture” and to clarify Shapps' comment.
The PRC has provided non-lethal assistance to Russia to support its defense industrial base since at least 2023. Over 90 percent of Russian microelectronics imports came from the PRC in 2023, for example. These dual-use materials are key for manufacturing weapons.[99] The CCP also provided Russia with military assistance such as rifles and smokeless powder at varying points in 2023.[100] United States Secretary of State Antony Blinken stated in April and May 2024 that the PRC provided dual-use components, such as machine tools, to the PRC as part of “invaluable support to Russia’s defense industrial base.”[101]
China-Taiwan Weekly Update, May 17, 2024
Click here to read the full report
Authors: Nils Peterson, Matthew Sperzel, and Daniel Shats of the Institute for the Study of War
Editors: Dan Blumenthal and Frederick W. Kagan of the American Enterprise Institute
Data Cutoff: May 16 at Noon ET
Key Takeaways:
- The Fujian provincial government in the PRC launched a series of economic initiatives that aim to build political support in Taiwan for cross-strait integration. Promoting economic ties between Fujian and Taiwan’s outer islands furthers the PRC’s efforts to establish greater political influence over ROC municipalities.
- The United States and PRC held their first bilateral government negotiations on artificial intelligence risks and governance in Geneva, Switzerland on May 14.
- The PRC may make an upcoming PRC-South Korea summit conditional on South Korea not sending a delegation to Taiwan President-elect Lai Ching-te’s inauguration on May 20.
- The PRC is increasingly asserting its claims over disputed maritime features in three areas of the South China Sea to signal its resolve amid heightened tensions with the Philippines.
- CCP General Secretary Xi Jinping held a series of meetings with European and Russian leaders in April and May, after which he likely concluded that the PRC could maintain and deepen economic ties with Europe while continuing to support Russia’s war against Ukraine.
Cross-Strait Relations
Taiwan
The Fujian provincial government in the PRC launched a series of initiatives aimed at building political support in Taiwan for cross-strait integration.[1] Among the services that the Fujan provincial government announced on April 28 is the “Fuzhou-Matsu City Pass,” a 300 RMB benefits card that facilitates the travel and settlement of Matsu residents in Fuzhou. The card offers Matsu residents discounted rides on transportation and hotels in Fuzhou, free tours of Fuzhou's major cultural attractions, housing benefits, and dedicated hotline consultation for children's education, employment, and entrepreneurship.[2] The Fujian government also announced that it will promote the construction of transportation and industrial infrastructure, such as airports, high-speed rails, highways, and ports, to increase connectivity between Fuzhou and Matsu.
The Fujian government announced the new programs on the same day that Kuomintang (KMT) Caucus Whip Fu Kun-chi met with Taiwan Affairs Office (TAO) Director Song Tao. The PRC’s announcement during Fu’s visit follows a pattern of showcasing cooperative policies to portray the KMT as a good faith partner that produces favorable outcomes for cross-strait relations.
Municipal offices in the Matsu Islands facilitated residents’ participation in the PRC initiatives. Municipal offices in Matsu (officially Lienchiang County) began assisting in the collection of the card applicants’ information in March after county Magistrate Wang Chung-ming met with Fuzhou Municipal Party Committee Secretary Lin Baojin.[3] The county Transportation and Tourism Bureau processed the information and forwarded it to the PRC for card printing.[4] Deputy Chairman of the Mainland Affairs Council (MAC) Chan Chih-hung stated at a press conference on May 9 that the MAC initially warned the Lienchiang County government about the possible illegality of cooperating with the PRC in processing applications and highlighted the danger of transferring citizens’ personal information.[5]
Promoting economic ties between Fujian and Taiwan’s outer islands furthers the PRC’s efforts to establish greater political influence over ROC municipalities. The purpose of intertwining the local economies and increased cross-strait interaction is to positively affect the livelihoods of residents in Taiwan’s outer islands and make decoupling a politically unpopular policy. Targeting Taiwan’s economically vulnerable and isolated outer islands enables the PRC to establish its influence at a local level without having to engage with the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) central government, with which the PRC severed official communication in 2016.
The PRC has already made political inroads by promoting cross-strait travel links. The PRC and ROC islands of Kinmen and Matsu expanded links in transportation, trade, and postal services in 2008 after decades of lobbying by the PRC. The PRC refers to these services between the PRC and Taiwan's outer islands as the "Three Little Links."[6] The PRC’s promotion of cross-strait travel has resonated with Kinmen residents, especially with whom political support for a bridge to connect the island to the mainland is strong.[7] The PRC has capitalized on that political support to promote the development of the Fujian “demonstration zone for integrated cross-strait development.”[8]
The measures are part of a broader PRC program unveiled in September 2023 that seeks to cultivate Fujian province as a “demonstration zone” for cross-strait integration by promoting infrastructure linkages and economic incentives with Taiwan.[9] The sweeping initiative aims to make Fujian, a region that shares a cultural and linguistic heritage with Taiwan, into a hub for “merged development” by attracting Taiwanese people and businesses.[10] Other measures include establishing a service center to accommodate Taiwanese firms transitioning to Fujian, offering preferential loans to Taiwanese businesses, and providing professional training programs to increase employment and entrepreneurship opportunities for Taiwanese people in Fujian.[11] The initiative entails creating a “joint living circle” between Fuzhou and Matsu, which the PRC is promoting by popularizing programs such as the Fuzhou-Matsu City Pass. The Fuzhou city government announced an additional ten policies on May 16 at the Cross-Strait Economic and Trade Fair that aim to draw in Matsu residents and enterprises.[12]
The dominant parties in Taiwan—the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) and Kuomintang (KMT)—voiced opposing stances on the PRC initiatives. Democratic Progressive Party Secretary-General Rosalia Wu labeled the program a tool of the PRC’s United Front political strategy to assimilate Taiwan and called on the Lienchiang County government to stop acting as an agent of the PRC’s political influence.[13] DPP legislator Lin Chu-yin questioned National Security Bureau (NSB) Deputy Director Hsu Hsi-hsiang on May 13 whether the Matsu government’s cooperation in submitting the applications constituted a violation of the Cross-Strait Act and enabled the PRC to spread its influence.[14] Hsu replied that the NSB would work with the MAC to determine whether the Matsu government’s cooperation with the program broke the law. Hsu mentioned that the program received approximately 3,000 applicants, almost a quarter of Lienchiang County’s population of 13,000. The Lienchiang County government suspended assistance in applying for the card in April.
Kuomintang (KMT) Secretary-General Hung Mong-kai stated at the same press conference that cross-strait tourism was an “olive branch” that could bring the two sides of the strait closer together. Fu announced that the KMT will propose a resolution in the Legislative Yuan to lift restrictions on cross-strait tourism and prioritize facilitating mainland tourists’ travel to Taiwan’s outer islands.[15]
The PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) condemned the United States for participating in joint naval exercises with Taiwan in the Pacific in April. Reuters reported on May 14 that Taiwan and the United States conducted unpublicized drills in the Western Pacific, according to unnamed sources. ROC Ministry of National Defense spokesperson Sun Li-fang responded to the claim on May 14, stating that the Taiwanese navy carried out routine exercises with the Code for Unplanned Encounters at Sea, referring to a non-binding code that aims to prevent confrontations between different navies at sea.[16] The United States is a signatory to the agreement. Taiwan abides by the code even though it is not a signatory. MFA spokesperson Wang Wenbin criticized the United States in a press conference the same day, urging the US to “earnestly abide by the one-China principle and the provisions of the three Sino-U.S. joint communiqués, and stop the erroneous act of military collusion.”[17]
China
The United States and PRC held their first bilateral government negotiations on artificial intelligence (AI) risks and governance in Geneva, Switzerland on May 14. The meeting was the first under an intragovernmental dialogue on AI that US President Joe Biden and CCP General Secretary Xi Jinping agreed to launch during their meeting in San Francisco in November 2023.[18] The US delegation included officials from the White House, the State Department, and the Department of Commerce. The PRC delegation included officials from the MFA, the Ministry of Science and Technology, the National Development and Reform Commission, the Cyberspace Administration of China, the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology, and the CCP Office of the Central Foreign Affairs Commission. An unnamed US official told the South China Morning Post that the first round of talks was not intended to focus on deliverables but instead was an initial exchange of views about the technical risks of AI.[19]
A US readout said that the two sides “exchanged perspectives on their respective approaches to AI safety and risk management” in a “candid and constructive” discussion. The United States also raised concerns over the misuse of AI, including by the PRC.[20] The United States has made a declaration that only humans, and never AI, would make decisions about deploying nuclear weapons. It has urged the PRC to make a similar commitment.[21] The PRC has not responded to this US demand, however, and readouts from both sides of the May 14 talks did not mention military applications of AI.
A PRC readout said that the PRC supports strengthening the global governance of artificial intelligence with the United Nations as the main channel. It said it is willing to strengthen communication and coordination with the international community, including the United States, to form a global AI governance framework and standards with broad consensus. The PRC also expressed its “solemn stance” on the US restrictions and “suppression of China” in the field of AI.[22] An MFA spokesperson objected to a proposed US AI export control bill on May 10. He urged the United States not to “politicize” trade, science, and technology. He also called on the United States to stop protectionist practices, restrictions on PRC science and technology, and disruptions to the international economic order.[23]
The PRC condemned the US imposition of new tariffs on PRC goods. The US government announced on May 14 that it would further increase tariffs on PRC goods including electric vehicles, batteries, solar cells, minerals, semiconductors, steel and aluminum, cranes, and medical equipment.[24] A PRC Ministry of Commerce spokesperson claimed the United States was abusing the Section 301 tariff review process out of “domestic political considerations.” It said the tariffs violate WTO rules and US President Joe Biden’s commitment to not “seek to suppress and contain China’s development” and not to decouple from the PRC.[25] An MFA spokesperson said the United States was “compounding” its mistakes and that the tariffs would primarily hurt US consumers. Both spokespeople said the PRC would take unspecified measures to protect its interests.[26]
The PLA claimed it “expelled” the USS Halsey after the ship “illegally broke into” waters around the Paracel Islands. PLA Southern Theater Command spokesperson Colonel Tian Junli claimed PLA air and naval forces “monitored, warned, and expelled” the Halsey destroyer ship on May 10 after it “illegally” entered the “territorial waters” around the Paracel Islands without PRC permission. Tian claimed the US transit violated PRC sovereignty and security. He also claimed it was “ironclad evidence” that the United States is pursuing “navigational hegemony,” is militarizing the South China Sea, and is a “security risk creator.”[27] The US 7th Fleet said that the Halsey carried out a Freedom of Navigation Operation to challenge restrictions on innocent passage around the Paracel Islands by the PRC, Taiwan, and Vietnam, and to challenge the PRC’s claim to straight baselines around the islands. It did not mention any confrontation with PLA forces.[28] The PRC administers the Paracel Islands and calls them the “Xisha Islands.” Taiwan and Vietnam also claim the islands.
The PRC claims straight archipelagic baselines around the Paracel Islands, which means it considers all the water between the islands as its territorial waters. The PRC also requires foreign ships to get permission or provide advance notification when they sail through its territorial waters. The UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) does not permit countries to restrict “innocent passage” through their territorial waters. “Innocent passage” is uninterrupted transit through the waters without other activities such as fishing, research, intelligence collection, or military activities. UNCLOS also only permits designated archipelagic states to draw straight-baseline claims around their islands. Non-archipelagic states, such as the PRC, can only claim waters up to 12 nautical miles from their shores as their territorial sea.[29]
The PRC framed US-UK-Australia nuclear submarine cooperation as a threat to the international nuclear non-proliferation regime at a seminar in Vienna. The PRC permanent mission in Vienna hosted a seminar on May 10 entitled “AUKUS: A Case Study about the Development of IAEA Comprehensive Safeguards.” An MFA spokesperson claimed over 100 attendees from the missions of nearly 50 countries, think tanks, and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) engaged in “heated discussions” about IAEA supervision of AUKUS, the US-UK-Australia security partnership. The spokesperson claimed that the nuclear submarine cooperation within AUKUS undermines regional security, provokes arms races and “confrontation between camps,” and has triggered “widespread concerns” about nuclear proliferation. He further claimed the trilateral cooperation undermines the effectiveness of the IAEA and Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) because existing institutional safeguards and oversight mechanisms cannot effectively supervise the transfer of nuclear reactors and large amounts of weapons-grade highly enriched uranium involved in the AUKUS submarine deal. He urged the United States, United Kingdom, and Australia to stop promoting nuclear submarine cooperation.[30]
The PRC reference to “nuclear submarine cooperation” refers to the AUKUS plan to build a nuclear-powered submarine fleet for Australia, which includes at least three submarines from the United States and nuclear reactors constructed in the United Kingdom.[31] The NPT bans the transfer of nuclear weapons to non-nuclear weapons states, such as Australia, but permits the transfer of fissile material to non-nuclear states without IAEA inspection if the material is not for use in explosive devices.[32] The PRC has accused the United States and the United Kingdom of violating the “object and purpose” of the NPT by transferring fissile material to Australia, however.[33] The PRC seminar in Vienna came less than two weeks before an upcoming IAEA conference in Vienna from May 20-24.[34] The PRC may raise the issue of the AUKUS nuclear submarine deals at the conference or seek to include language about the issue in a joint ministerial declaration produced by ministers attending the conference.
Northeast Asia
South Korea
PRC Foreign Minister Wang Yi acknowledged “difficulties and challenges” in the PRC-ROK relationship during talks with South Korean Foreign Minister Cho Tae-yul. The talks in Beijing on May 13 were the first bilateral foreign minister talks between the two countries since 2022. The two countries’ relations have been strained over South Korea’s increasingly close security and economic relationship with the United States.[35] The PRC readout of the meeting said Wang acknowledged the PRC-ROK relationship has faced “difficulties and challenges” lately but hoped the two countries could enhance mutual trust and deepen mutually beneficial cooperation on trade and development. Wang also urged South Korea to “abide by the one-China principle [and] properly and prudently handle Taiwan-related issues.”[36] The readout did not elaborate on the “difficulties and challenges” Wang referred to. The ROK readout of the meeting said Cho also agreed the two countries should enhance mutual trust and strengthen economic cooperation. Cho also raised concerns about North Korea’s recent “provocations” and illicit military cooperation with Russia. He called on the PRC to strengthen its constructive role for peace and stability on the Korean Peninsula and the denuclearization of North Korea and urged the PRC not to repatriate North Korean defectors against their will.[37] The PRC readout did not mention these issues.
The PRC may condition the holding of a future PRC-ROK summit on whether South Korea sends a delegation to Taiwan President-elect Lai Ching-te’s inauguration on May 20. President of the Seoul-based Korea-China Global Association Woo Su-yuen, whom Korean media described as a “longtime adviser to Chinese policymakers,” said PRC Premier Li Qiang would attend a PRC-South Korea-Japan trilateral summit at the end of May. The three countries have not announced an exact date for the summit, but media reports say it will likely take place on May 26-27. Woo also claimed top PRC State Council and CCP officials privately said during his visit to the PRC in April that Beijing would only agree to a separate bilateral PRC-ROK summit if South Korea honors its commitment not to send a delegation to the presidential inauguration of Lai Ching-te in Taiwan on May 20.[38]
Making bilateral talks contingent on South Korea's decision not to send a delegation to Lai’s inauguration is consistent with the PRC’s willingness to suspend dialogue to punish other countries for engaging with Taiwan. The PRC suspended military dialogue with the United States after then-US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi visited Taiwan in August 2022 and did not resume the dialogue until after the Biden-Xi meeting in November 2023.[39]
Southeast Asia
Philippines
The PRC is increasingly asserting its claims over disputed maritime features in three areas of the South China Sea to signal its resolve amid heightened tensions with the Philippines. The PRC is deploying research vessels and divers to the Sabina Shoal, potentially as part of a campaign to prevent the Philippines from defending its claim to the Second Thomas Shoal. This is a change from last month when the PRC deployed the Chinese Coast Guard to block Philippine ships from reaching Second Thomas Shoal and did not conduct efforts to reclaim Sabina Shoal. The PRC also conducted its largest-ever blockade at Scarborough in an attempt to block a fleet of Philippine civilian ships from resupplying fishermen near Scarborough Shoal. The PRC asserts that the United States and the Philippines are driving tensions in the region, however, through joint exercises and by forming a coalition against the PRC.
The PRC deployed research vessels and divers to the Sabina Shoal, which may be part of a campaign to reclaim the island and prevent the Philippines from defending its claim to Second Thomas Shoal. Sabina Shoal is roughly 37 miles east of the Second Thomas Shoal and is the staging point for Philippine resupply missions to the Second Thomas Shoal. The resupply missions enabled the Philippines to maintain the Sierra Madre, a dilapidated World War II-era naval ship that the Philippines ran aground at Second Thomas Shoal in 1999 to serve as a military detachment.[40]
The PRC has sent an unspecified number of research vessels and divers to Sabina Shoal since early May, which prompted the Philippine Coast Guard (PCG) to deploy a ship near Sabina Shoal on May 11 in response.[41] PCG Spokesman Jay Tarriela expressed concern on May 11 about the PRC dumping crushed corals at Sabina Shoal, which he warned was a preparatory step to allow the PRC the option to build structures upon the shoal as part of a reclamation effort.[42] He also stated on May 13 that the PCG’s mission is to prevent the PRC from “carrying out a successful reclamation in Sabina Shoal.”[43] PRC MFA Spokesman Wang Wenbin denied Tarriela’s assertion and accused the Philippines of misleading the international community.[44]
A PRC-controlled Sabina Shoal would extend the PRC’s territorial claims in the South China Sea and improve the PRC’s ability to assert its claim over the Second Thomas Shoal. A PRC-controlled Sabina Shoal would also provide the PRC with the opportunity to build a military facility to the east of the Second Thomas Shoal. This would surround the Second Thomas Shoal with PRC military facilities, which would enhance the difficulty of Philippine resupply missions. The Filipino troops stationed on the Sierra Madre as well as the ship’s structural integrity depend on Philippine resupply missions.
The malign PRC activities at the Sabina Shoal come as the PRC alleges that the Philippines has violated a series of secret and informal agreements about the Second Thomas Shoal since 2016. The PRC claims are part of a malign influence campaign to secure PRC control over the Second Thomas Shoal and frame the Philippines as the belligerent in the South China Sea. The PRC Embassy to the Philippines claimed on May 2, 2024, that Xi Jinping and then-Philippines President Rodrigo Duterte reached an unwritten “temporary special arrangement” in 2016 about the Philippines’ access to the waters near Second Thomas Shoal. The PRC alleged that they concluded the arrangement as a gentleman's agreement with two stipulations. First, Philippine fishing vessels would have access to the waters near Second Thomas Shoal. Philippine military and police ships needed to stay at least twelve nautical miles away from the shoal, however.[45] Second, the Philippines would not transport construction materials to repair the Sierra Madre, a dilapidated World War II-era naval ship on Second Thomas Shoal that the Philippines deliberately ran aground in 1999 to serve as a military detachment.[46] The PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesperson Mao Ning clarified that if the Philippines needed to replenish the Sierra Madre with necessities for the personnel there, it must notify the PRC in advance, which will approve and supervise the process.[47]
PRC MFA Spokesman Lin Jian claimed on May 6, 2024, that the PRC reached another unspecified “gentleman’s agreement” in 2021 with the Philippine government under then-President Rodrigo Duterte. Lin claimed the Philippines violated this agreement in February 2023 without specifying the contents of the agreement or how the Philippines had failed to comply with it. Lin also claimed that the PRC negotiated a “new model” at “the beginning of this year [2024]” that received the approval of “all key officials in the Philippine chain of command, including the Secretary of National Defense and the National Security Advisor.”[48] Lin then stated that the Philippines carried out a resupply mission to Second Thomas Shoal on February 2 before abandoning this “new model.” [49]
Philippine political leadership denies the existence of these alleged agreements. Duterte denied ever making a “gentleman’s agreement” with Xi, however, and claimed that the 2016 meeting helped keep the status quo of peace in the South China Sea. Duterte also claimed that Xi threatened to go to war if the Philippines exercised its economic rights in the South China Sea.[50] Current Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. deems the alleged agreement illegitimate since it was a “secret agreement” hidden from the public.[51] Philippine Defense Secretary Gilberto Teodoro and National Security Advisor Eduardo Año denied agreeing to the PRC-alleged “new model” on May 5.[52] The Philippine Department of Foreign Affairs also stated on May 5 that “no cabinet-level official of the administration has agreed to any Chinese proposal pertaining to Ayungin Shoal [Second Thomas Shoal].”[53]
Chinese Coast Guard (CCG) and Chinese Maritime Militia (CMM) vessels surrounding Scarborough Shoal failed to prevent a successful resupply mission to Filipino fishermen by the civilian group Atin Ito. At least 4 CCG and 26 CMM vessels are at Scarborough Shoal awaiting the Atin Ito convoy as of May 14.[54] 1 PLA Navy, 8 CCG, and 34 CMM vessels sailed to the east of Scarborough Shoal to prevent the Atin Ito convoy from reaching the shoal on May 15.[55] SeaLight Director Ray Powell noted this is the largest-ever blockade at Scarborough.[56] The Atin Ito convoy comprises 5 commercial fishing vessels and 100 small fishing boats that aim to deliver supplies such as food and fuel to the fisherman.[57] The Atin Ito convoy is independent of the Philippine government even though the BRP Bacagay is escorting the convoy.[58] An advance party of the Atin Ito convoy delivered 1,000 liters of fuel and 200 food packs near Scarborough Shoal on May 16.[59] The convoy leaders declared the mission accomplished on May 16 in light of this news and decided to not sail closer to Scarborough Shoal.[60]
The CCP English language propaganda outlet Global Times released articles and a video maligning the Philippines to portray the Philippines as irresponsible to the Atin Ito convoy. It claimed on May 13 that Atin Ito is using the fishermen as “human shields” and that the organization is a “hired gun” of the United States that has “continuously stirred up troubles” in the South China Sea.[61] Global Times also released an edited video showing Philippine fishermen polluting the environment by spitting, urinating, and dumping garbage at sea.[62]
A PLA Navy (PLAN) destroyer division carried out anti-missile and anti-submarine drills in the South China Sea. The PLA Southern Theater Command (STC) posted a video of the drill on May 10, the day the US-Philippine annual Balikatan military exercise in the South China Sea concluded.[63] The drill included the powerful Type 055 guided-missile destroyer Zunyi and other ships including the destroyer Haikou, destroyer Kunming, and frigate Xianning. The STC said the ships were deployed in “sea-strike tactical formation” for training that focused on sea warfare, air defense and anti-missile warfare, and submarine warfare. The drill also included simulated nighttime strikes on onshore targets and exercises involving buoys.[64] PRC state-owned media Global Times reported that PLAN task forces led by Type 055 destroyers conducted multiple exercises around the South China Sea over the past month, including four PLAN ships that traversed the Sibutu Strait near the southern Philippines on May 2.[65]
Europe
Xi held a series of meetings with European and Russian leaders in April and May, after which he likely concluded that the PRC could maintain and deepen economic ties with Europe while continuing to support Russia’s war against Ukraine. Xi emphasized the benefits of cooperation between Europe and the PRC and rejected concerns about Sino-Russian ties and support that the PRC is providing to Russia’s war in Ukraine. Xi said during his April meeting with German Chancellor Olaf Scholz on April 16 that PRC and German industrial and supply chains are “deeply embedded” in one another and claimed this is not a “risk” but a guarantee of future relations – a possible reference to the European Union’s “de-risking” policies toward the PRC. He stressed that the two countries have “huge potential” for “win-win cooperation,” including in green development, and said both sides should be wary of protectionism. He said that the PRC hopes for a “fair, open, and non-discriminatory German market.”[66] Xi also stressed cooperation during his May 5 meeting with French President Emmanuel Macron. He said he hopes that “EU institutions… [will] formulate a positive policy towards China” and build “an industrial and supply chain partnership that is stable and mutually trustworthy.”[67] Xi’s statements aligned with a PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs statement on April 27 in the leadup to Xi’s trip that emphasized the necessity of avoiding “confrontation between camps” and the desire for France to push the EU to “pursue a positive and pragmatic policy towards China.”[68]
Xi’s approach during these meetings aimed to dissuade the European Union from implementing more hawkish economic policies against the PRC’s interests. The European Commission and its president Ursula von der Leyen have called EU-PRC trade “critically unbalanced,” criticized the PRC’s preferential treatment of its domestic companies and overcapacity in its production, and called for “de-risking” policies to reduce Europe’s economic dependence on the PRC.[69] The European Commission’s Economic Security Strategy released in 2023 said “de-risking” policies are meant to mitigate risks to supply chain resilience, risks to critical infrastructure, risks related to leakage of sensitive technology, and risks of economic coercion by diversifying supply chains and restricting European companies’ ability to produce sensitive technologies overseas.[70] Scholz, Macron, and von der Leyen all urged Xi to pressure Russia to end its war against Ukraine.[71]
Xi focused on shared Sino-Russian geopolitical goals during his meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin on May 16, however. Putin framed Russia and the PRC as both not willing to “accept Western attempts to impose an order based on lies, hypocrisy, and invented rules” in a written interview with CCP media outlet Xinhua on May 15.[72] Xi’s view in the aftermath of this meeting that the PRC and Russia should deepen their cooperation to produce a multi-polar world aligns with Putin’s view in the Xinhua interview.[73] PRC MFA Spokesman Wang Wenbin’s May 16 statements further demonstrate Xi’s view that the PRC can continue supporting Russia’s war against Ukraine with minimal consequences. He framed the US accusations of PRC support for Russia as an attempt to shift blame for the Russia-Ukraine War onto the PRC. Wang then reiterated the PRC claim that US accusations “against China’s normal trade with Russia” are unjustified. [74]
The PRC strongly denied and condemned the United Kingdom’s espionage charges against alleged agents from Hong Kong. UK police charged three men under the National Security Act for allegedly assisting Hong Kong’s intelligence service in spying on UK-based dissidents. The charges include aiding a hostile state and forcing entry into a UK address. One of the men is the office manager at the Hong Kong Economic and Trade Office (HKETO) in London and an alleged former classmate of Hong Kong Chief Executive John Lee. The other two are a UK Border Force official and a former Royal Marines commando.[75] The UK summoned PRC ambassador Zheng Zeguang to lodge complaints about the spying.[76] Lee, the PRC Embassy in the UK, and the MFA all strongly denied the charges. An MFA spokesperson called the allegations “malicious slander” and “political manipulation” and expressed “serious concern” about the prosecution of PRC citizens.[77] PRC Ambassador Zheng also claimed the case was a fabrication to “smear and attack” the Hong Kong government. He accused the UK of wantonly harassing and detaining PRC citizens in the UK and warned it not to meddle in Hong Kong affairs. He said the PRC is “firmly resolved in fighting anti-China elements seeking to disrupt Hong Kong” and accused the UK of “harboring wanted criminals.”[78] The UK government previously charged two British nationals with spying for the PRC in April.[79]
China-Taiwan Weekly Update, May 10, 2024
Click here to read the full report
Authors: Matthew Sperzel and Nils Peterson of the Institute for the Study of War
Editors: Dan Blumenthal and Frederick W. Kagan of the American Enterprise Institute
Data Cutoff: May 9 at Noon ET
Key Takeaways
- The Chinese Coast Guard has normalized patrols around Kinmen, a Taiwan-controlled island with a large military garrison roughly 3 km from the coast of the PRC.
- Kuomintang and Taiwan People’s Party legislators in the Legislative Yuan rejected a Democratic Progressive Party draft amendment that would reduce the CCP’s ability to engage with the opposition.
- CCP General Secretary Xi Jinping met with French President Emmanuel Macron and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen on May 5 as part of a charm offensive to block the formation of a stricter EU policy on China.
- The PRC alleges that the Philippines has violated a series of secret and informal agreements about the Second Thomas Shoal since 2016. The PRC claims are part of a malign influence campaign to secure PRC control over the shoal and frame the Philippines as the belligerent in the South China Sea.
- The PRC announced that it will release an audio recording that it claims will prove that the Philippines had agreed to the terms of the secret deals.
- The election of Jeremiah Manele as prime minister provides the PRC with an opportunity to continue expanding economic and infrastructure cooperation with the Solomon Islands.
- The United States Intelligence Community warned of Sino-Russian military cooperation in East Asia.
- Russia is starting the development of a joint Sino-Russian lunar nuclear power plant. The PRC and Russia are also collaborating on the development of surveillance space capabilities that threaten US access to space and space-based capabilities.
Cross-Strait Relations
The Chinese Coast Guard (CCG) has normalized patrols around Kinmen, a Taiwan-controlled island with a large military garrison roughly 3 kilometers from the coast of the PRC. The CCG began patrols in Kinmen’s prohibited waters in February after two PRC fishermen drowned while fleeing from a Taiwanese Coast Guard pursuit on February 14. The PRC pledged after the incident to strengthen law enforcement activities around Kinmen. The PRC has increased the frequency of CCG patrols in Kinmen’s waters and the volume of ships per event since it began routine violations in late February.
The CCG announced on April 29 that it carried out law enforcement patrols in waters near Kinmen. The announcement stated that the CCG strengthened its law enforcement activities around Kinmen in April to “safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of Chinese fishermen, including Taiwan… and safeguard normal navigation in Kinmen-Xiamen waters.”[1] The CCG violated Taiwan’s maritime borders around Kinmen four times since the beginning of May under the pretense of legitimate law enforcement operations.[2] Five CCG ships and seven PRC fishery and maritime agency-affiliated official ships took part in the operations on May 9, marking the first time CCG ships and other official ships have sailed together in Taiwan’s waters.[3] The Taiwanese Coast Guard Administration (CGA) stated that three other PRC fishing vessels joined the formation, which CGA suspects conducted drills with the official ships in Taiwan’s contiguous zone around Kinmen.[4]
The CCG frequently announced its activities in the past week and illustrated its May 6 voyage through Taiwan’s prohibited waters with a publicly released map.[5] PRC state media has actively covered CCG patrols and highlighted their proximity to Kinmen.[6] The CCG and PRC state media’s publicization of CCG patrols in Kinmen waters serves as a public challenge to ROC sovereignty that surpasses the PRC’s rhetorical denial. Taiwan’s CGA has responded to each instance by deploying ships to and broadcasting warnings to the PRC vessels until they leave Taiwanese waters.[7]
Opposition parties in Taiwan’s legislature rejected a Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) draft amendment that would reduce the CCP’s ability to engage with the opposition. DPP legislator Puma Shen spearheaded a proposal to amend the Cross-Strait Act, which regulates cross-strait travel for public officials. The Act, passed in 1992, currently prohibits central government officials, city mayors, county magistrates, and personnel of national security-related agencies, from traveling to the PRC without permission from the Ministry of Interior.[8] Shen’s amendment, if passed, would extend the scope of that law to include legislators and other elected officials such as city councilors. DPP legislator Puma Shen spearheaded an amendment proposal that would extend the scope of the law to include legislators and other elected officials.[9] Kuomintang (KMT) and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) legislators voted down the proposal on May 6.[10] The proposal follows a high-level KMT delegation of lawmakers led by Caucus Whip Fu Kun-chi to the mainland last week. Fu met with Taiwan Affairs Office (TAO) Director Song Tao and Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference Chairman Wang Huning on April 27.[11] Wang is the PRC’s top Taiwan policy setter after Xi Jinping.
Blocking DPP efforts to regulate cross-strait engagement is beneficial to the CCP. The CCP uses cross-strait engagement with legislators and lower-level officials to advance its political objectives in Taiwan. The CCP strategy rewards aims to legitimize the KMT as a good-faith steward of cross-strait relations that benefit Taiwan. For example, the CCP announced during a meeting with KMT Caucus Whip Fu Kun-chi on April 26 that the PRC would lift its ban on the imports of Wendan pomelos and two types of fish from Taiwan.[12] The change in CCP policy signaled to Taiwan’s farmers and fishermen that they stand to benefit from the KMT’s cross-strait engagements and lose from the DPP’s. The PRC implemented the bans as a form of economic punishment after then-US Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi arrived in Taiwan in August 2022.[13]
The PRC’s ability to conduct cyber-enabled information operations against Taiwan at scale is increasing with the popularization of social media and artificial intelligence. Days before the presidential election in January, unnamed Taiwanese national security personnel told the media that hundreds of videos denigrating President Tsai Ing-wen appeared on YouTube. The videos were being spread by over 200 accounts and used AI generative technology.[14] The national security sources attributed the videos and other related content to an information operation by the PRC’s Ministry of State Security. The Taiwan Information Environment Research Center (IORG), a civil society organization that researches disinformation, found that about 23% of Taiwanese people use YouTube as their main source for intaking news.[15] The same study found that TikTok users were more agreeable to political narratives that aligned with CCP interests than non-users. Tsai acknowledged TikTok as a possible avenue for CCP information manipulation in 2023, noting Taiwan’s vulnerability due to lack of restrictions.[16]
The PRC is already inundating Taiwan with disinformation. Taiwan’s National Security Bureau (NSB) Director-General Tsai Ming-yen revealed on May 1 that the NSB identifies as many as 30,000 instances of online misinformation each week.[17] Tsai stated that the NSB reports around 6,000 of those posts to the Executive Yuan to decide how to respond. Although Tsai did not explicitly mention the PRC by name in his address to the Legislative Yuan, the PRC’s domination of Taiwan’s information threat landscape is known. The PRC’s political warfare against Taiwan features constant information operations that aim to degrade support for the DPP and suppress Taiwanese sovereignty and identity. Governments and threat intelligence organizations have called repeated attention to sprawling PRC disinformation operations in coordinated campaigns such as Spamouflage.[18]
A report from DoubleThink Labs, a Taiwanese firm that researches PRC influence operations, released a report in January that detailed the wide range of narratives that PRC threat actors propagate to negatively influence Taiwanese people’s perception of the DPP. The narratives opportunistically seize on topical controversies in Taiwanese politics to amplify criticism of the DPP government, including egg and pork import scandals, fraud cases related to Taiwan’s domestic submarine production, compulsory military service extensions, Indian migrant worker inflows, and false rumors about President-elect Lai Ching-te’s supposed illegitimate child.[19]
China
CCP General Secretary Xi Jinping met with French President Emmanuel Macron and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen on May 5 as part of a charm offensive to block the formation of a stricter EU policy on China. Macron emphasized trade disputes and urged the PRC to pressure Russia to end its invasion of Ukraine.[20] Von der Leyen also focused on trade by stating that the EU “cannot absorb massive over-production of Chinese industrial goods flooding its market” and said that Europe would protect its own market.[21] Xi stated his hope that “EU institutions… [will] formulate a positive policy towards China” and build “an industrial and supply chain partnership that is stable and mutually trustworthy.”[22] Xi rejected the assertion that the PRC has an “overcapacity problem.”[23] He inaccurately framed the PRC as not a party to the “Ukraine crisis,” while avoiding mentioning PRC support for Russia’s industrial base.
Xi’s statements align with a PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs statement on April 27 in the leadup to Xi’s trip that emphasized the necessity of avoiding “confrontation between camps” and the desire for France to push the EU to “pursue a positive and pragmatic policy towards China.”[24] Bloomberg also reported on April 29 that the EU is considering additional restrictions on PRC companies for supporting Russia.[25] The PRC MFA readout of the meeting between Xi, Macron, and von der Leyen emphasizing the economy and only addressing the Ukraine War in the second to last paragraph indicates that CCP leadership is attempting to maintain access to Europe as an export market while simultaneously supporting Putin’s war of aggression in Ukraine.
Xi visited and met with Serbian and Hungarian political leadership to conclude his European trip. His trip to Serbia resulted in the lifting of trade restrictions and the announcement that the China-Serbia Free Trade Agreement would come into effect on July 1.[26] Xi emphasized implementing the Belt and Road Initiative during his time in Hungary.[27] This will take the form of a 2.1 billion USD project to construct a Budapest-Belgrade railway.[28] Xi’s trip solidifies Serbia and Hungary as avenues for the party to exert influence in Europe, particularly Hungary due to its membership in the European Union.
Southeast Asia
Philippines
The PRC alleges that the Philippines has violated a series of secret and informal agreements about the Second Thomas Shoal since 2016. The PRC claims are part of a malign influence campaign to secure PRC control over the shoal and frame the Philippines as the belligerent in the South China Sea. The PRC Embassy to the Philippines claimed on May 2, 2024, that Xi Jinping and then-Philippines President Rodrigo Duterte reached an unwritten “temporary special arrangement” in 2016 about the Philippines’ access to the waters near Second Thomas Shoal. The PRC alleged that they concluded the arrangement as a gentleman's agreement with two stipulations. First, Philippine fishing vessels would have access to the waters near Second Thomas Shoal. Philippine military and police ships needed to stay at least twelve nautical miles away from the shoal, however.[29] Second, the Philippines would not transport construction materials to repair the Sierra Madre, a dilapidated World War II-era naval ship on Second Thomas Shoal that the Philippines deliberately ran aground in 1999 to serve as a military detachment.[30] The PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesperson Mao Ning clarified that if the Philippines needed to replenish the Sierra Madre with necessities for the personnel there, it must notify the PRC in advance, which will approve and supervise the process.[31]
PRC MFA Spokesman Lin Jian claimed on May 6, 2024, that the PRC reached another unspecified “gentleman’s agreement” in 2021 with the Philippine government under then-President Rodrigo Duterte. Lin claimed the Philippines violated this agreement in February 2023 without specifying the contents of the agreement or how the Philippines had failed to comply with it. Lin also claimed that the PRC negotiated a “new model” at “the beginning of this year [2024]” that received the approval of “all key officials in the Philippine chain of command, including the Secretary of National Defense and the National Security Advisor.”[32] Lin then stated that the Philippines carried out a resupply mission to Second Thomas Shoal on February 2 before abandoning this “new model.” [33]
Philippine political leadership denies the existence of these alleged agreements. Duterte denied ever making a “gentleman’s agreement” with Xi, however, and claimed that the 2016 meeting helped keep the status quo of peace in the South China Sea. Duterte also claimed that Xi threatened to go to war if the Philippines exercised its economic rights in the South China Sea.[34] Current Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. deems the alleged agreement illegitimate since it was a “secret agreement” hidden from the public.[35] Philippine Defense Secretary Gilberto Teodoro and National Security Advisor Eduardo Año denied agreeing to the PRC-alleged “new model” on May 5.[36] The Philippine Department of Foreign Affairs also stated on May 5 that “no cabinet-level official of the administration has agreed to any Chinese proposal pertaining to Ayungin Shoal [Second Thomas Shoal].”[37]
The PRC announced that it will release an audio recording that it claims will prove that the Philippines had agreed to the terms of the secret deals. Bloomberg reported on May 7 that unspecified PRC officials are threatening to release audio of a purported call on January 3 with Philippine Western Command Vice Admiral Alberto Carlos to substantiate their allegations.[38] The PRC MFA declined to state on May 8 when the PRC would release the recording.[39] Philippines Armed Forces Chief of Staff Romeo Brawner denied that the recording is legitimate, noting that “transcripts can be easily fabricated, and audio recordings can be manufactured by using deep fakes.”[40]
The Manila Times reported the transcript of the alleged audio recording on May 8. Per the transcript, the PRC and Philippines agreed to each deploy “one plus one vessel,” which “most likely” would be a coast guard and civilian vessel. The Philippines would also notify the PRC of any resupply mission to the Second Thomas Shoal two days in advance, and those missions would “only transport food and water or humanitarian subsistence.” It also claims that Philippine Western Command Vice Admiral Alberto Carlos, Philippines Armed Forces Chief of Staff Romeo Brawner, Philippine Defense Secretary Gilberto Teodoro, and National Security Advisor Eduardo Año all approved the agreement.[41]
Oceania
Solomon Islands
The election of Jeremiah Manele as prime minister provides the PRC with an opportunity to continue expanding economic and infrastructure cooperation with the Solomon Islands. Manele was the foreign minister in the prior Sogavare administration and traveled to the PRC in 2019 in that role to formalize the Solomon Island’s switch of diplomatic relations from Taiwan to the PRC.[42] PRC Premier Li Qiang congratulated Manele and said he looked forward to “strengthening mutually beneficial cooperation.”[43]
Manele called for a “more focused and aggressive approach” to address economic difficulties in the Solomon Islands during his victory speech and may look to the PRC for additional investment.[44] The Solomon Islands awarded Huawei a contract for an underwater telecommunication cable project that Australia jointly funded and secured a $66 million loan from the PRC for Huawei to build telecommunications towers that began in 2022.[45] Huawei’s ties to the CCP and PLA provide potential avenues for espionage.[46] The Solomon Islands and PRC also engaged in talks in April 2024 to negotiate a standard cooperation agreement before implementing further Belt and Road Initiative infrastructure projects.[47]
Russia
The United States Intelligence Community warned of Sino-Russian military cooperation in East Asia. Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines testified on May 2, 2024, that "We see China and Russia for the first time exercising together in relation to Taiwan and recognizing that this is a place where China definitely wants Russia working with them and we see no reason why they wouldn't." She did not specify the forces, timing, or location of these exercises, however.[48] Haines’ comment responded to a question about the increasingly robust cooperation between the PRC and Russia and whether one initiating hostility with the United States and US allies would prompt the other to follow suit.
Sino-Russian military cooperation in East Asia supports Putin’s objective to portray Russia as an equal defense partner to the PRC in the Pacific. Putin portrayed Russia to the PRC as an equal defense partner in the Pacific since 2023.[49]
Russia is starting the development of a joint Sino-Russian lunar nuclear power plant. Russian space agency, Roscosmos, General Director Yuri Borisov stated on May 8 that the development of a nuclear power plant for the joint Russia-China lunar station project is underway.[50] Borisov previously stated on March 5 that the PRC and Russia were considering cooperation to build a nuclear power plant on the moon in the early 2030s.[51] This is a competing initiative to an ongoing NASA project to design a nuclear fission reactor on the moon.[52]
The PRC and Russia are also collaborating on the development of surveillance space capabilities that threaten US access to space and space-based capabilities. The China National Space Administration (CNSA) stated in late February that the PRC plans to construct a surveillance system around the in-progress International Lunar Research Station (ILRS). The surveillance system will use the Skynet mass surveillance system as a model.[53] Skynet is the PRC’s nationwide camera surveillance system that includes over 600 million cameras.[54] The ILRS is a multinational space station initiative that Russia and the PRC founded in 2021 that is scheduled for competition by the 2030s. CNSA did not specify how it would prioritize surveillance efforts in space. Borisov stated on May 8 that the ILRS will be launched in two stages between 2025 and 2035.[55]
Commander of United States Space Command General Stephen N. Whiting stated that these types of space-based systems compete with US interests during his February 29 testimony to the United States Senate Committee on Armed Services. He warned that the PRC “and the Russian Federation continued to field systems and engage in behavior that threaten US, Allied, and Partner access to space and space-based capabilities.”[56]
China-Taiwan Weekly Update, May 3, 2024
click here to read the full report
Authors: Nils Peterson, Matthew Sperzel, and Daniel Shats of the Institute for the Study of War
Editors: Dan Blumenthal and Frederick W. Kagan of the American Enterprise Institute
Data Cutoff: April 30 at 5pm ET
Key Takeaways
- The PRC eased cross-strait trade and travel restrictions after hosting a Kuomintang delegation. The PRC ended the trade bans after hosting the KMT delegation as a form of economic coercion that aims to reduce domestic support for the Democratic Progressive Party in Taiwan.
- President-elect Lai Ching-te announced his national security cabinet picks on April 25. The reshuffling of cabinet posts is telling of Lai’s intent to stay the course in cross-strait policy.
- The CCP signaled during US Secretary of State Antony Blinken’s visit to the PRC the potential for cooperation in US-PRC relations while asserting that US actions—including economic measures against the PRC and support for Taiwan–risk competition and instability.
- The Chinese Coast Guard and Chinese Maritime Militia failed to block a Philippine Coast Guard resupply mission near Scarborough Shoal on April 30. This is the latest PRC effort to enforce the CCP’s territorial claims in the South China Sea.
- CCP General Secretary Xi Jinping will visit France, Serbia, and Hungary from May 5 to 10 as part of a charm offensive to build ties with the European states and block the formation of a stricter EU policy on China.
- The PRC hosted “reconciliation” talks between Fatah and Hamas in Beijing and endorsed the strengthening of the Palestinian Authority. Hosting the intra-Palestinian talks is a relatively low-cost, low-risk way for the PRC to bolster its diplomatic reputation and signal its intent to play an active diplomatic role in the Middle East.
Cross-Strait Relations
The People’s Republic of China (PRC) eased cross-strait trade and travel restrictions after hosting a Kuomintang (KMT) delegation. The PRC ended the trade bans after hosting the KMT delegation as a form of economic coercion that aims to reduce domestic support for the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) in Taiwan. KMT Caucus Whip Fu Kun-chi traveled to the PRC on April 26, where he met with CCP officials throughout the weekend. Fu met with General Administration of Customs Deputy Director Zhao Zenglian on April 28. Zhao announced during the meeting that the PRC would lift its ban on imports of Wendan pomelos and two types of fish from Taiwan.[1] The PRC implemented the bans as a form of economic punishment after then-US Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi arrived in Taiwan in August 2022.[2] The PRC’s import bans significantly reduced income for Taiwanese exporters, as the PRC is an important export market for the banned goods, especially Wendan pomelos. The PRC accounted for over two-thirds of Taiwan’s pomelo exports before the ban.[3] Director General of the Ruisui Township Farmers’ Association Huang Sheng-huang claimed that the PRC accounted for 90% of Wendan pomelo exports from Hualien County, Fu Kun- Chi’s district. [4]The change in CCP policy signals to farmers and fishermen in Taiwan that they stand to benefit from the KMT’s cross-strait engagements and lose from the DPP’s.
Fu also met with Ministry of Culture and Tourism Vice Minister Rao Quan the same day, during which Rao announced the PRC would allow Fujian residents to travel to Taiwan’s Matsu islands again.[5] The Matsu Islands make up an archipelago close to the PRC coast. Representatives from the agriculture and travel industries have called for the ROC government to reciprocate the PRC’s loosening. Chairman of the Travel Agent Association of Taiwan Hsiao Bo-ren urged Taiwan’s Mainland Affairs Council (MAC) to respond in kind.[6] A program on the PRC state-run China Central Radio and Television posted on its WeChat on April 30, calling on the DPP to lift restrictions to allow tourism to return to normal and stop obstructing cross-strait exchanges.[7]
The PRC’s use of economic bargaining chips to influence Taiwan’s politics is not new. The PRC ended its suspension of Taiwanese grouper imports in December 2023, two weeks before the presidential election, citing action from the KMT to address quality concerns.[8] KMT Vice Chairman Andrew Hsia, who has held numerous meetings with CCP officials since assuming his role in 2021, travelled to the mainland earlier that year to lobby for an end to the import suspension.[9] TAO spokesperson Zhu Fenglian accredited the successful negotiations to the CCP and KMT’s mutual recognition of the 1992 Consensus, which the DPP does not recognize. The 1992 Consensus states that both sides agree there is only one China, and that Taiwan is part of the only China. The CCP claims that China is the PRC, while the KMT simply acknowledges the differences in interpretations of “one China.”
Fu met with Taiwan Affairs Office (TAO) Director Song Tao and Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC) Chairman Wang Huning on April 27. Wang stated that both sides of the Taiwan Strait belong to the Chinese nation and expressed hope for greater cross-strait exchanges.[10] Fu echoed Wang’s sentiments and advocated for greater cooperation between the CCP and KMT on their “common political basis.”[11] Wang’s role as CPPCC chairman, which is a leading United Front organization, and as deputy leader of the Central Leading Group for Taiwan Affairs make him one of the top CCP officials responsible for overseeing the PRC’s policy toward Taiwan. TAO spokesperson Zhu Fenglian also stated on April 27 that the PRC is willing to donate prefabricated houses to Hualien County, where a recent earthquake wrought extensive damage.[12]
Taiwan
President-elect Lai Ching-te announced his national security cabinet picks on April 25. Old hands from President Tsai Ing-wen’s cabinet comprise the picks, although they will serve in different capacities. National Security Council (NSC) Secretary-General Wellington Koo will head Taiwan’s Ministry of National Defense (MND) and current Foreign Minister Joseph Wu will replace Koo at the NSC. Lin Chia-lung, the current Secretary General to the President and former ambassador-at-large for Taiwan's digital New Southbound Policy initiatives, will head the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA). Former deputy minister of the Mainland Affairs Council (MAC) and current vice chairman of the Straits Exchange Foundation Chiu Chui-cheng will become minister of the MAC. National Security Bureau (NSC) Director General Tsai Ming-yen will remain in his post.
The reshuffling of cabinet posts is telling of Lai’s intent to stay the course in cross-strait policy. During a presidential candidate debate in December, Lai praised Tsai In-wen’s diplomatic line and touted his qualifications to continue her policy, being her vice president.[13] The PRC regards the DPP as a separatist party that wants to pursue formal Taiwanese statehood (as opposed to the Republic of China) and suspended diplomatic communication with the DPP government in 2016. TAO Spokesperson Zhu Fenglian described Taiwan independence workers as “war makers” during the election season, referring to Lai.[14] The TAO responded to Lai’s victory in the January presidential election by condemning the DPP’s “separatist plots” and vowing to resist the DPP’s “independence provocations.”[15] Lai previously described himself as a “pragmatic worker for Taiwan independence” during his premiership in 2017, but later stated that there was no need to formally declare Taiwan’s independence from the ROC.[16]
China
The CCP signaled during US Secretary of State Antony Blinken’s visit to the PRC the potential for cooperation in US-PRC relations while asserting that US actions—including economic measures against the PRC and support for Taiwan–risk competition and instability. US Secretary of State Antony Blinken met CCP General Secretary Xi Jinping and PRC Foreign Minister Wang Yi in separate meetings during his trip to the PRC on April 26. Xi’s comments in the PRC readout largely took a positive tone about US-PRC relations. Xi said the two countries should be partners, not rivals, and that they should engage in win-win cooperation and implement the “San Francisco Vision” of his and US President Joe Biden’s meeting in November 2023. Xi said the PRC is willing to cooperate, but cooperation must go both ways; that the PRC is not afraid of competition, but competition should be about common progress and not a zero-sum game; and that the PRC does not form alliances and the United States likewise should not form “small circles” – a reference to US-led multilateral regional partnerships that exclude and target the PRC.[17] Wang Yi also praised the San Francisco meeting and said that US-PRC relations have “generally stopped declining and stabilized.” His remarks focused far more than Xi’s on accumulating “negative factors” in the relationship, however. Wang urged the United States to stop arming Taiwan, refrain from sending “wrong signals” to Taiwan “separatists,” and not use Taiwan as a tool to contain China. Wang also criticized the United States for “endless measures to suppress China’s economy, trade, science and technology.” He said it should stop promoting the “false narrative” of PRC “overcapacity” and lift “illegal sanctions” and tariffs. Wang finally stressed that the Asia-Pacific should “not become a battleground for major powers.” He urged the United States to stop “forming small circles,” stop “coercing” countries in the region to choose sides and stop deploying intermediate-range missiles to the region.[18]
A PRC readout claimed that Wang and Blinken’s meeting produced a five-point consensus. The consensus included agreements to 1. Stabilize and develop US-PRC relations in accordance with the San Francisco “consensus;” 2. Maintain exchanges at all levels and in newly established consultation mechanisms in various fields, including military, drugs, climate change, and AI; 3. Hold a variety of dialogues including the first China-US Intragovernmental Dialogue on Artificial Intelligence, dialogues on Asia-Pacific Affairs, US-PRC military affairs, and consular consultations; 4. Embrace people-to-people and cultural exchanges; 5. Continue consultations on international and regional hotspot issues.[19] The US readout about the meeting did not reference any five-point consensus, however. It said Blinken and Wang discussed the next steps for advancing cooperation on counternarcotics, military-to-military communication, talks on artificial intelligence risks and safety, and facilitating people-to-people exchanges.[20]
The PRC responded to Blinken’s accusations that the PRC provided dual-use goods to Russia by accusing the United States of denigrating its “normal trade with Russia” and “aggravating the crisis” through aid to Ukraine. Blinken raised the issue of PRC provision to Russia of dual-use components and machine tools during his meetings with top PRC officials.[21] He said in an interview after his trip that the PRC is providing “invaluable support to Russia’s defense industrial base” which is helping Russia overcome the effects of sanctions and export controls.[22] An MFA spokesperson claimed the PRC has “never done anything to fan the flames or seek profit from the crisis.” He said the PRC’s “right to normal trade and economic exchanges” with countries including Russia should not be interfered with. He also noted US military aid to Ukraine and remarked that it is clear “who exactly is fueling the flame and aggravating the crisis.”[23] The PRC readouts of Blinken’s meetings with Xi Jinping and Wang Yi did not mention the issue of PRC support for Russia’s defense industry.[24]
The PRC expressed muted opposition following the passage of a US law to force the sale or ban of TikTok in the United States. US President Joe Biden signed a bill on April 24 to force TikTok’s PRC parent company ByteDance to fully divest from TikTok within 270 days or face a ban in the United States.[25] An MFA spokesperson responded to the ban on the day it passed by saying the MFA had already expressed its “principled position” on the issue.[26] The MFA previously expressed its strong opposition to a TikTok “divest or ban” bill on March 14. It accused the United States of overstretching the concept of “national security” to hinder foreign competition, said the attempt to force the sale of TikTok was based on “sheer robbers’ logic,” warned that the US moves would eventually backfire, and claimed the US government has never found evidence that TikTok poses a national security threat.[27] TikTok called the law unconstitutional and said it would fight the legislation in US courts.[28]
Northeast Asia
Japan
The Chinese Coast Guard (CCG) confronted a delegation of Japanese officials en route to inspect the Senkaku Islands on April 27. The PRC Embassy in Japan said on April 28 that the CCG carried out unspecified “law enforcement measures” and that the PRC lodged “stern representations” with the Japanese government.[29] The PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs Spokesman Linjian reiterated PRC claims on April 27 that the Japanese-administered Senkakus, what the PRC refers to as Diaoyu Dao, are PRC territory.[30] The delegation of Japanese officials included Defense Minister Tomomi Inada and a member of the Japanese Diet.[31]
The PRC did not increase the number of CCG vessels operating in the vicinity of the Senkakus to confront the Japanese delegation. Four CCG vessels operated in the Senkaku Islands on April 27.[32] This is consistent with the trend of CCG incursions of between two and four vessels occurring daily in Senkaku Island waters since April 2023. Up to eight CCG vessels routinely intrude into the Senkaku Island waters on the first of every month.[33] The intent of these incursions is to exert the PRC’s claims of sovereignty over the Senkakus.
Southeast Asia
Philippines
The Chinese Coast Guard (CCG) and Chinese Maritime Militia (CMM) failed to block a Philippine Coast Guard (PCG) resupply mission near Scarborough Shoal on April 30. This is the latest PRC effort to enforce the CCP’s territorial claims in the South China Sea.[34] The CCG deployed four ships, the CMM deployed six ships, and the PCG and BFAR deployed two ships.[35] The CCG and CMM vessels hit the PCG and BFAR vessels eight times with high-pressure water cannons and rammed the vessel three times. The PCG ship suffered damage to its superstructure while the BFAR suffered minimal hull and electrical damage.[36] The Philippines' resupply mission was successful, nonetheless.[37] The CCG also reinstalled a floating barrier covering the entrance of Scarborough Shoal on April 30 to prevent Philippine ships from accessing the shoal.[38] The CCG previously placed this barrier at Scarborough Shoal on September 20, 2023, and February 22, 2024, which the PCG then removed.[39]
The harassment is consistent with ongoing CCG actions to enforce PRC territorial claims inside the nine-dash line. The PRC rejected a 2016 Permanent Court of Arbitration ruling that declared the nine-dash line territorial claims unlawful.[40] The PRC has normalized CCG harassment of the PCG and supply ships near the Second Thomas Shoal, also a prominent feature inside the nine-dash line, since December 2023 to render the Philippines unable and unwilling to defend its claim to the Second Thomas Shoal. The CCG harassed the PCG and associated supply ships six times at the Second Thomas Shoal between November 2021 and November 2023.[41] The number of such incidents at the Second Thomas Shoal has nearly doubled since December 1, 2023. The methods of harassment that the CCG employs have remained constant during the past three years. The CCG shines military-grade lasers to blind the PCG crews, sprays water cannons to immobilize supply ships and injure Filipino sailors, and rams PCG ships.[42]
The CCP used a similar strategy in 2012 that resulted in the Philippines withdrawing from the Scarborough Shoal, indicating the party’s intent with CCG activity around disputed shoals is to gain and enforce control of that territory. The CCP engaged in negotiations with the Philippines in 2012 to end a standoff at the Scarborough Shoal, which Manilla administered at the time, while steadily increasing the number of Chinese Coast Guard ships near the shoal.[43] This resulted in the Philippines withdrawing its ships from the shoal in mid-June 2012 under a now-disputed agreement that the PRC would do the same.[44] The CCP subsequently kept its ships near the shoal and achieved its political objective of gaining de facto control of the Scarborough Shoal by July 2012.[45]
CCP-controlled media outlets portrayed the United States-Philippines Exercise Balikatan 2024 as a threat to regional stability. The exercise runs from April 22 to May 10 and will include test missions across all domains, including a Philippine-US-French trilateral naval exercise in the Philippines’ exclusive economic zone (EEZ).[46] The naval exercises will occur in the Philippines’ EEZ rather than territorial waters because France and the Philippines have not yet completed a visiting forces agreement.[47] The party-controlled Xinhua and People’s Daily media outlets framed the exercise as a bellicose provocation that destabilizes the region.[48]
Europe
CCP General Secretary Xi Jinping will visit France, Serbia, and Hungary from May 5 to 10 as part of a charm offensive to build ties with the European states and block the formation of a stricter EU policy on China. The Xi-Macron meetings will include discussions of Ukraine and the Israel-Hamas War and Sino-French trade and scientific cooperation.[49] The PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs statement emphasized the necessity of avoiding “confrontation between camps” and the desire for France to push the EU to “pursue a positive and pragmatic policy towards China.”[50] Bloomberg also reported that the EU is considering additional restrictions on PRC companies for supporting Russia.[51]
The PRC claimed that European governments are manufacturing fears of a “China spy threat” after Germany and the United Kingdom arrested several individuals for spying for the PRC.[52] Germany arrested three German nationals on April 22 who prosecutors said are “strongly suspected of having worked for a Chinese secret service since an unspecified date before June 2022.” The prosecutors said that the individuals supplied the PRC Ministry of State Security (MSS) with information about military technology, including machine parts for the operation of powerful ship engines and a “special laser.”[53] Germany arrested an aide to far-right PRC-friendly German MEP Maximilian Krah on April 23 on suspicion of being an “employee of a Chinese secret service” and spying on “Chinese opposition figures” in Germany.[54] A PRC spokesperson on April 26 claimed Germany’s espionage cases were “completely fabricated.” The PRC summoned the German ambassador to lodge protests.[55] The UK also arrested two people it accused of spying for the PRC on April 26.[56] The PRC embassy in the UK called the UK spy cases “malicious slander” and “anti-China political manipulation.[57]
The PRC has used spies in Europe to monitor and influence European policy toward the PRC. An investigation by European media Der Spiegel, Financial Times, and Le Monde published in December 2023 found that an MSS agent named Daniel Woo directed former far-right Belgian MP Frank Creyelman from 2019 to 2022 to report on confidential meetings in the European Parliament, attack the reputations of “anti-China” politicians and activists, and spread pro-PRC narratives on issues such as Covid-19, the PRC repression of Uighurs, and pro-democracy protests in Hong Kong. European intelligence services also identified Woo as the PRC contact of other far-right and pro-Russia European politicians as well as a recruiter of spies in countries including Germany and Poland. [58]
Russia and Iran
PRC Defense Minister Dong Jun’s speech at the Shanghai Cooperation Organization on April 26 called on member states to be a model for “unity and cooperation” amidst current instability in global governance. He emphasized the necessity of security so that member states may effectively develop in a stable environment.[59] Dong also engaged in a flurry of meetings at the Shanghai Cooperation Organization meeting on April 26 in Astana, Kazakhstan. He met with defense ministers of Pakistan, Russia, Iran, Kyrgyzstan, Belarus, Uzbekistan, and Tajikistan to discuss the international security situation and unspecified “issues of common concern.”[60] Dong’s April 26 meeting with Iranian Defense Minister Mohammad Ashtiani occurred after PRC Special Envoy for Middle Eastern Affairs Zhai Jun met with Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Ali Bagheri on April 25 in Moscow to discuss “the situation in the Middle East.”[61]
Israel-Hamas War
The PRC hosted “reconciliation” talks between Fatah and Hamas in Beijing and endorsed the strengthening of the Palestinian Authority. The PRC invited representatives of Fatah and Hamas to Beijing on April 26 to negotiate “intra-Palestinian reconciliation” between the two major factions.[62] A PRC MFA spokesperson said on April 30 that the two sides “expressed their political will to achieve reconciliation through dialogue and consultation, discussed many specific issues and made positive progress, and unanimously agreed to continue this dialogue process and strive for the early realization of Palestinian unity and reunification.”[63] Another MFA spokesperson said on April 26 that the PRC supports strengthening the authority of the Palestinian Authority (PA).[64] PRC Foreign Minister Wang Yi laid out the PRC position in an interview published the same day as the talks. Wang said the PRC supports an immediate ceasefire, unimpeded humanitarian assistance to Gaza, preventing regional escalation, and correcting “historical injustice” to the Palestinian people by promoting reconciliation between Palestinian factions and establishing an independent State of Palestine with UN membership.[65] The April 26 talks followed PRC MFA envoy Wang Kejian’s trip around the Middle East from March 10-17, which included meetings with PA and Israeli officials and the PRC’s first publicly acknowledged meeting with Hamas since its terror attacks on Israel on October 7, 2023.[66] The PRC has never directly criticized Hamas.
The PRC’s hosting of and statements about intra-Palestinian negotiations reflect its intent to play an active diplomatic role in the resolution of the Gaza war and the broader Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The talks also serve the propaganda purpose of portraying the PRC as an important and responsible mediator in the conflict in contrast to the United States. The PRC has repeatedly criticized Israel’s military operations in Gaza and US support for Israel while calling for an internationally mediated ceasefire.[67]
Hosting the intra-Palestinian talks is a relatively low-cost, low-risk way for the PRC to bolster its diplomatic reputation. A failure to bring about Fatah-Hamas reconciliation would amount to maintenance of the status quo and would not draw significant criticism of the PRC. A success in the negotiations, which is very unlikely, would present an opportunity for the PRC to embellish its reputation in a similar way to the Beijing-mediated Saudi Arabia-Iran rapprochement in March 2023. The PRC said after the Saudi-Iran negotiations that “China has no selfish interests in the Middle East, respects the status of the Middle East countries as its masters, and opposes geopolitical competition in the Middle East... China will continue to contribute Chinese wisdom and put forward Chinese suggestions to achieve peace and tranquility in the Middle East, and play its role as a responsible great power.”[68]
China-Taiwan Weekly Update, April 26, 2024
Click here to read the full report
Authors: Matthew Sperzel, Daniel Shats, Nils Peterson, and Mathilde Lemerle of the Institute for the Study of War
Editors: Dan Blumenthal and Frederick W. Kagan of the American Enterprise Institute
Data Cutoff: April 25 at Noon ET
Key Takeaways
- The PRC unilaterally opened two eastbound connecting flight routes near Taiwanese airspace over the Kinmen and Matsu islands. The move is likely part of a CCP effort to strain Taiwan’s situational awareness around its airspace and put pressure on Taiwan’s incoming Lai Ching-te administration.
- PRC tariffs on Taiwan’s polycarbonate exports may be part of a pressure campaign ahead of Lai Ching-te’s presidential inauguration on May 20.
- Former ROC President Ma Ying-jeou met with Kuomintang Chairman Eric Chu on April 16 and discussed amending a law that counters PRC interference in Tawan’s politics.
- The People’s Liberation Army dissolved the Strategic Support Force into three distinct arms to achieve “information dominance” and operational superiority through force integration.
- The PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs highlighted the importance of addressing United States sanctions on PRC companies during Secretary of State Antony Blinken’s visit to the PRC. The PRC framing of the visit indicates that the CCP aims to alleviate economic tension with the United States while maintaining commercial and defense industrial base assistance to Russia.
- The PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs Spokesman Lin Jian framed the United States Army deploying the Typhon ground-based cruise missile and air-defense missile launcher to the Philippine island of Luzon as part of the US-Philippine Salaknib 2024 military exercise as “provoking conflict.”
Cross-Strait Relations
The PRC unilaterally opened two eastbound connecting flight routes near Taiwanese airspace over the Kinmen and Matsu islands. The move is likely part of a CCP effort to strain Taiwan’s situational awareness around its airspace and put pressure on Taiwan’s incoming Lai Ching-te administration. The flight routes, W122 and W123, have been operational in the westbound direction since 2018 and connect the PRC cities of Fuzhou and Xiamen to the M503 north-south flight route, which goes down the middle of the Taiwan Strait. The W122 route flies close to the Matsu islands and the W123 route flies near the Kinmen Islands, two island groups near the PRC that Taiwan controls. The PRC Civil Aviation Administration of China (CAAC) unilaterally canceled a 6 nautical mile “offset” of the M503 route in January 2024, which moved the route to within 4.2 nautical miles (5 miles or 7.8 kilometers) of the median line of the Taiwan Strait. It announced on the same day that it would permit eastbound flights along the W122 and W123 routes.[1] The CAAC finally launched the new eastbound flight routes on April 19. It claimed the new airspace “optimization” and the adjustment of the M503 route were needed to meet the “development needs” of air transportation between the Yangtze River Delta and the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Bay Area and to ensure flight safety.[2]
Taiwan’s Civil Aviation Administration said both the establishment of the new flight routes and the “unilateral” adjustment of the M503 were a danger to air traffic in the area. It said it will request that aircraft turn around if they approach Taiwanese airspace without permission.[3] ROC Premier Chen Chien-jen condemned the new routes, called for them to be retracted, and directed the CAA to study possible response measures.[4] The PRC’s Taiwan Affairs Office (TAO) denied that there were any security concerns about the new flight routes and also denied the existence of a median line in the Taiwan Strait.[5]
An unnamed “senior Taiwan official” told Reuters the PRC’s flight adjustments were part of a pattern of pressure on Taiwan ahead of ROC Vice President Lai Ching-te’s inauguration as President on May 20. The official said the CCP wants Taiwan to “cave in, make compromises, and change [its] behavior.”[6] The CCP considers Lai and his political party, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), to be separatists. The timing of the air route changes is consistent with political motives. The CAAC originally announced the routes and the shifting of the M503 route on January 30, not long after Taiwan’s January 13 election. It activated the new routes on April 19, almost one month before Lai’s inauguration. Increasing the volume of flights in the sensitive airspace near Kinmen, Matsu, and the Taiwan Strait median line serves to strain Taiwanese resources as Taiwan must monitor, assess, and prepare to respond to each flight as a potential airspace incursion.
PRC tariffs on Taiwan’s polycarbonate exports may be part of a pressure campaign ahead of Lai Ching-te’s presidential inauguration on May 20. The PRC Ministry of Commerce (MOFCOM) announced on April 19 that it would levy tariffs of up to 22.4% on Taiwan’s polycarbonate exports to the PRC. Polycarbonate is a material used in many fields such as electronic appliances, sheets and films, automobiles, optics, packaging, medical devices, and safety equipment.[7] The tariffs resulted from MOFCOM concluding an anti-dumping investigation into Taiwanese polycarbonate products. MOFCOM first announced the investigation in November 2022 and released preliminary findings announced in August 2023 which claimed Taiwanese “dumping” of polycarbonate products had “substantially” damaged the PRC’s polycarbonate industry. The findings released on April 19 confirmed the conclusions from August.
ROC Executive Yuan spokesperson Lin Tze-luen accused the PRC of using “political manipulation” to interfere with normal cross-strait trade relations.[8] The TAO spokesperson claimed on April 24 that the anti-dumping investigation reached its conclusion “fairly and impartially” and fully complied with relevant laws and World Trade Organization regulations. The spokesperson threatened further economic measures against Taiwan “if the DPP authorities continue to stubbornly adhere to the ‘Taiwan independence’ stance,” however.[9]
The TAO statement and the timing of the tariff announcement are consistent with a politically motivated pressure campaign against Taiwan and the incoming administration of Lai Ching-te. The tariffs took effect on April 20, exactly one month before Lai’s presidential inauguration. MOFCOM’s announcement of the tariffs on April 19 also coincided with the CAAC announcing its new flight routes near Kinmen and Matsu. The PRC previously imposed punitive economic measures against Taiwanese chemical and fishery products before Taiwan’s January 13 election. It also claimed Taiwan’s trade restrictions on the PRC violated the 2011 Cross-Strait Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA). ISW has assessed that these punitive economic measures may have been meant to influence Taiwan’s election.[10]
Taiwan
Former ROC President Ma Ying-jeou met with Kuomintang (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu on April 16 and discussed amending a law that counters PRC interference in Tawan’s political system. Ma, who is a member of the KMT, and the KMT leadership advocated amending some provisions of the law to prevent it from becoming a tool for DPP “manipulation” and to avoid “stifling the rights of Taiwanese people to exchange with the mainland.” They did not publicly specify what amendments they sought to make.[11] The Anti-Infiltration Act is a 2020 law that the DPP government passed to counter PRC interference in Taiwan’s elections and political system. It imposes criminal penalties for accepting funds from “hostile foreign forces” to make political donations and lobby the government. It also increases penalties for other election law violations if those violations are committed with funding from foreign forces.[12]
Ma and the KMT’s plans to propose amendments are consistent with their opposition to the law when originally passed. Ma at the time compared the law’s passage to a return to “martial law” in Taiwan, referring to the period of KMT authoritarian rule from 1949-1987 known as the “White Terror.”[13] The KMT boycotted the final vote on the law and criticized it as a ploy for the DPP to win votes shortly before the 2020 election. Some of the law’s critics said it was too broad and could be used to repress legitimate political activity and cross-strait exchanges.[14]
The PRC’s Taiwan Affairs Office (TAO) spokesperson on April 24 claimed the Anti-Infiltration Act is an “evil law” meant to suppress dissidents, create “Green Terror,” and seek the “selfish interests” of one party.[15] “Green Terror” is a term the CCP and other opponents of the DPP use to compare DPP policies with the repressive policies of the “White Terror.” Green is the DPP’s official color. The CCP’s rhetoric about the Anti-Infiltration Law is similar to that of Ma and some hardline KMT officials. The CCP prefers for the law to be abolished rather than amended, however.
The DPP said it would oppose former president Ma Ying-jeou and the Kuomintang’s proposed amendments to Taiwan’s Anti-Infiltration Act. ROC Vice President and President-elect Lai Ching-te said on April 17 that the KMT’s proposal appears to be harmful to Taiwan and regional stability. He said the Anti-Infiltration Act is designed to prevent malicious infiltration by foreign forces and does not hinder cross-strait exchanges.[16] DPP spokesperson Justin Wu said on April 23 that the DPP would oppose any loosening of the law. He raised suspicions about the timing of Ma and the KMT’s announcement, noting that it came shortly after Ma returned from his trip to the PRC on April 1-11. Wu also warned KMT legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi not to discuss domestic Taiwanese legislation during his planned trip to the PRC.[17] Fu will lead a KMT delegation to the PRC on April 25.[18]
The ROC Ministry of Foreign Affairs is investigating the leak of government documents and whether the documents were altered overseas before their public disclosure. The leaked documents dating from March 15 included reportedly official communications between the ROC Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Keelung Customs Service, and the ROC National Treasury Administration approving a Hsiao Bi-khim request for the wine she imported for her personal consumption to be exempted from inspection. The documents were part of 4GB of data acquired by hackers.[19] The ROC MOFA did not confirm the authenticity of the leaked documents. It suspected the documents involved may have undergone “malicious overseas alteration” after being “sold on the dark web.”[20] The ROC Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Ministry of Finance stated that the transfer of Hsiao Bi Khim’s personal belongings back to Taiwan occurred legally. [21] ROC Premier Chen Chien-jen stated that the accusations against Hsiao Bi-khim were an act of cognitive warfare and called on the public to maintain vigilance. [22]
China
The People’s Liberation Army (PLA) dissolved the Strategic Support Force (SSF) into three distinct arms to pursue “information dominance” and operational superiority through force integration. Xi created the SSF in 2015 during comprehensive military reforms, tasking it with integrating military operations across the cyber, electronic, and aerospace domains.[23] Former PLA Navy Rear Admiral Yin Zhuo stated in 2016 that SSF responsibilities included target detection and reconnaissance, relaying target information, management of BeiDou [navigation] satellites and space reconnaissance means, and conducting operations in cyberspace and the electromagnetic spectrum.[24] CCP General Secretary Xi Jinping announced the dissolution of the SSF and the inauguration of the Information Support Force (ISF) on April 19.[25] Ministry of National Defense (MND) spokesperson Wu Qian stated that an Aerospace Force and Cyberspace Force also came into existence alongside the ISF as a part of the restructuring.[26]
The three new arms are organized in the same support capacity as the preexisting Joint Logistics Support Force (JLSF), whose task is to unify logistics to support the five theater commands. The four auxiliary arms are distinct from the PLA’s four armed services, which are the Ground Forces, Navy, Air Force, and Rocket Force.
Xi described the new ISF as a key support for coordinating the development and application of “network information systems,” referring to mechanisms to facilitate information sharing and strengthen information infrastructure across the military.[27] Xi’s introduction indicates that the ISF will assume one of the SSF’s primary responsibilities, which includes what former SSF Commander Gao Jin referred to as acting as an “information umbrella” for the military to integrate operational capabilities.[28] This entails forming a data link to enable information transmission, processing, and distribution that is critical to the cohesion of joint operations.[29] This is consistent with PRC military doctrine, which emphasizes the importance of network-centric “informatized” warfare that exploits information sharing to achieve synergy across warfighting domains.[30] The PLA defines information dominance as gaining “superiority over an adversary in terms of information acquisition, transmission, processing, utilization, and confrontation capabilities.”[31] Information offense and defense are inherent to information dominance in the PLA’s view, requiring a blend of kinetic and non-kinetic means to influence, interfere with, degrade, and destroy the enemy’s information systems.[32]
The Aerospace Force and Cyberspace Force will likely take on the responsibilities of the SSF’s two functional units, the Aerospace and Network Systems Departments.[33] PRC officials have not indicated where responsibilities under the SSF’s broad remit would be reallocated, such as collecting intelligence, technical reconnaissance, electronic countermeasures, and psychological warfare.
The SSF’s division into three distinct organizations demonstrates the CCP leadership’s aim to streamline its various missions into separate individual arms to improve efficacy. The creation of a standalone ISF suggests that the SSF was inadequate to meet Xi’s standards for centralizing informatization in PLA operations. Xi appointed SSF Deputy Commander Bi Yi as ISF Commander and SSF Political Commissar Li Wei ISF Political Commissar.[34] Retaining top leadership roles such as Bi and Li suggests that the reason for the SSF’s dissolution was primarily functional and not due to endemic performance or trust issues throughout the command. The ISF’s placement under the direct command of the Central Military Commission affirms the centrality of information in military operations and maintains CCP leadership’s close supervision over the information chain.
The PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs highlighted the importance of addressing United States sanctions on PRC companies during Secretary of State Antony Blinken’s visit to the PRC. The PRC framing of the visit indicates that the CCP aims to alleviate economic tension with the United States while maintaining commercial and defense industrial base assistance to Russia. Blinken met with party officials in Shanghai on April 24 before traveling to Beijing to meet with PRC Foreign Minister Wang Yi on April 26.[35] The head of the MFA’s North America and Oceania Division Yang Tao announced the PRC’s main goals for Blinken’s visit during a briefing on April 23 are: 1) establishing the right perception; 2) strengthening dialogue; 3) effectively managing disagreements; 4) promoting mutually beneficial cooperation; and 5) jointly assume responsibilities as major countries. The establishment of right perception refers to making the United States not contest fundamental economic and political disagreements with the PRC over sensitive issues like CCP regime stability and Taiwan. Yang claimed that the United States has intensified measures to suppress the PRC’s economy, trade, science, and technology with sanctions. Yang denied the PRC’s responsibility for the crisis in Ukraine and urged the United States to immediately stop “indiscriminately imposing unilateral sanctions on Chinese companies and individuals.” Yang also noted “negative developments” regarding the United States’ security cooperation with the Philippines, Australia, and Japan. [36]
A senior unnamed State Department official outlined the issues that Blinken will focus on during a briefing on April 19, which included US concerns about PRC businesses’ transfers of dual-use materials and weapons components to Russia that Russia is using to advance its military production. The State Department official stated the United States’ concern that through Chinese support, Russia has reconstituted its defense industrial base and is therefore reinforcing the threat to Ukraine on the battlefield and European security writ large. Blinken called the PRC the primary contributor to Russia’s defense industrial base on April 19 during the Group of Seven (G7) summit in Italy.[37]
Southeast Asia
Philippines
The PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs Spokesman Lin Jian framed the United States Army deploying the Typhon ground-based cruise missile and air-defense missile launcher to the Philippine island of Luzon as part of the US-Philippine Salaknib 2024 military exercise as “provoking conflict.” The United States Army stated this is the first time it deployed the Typhoon to the Philippines.[38] Lin claimed that the deployment “aggravated regional tensions” and urged the Philippines to be aware of the unspecified “serious consequences of catering to the US.”[39]
Russia
The Chinese Coast Guard (CCG) began implementing expanded cooperation with the Border Guard Bureau Service of the Russian Federal Security Service (FSB). The CCG held working-level talks with the FSB in Vladivostok from April 16 to 18 for the first time since the signing of the April 2023 memorandum of understanding between the two services. The meetings involved tabletop exercises and seminars.[40] The April 2023 memorandum stated that the CCG and FSB would strengthen maritime law enforcement.[41]
China-Taiwan Weekly Update, April 18, 2024
Click here to read the full report
Authors: Nils Peterson, Matthew Sperzel, Daniel Shats, and Kaylin Nolan of the Institute for the Study of War
Editors: Dan Blumenthal and Frederick W. Kagan of the American Enterprise Institute
Data Cutoff: April 16 at 5 pm ET
The China–Taiwan Weekly Update is a joint product from the Institute for the Study of War and the American Enterprise Institute. The update supports the ISW–AEI Coalition Defense of Taiwan project, which assesses Chinese campaigns against Taiwan, examines alternative strategies for the United States and its allies to deter the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) aggression, and—if necessary—defeat the People’s Liberation Army (PLA). The update focuses on the Chinese Communist Party’s paths to controlling Taiwan and cross–Taiwan Strait developments.
Key Takeaways
- ROC opposition parties advanced a bill in the Legislative Yuan (LY) that aims to strengthen the LY’s oversight of the government. Passing the bill could hamper the DPP-led government’s ability to implement its policies. Political feuding that impedes the DPP’s ability to govern is favorable to CCP interests.
- PRC Minister of National Defense Dong Jun and US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin held the first US-PRC defense minister’s talk since November 2022. Dong dismissed US concerns about South China Sea tensions and claimed the situation was “generally stable.”
- CCP General Secretary Xi Jinping promoted economic integration during a meeting with German Chancellor Olaf Scholz in Beijing.
- The PRC claims that the Philippines is not upholding a 2016 “gentleman’s agreement” and driving tensions at Second Thomas Shoal.
- Unnamed senior US officials said that the PRC is supplying Russia with equipment that Russia is using to rapidly increase military production for use in its war against Ukraine.
Cross-Strait Relations
Taiwan
ROC opposition parties advanced a bill in the Legislative Yuan (LY) that aims to strengthen the LY’s oversight of the government. Passing the bill could hamper the DPP-led government’s ability to implement its policies. Political feuding that impedes the DPP’s ability to govern is favorable to CCP interests. The reforms would grant the LY the ability to conduct inquiries and call on officials to testify before the LY, establish penalties for perceived non-compliance or dishonesty in responses, and confirm political appointments.[1] The bill would also impose penalties on members of the Executive Yuan, including up to a year of imprisonment for concealing information or providing false or misleading information.[2] The maximum sentence is three years for all other individuals. DPP Caucus Whip Ker Chien-ming articulated the threat that the bill poses to the executive branch, calling it a “limitless expansion of powers” and the “constitutional monster” whose purpose was to weaponize the legislature. Ker claimed that if the law is passed, the president will be immediately summoned on May 20 to answer inquiries from the Legislative Yuan and can even be imprisoned if found to be in contempt of the legislature.[3] The Kuomintang (KMT) and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) were able to advance the proposed bill through the LY Judiciary and Organic Laws Statutes Committee despite objections from the Democratic People’s Party (DPP) because they have a majority on the committee.
The bill entered a month-long “consultation period” after passing the Judiciary and Organic Laws and Statutes Committee. The KMT and TPP plan to bring the reform bill to the LY for a vote as early as May 17, before the change of government on May 20. KMT Caucus Whip stated the KMT’s intent to formally vote on the bill before President-elect Lai Ching-te’s inauguration on May 20.[4] TPP Caucus Whip Huang Kuo-chang declared the opposition’s goal to clear the bill from the committee on the day of the meeting.[5]
Collaboration between the KMT and the TPP on the proposals suggests that the reforms will pass with a majority in the LY, as the two opposition parties outnumber the DPP in the LY. The TPP and KMT have consistently stated that establishing a legislative investigative task force to strengthen oversight of the executive branch is at the top of their agenda.[6] KMT Caucus Deputy Secretary-General Lin Szu-ming, one of the main authors of the reform bills, earlier referred to the proposed reforms as a “great weapon” that the LY must use to supervise the government.[7]
The DPP will continue to oppose the legislative oversight bill. DPP Caucus Secretary-General Rosalia Wu stated on April 1 that the DPP will fight against the law with all its strength, and would request action from the justices of the Constitutional Court if the bill passed the LY.[8] Stopping the bill would require more than a quarter of legislators petitioning the Constitutional Court to issue a judgment declaring the bill unconstitutional.[9] The DPP holds 51 seats in the Legislative Yuan, exceeding the threshold to initiate a lawsuit.
The KMT approved of former President Ma Ying-jeou’s meeting with CCP General Secretary Xi Jinping. The party issued a press release that praised Ma’s articulation of the 1992 Consensus.[10] Ma described the 1992 Consensus as both sides agreeing to a "one China principle," with each side free to determine what "China" means.[11] The 1992 Consensus is an alleged verbal agreement between semi-official representatives of the PRC and the then KMT-ruled ROC following negotiations in 1992. It states that both sides agree there is only one China and that Taiwan is part of China. The CCP interprets this “one China” to be the People’s Republic of China, while the KMT interprets it to be the Republic of China. The PRC has never publicly recognized the part of the “consensus” that acknowledges differing interpretations of “China” and did not include this part of Ma’s comments in its official readout of the meeting. KMT Chairman Eric Chu separately announced after Ma’s return that he had given Ma his “blessing” for his trip to the mainland.[12]
The Mainland Affairs Council (MAC), chaired by DPP members, issued a press release expressing disappointment that Ma failed to convey to Xi the Taiwanese people’s insistence on safeguarding the sovereignty of the Republic of China (ROC) and its democratic system.[13] The MAC called the 1992 Consensus an attempt to undermine Taiwan’s sovereign status that left no room for the ROC’s survival.
China
PRC Minister of National Defense Dong Jun and US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin held the first US-PRC defense minister’s talk since November 2022. Dong dismissed US concerns about South China Sea tensions and claimed the situation was “generally stable.” The US readout of the virtual meeting on April 16 said Austin and Dong discussed US-PRC defense relations as well as regional and global security issues, including the South China Sea, Russia’s war in Ukraine, and North Korea. Austin underscored freedom of navigation, especially in the South China Sea, and re-iterated the US commitment to the One China Policy. He also stressed the importance of maintaining open lines of communication.[14] The PRC readout said Dong emphasized that Taiwan is at the core of the PRC’s core interests and that the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) will never let “‘Taiwan independence’ separatist activities” and “external connivance and support” go unchecked. Dong also claimed the situation in the South China Sea is “generally stable” and that regional countries have the “willingness, wisdom, and capacity” to resolve issues. He urged the United States to respect the PRC’s territorial sovereignty and maritime rights and interests in the sea.[15]
This call was Austin’s first conversation with Dong since Dong became the PRC defense minister in December 2023. It was the first formal top-level military communication between the United States and PRC since November 2022.[16] The PRC cut off military talks with the United States after US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi visited Taiwan in August 2022. It agreed to resume them at the presidential summit between US President Joe Biden and CCP General Secretary Xi Jinping in San Francisco in November 2023. The CCP views military exchanges, at least in part, as a bargaining chip that it can use to influence US behavior to the party’s benefit.
Senior US and PRC diplomats met for three days to discuss various bilateral and regional issues. The PRC readout stressed PRC criticism of US-Japan-Philippines collaboration “against China” on South China Sea issues, US interference in PRC “internal affairs,” and US “suppression” of PRC companies. US Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs Daniel Kritenbrink and National Security Council Senior Director Sarah Beran led a delegation to the PRC from April 14-16 to meet PRC officials including Vice Foreign Minister Ma Zhaoxu. US Ambassador to the PRC Nicholas Burns also joined a meeting on April 15. A US State Department readout said the two sides had “candid” and “constructive” discussions on a range of bilateral, regional, and global issues, including the Middle East, PRC support for Russia’s defense industrial base, cross-Strait issues, the South China Sea, and North Korea.[17] A PRC readout said the PRC expressed its “solemn position” on the US promotion of its Indo-Pacific Strategy “against China” and about the United States trying to “cobble together a small circle” with Japan and the Philippines to “disrupt the situation in the South China Sea.” It urged the United States to not engage in “camp confrontation, “stop interfering in China’s internal affairs, stop obstructing China’s development, stop unreasonable sanctions on Chinese companies, and stop suppressing China’s economy, trade, science and technology.”[18] US Secretary of State Antony Blinken is expected to visit the PRC in the coming weeks.[19]
The PRC imposed sanctions on US defense firms General Atomics and General Dynamics for arms sales to Taiwan. The sanctions froze all assets of the two companies within the PRC and barred senior management employees from obtaining a visa to enter the country.[20] General Dynamics operates half a dozen Gulfstream and jet aviation services in the PRC and manufactures the Abrams tanks that Taiwan agreed to purchase in 2019. General Atomics is a drone manufacturer that signed a contract with Taiwan in 2020 to deliver MQ-9B drones.[21] The PRC previously sanctioned five other US defense companies in January 2024 in response to US arms sales to Taiwan and US sanctions on PRC companies and individuals.[22] A 2023 report by the German think tank Mercator Institute for China Studies (MERICS) found that the PRC has significantly increased its use of unilateral sanctions since 2018 against US individuals, groups, or companies it perceives to be interfering in its internal affairs.[23] The PRC has repeatedly expressed opposition to unilateral sanctions in general, however, including US sanctions against it and other countries such as Russia and Iran.[24]
Southeast Asia
Philippines
The PRC claims that the Philippines is not upholding a 2016 “gentleman’s agreement” and driving tensions at Second Thomas Shoal. Xi Jinping and then-Phillipines President Rodrigo Duterte met in 2016 to discuss the South China Sea territorial disputes.[25] The PRC alleges that Duterte and Xi made a gentleman’s agreement to not transport construction materials to repair the Sierra Madre, which is a dilapidated World War II-era naval ship on Second Thomas Shoal that the Philippines deliberately ran aground in 1999 to serve as a military detachment.[26] The PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesperson Mao Ning clarified that if the Philippines needed to replenish the Sierra Madre with necessities for the personnel there, it must notify the PRC in advance, which will approve and supervise the process.[27] Duterte denied ever making a “gentleman’s agreement” with Xi, however, and claimed that the meeting helped keep the status quo of peace in the South China Sea. Duterte also claimed that Xi threatened to go to war if the Philippines exercised its economic rights in the South China Sea.[28] Current Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. views the alleged agreement as illegitimate since it was a “secret agreement” hidden from the public.[29] The spokesperson for the PRC Embassy in the Philippines responded that the agreement was not a secret, and the two sides operated in accordance with the agreement for a short time before the Philippines reneged.[30]
A Chinese Coast Guard vessel tailed two Philippine vessels conducting a hydrographic survey near Scarborough Shoal on April 15. The Philippine National Security Council refuted initial reports that the CCG vessel had blocked the Philippine ships for over eight hours as they crossed the “nine dash line” 35 nautical miles from the Philippine coast.[31] The CCG vessel in question, CCG 5303, was also present in a “swarm” of PRC ships around Scarborough Shoal on April 13, including two preexisting CCG ships and 25 militia vessels.[32] Philippine Coast Guard spokesman Jay Tarriela rejected the PRC narrative that the Philippines is deliberately provoking the PRC in the South China Sea.[33]
The PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs Spokeswoman Mao Ning portrayed the United States, Japan, and the Philippines as stoking “bloc confrontation” tensions in the region in response to the trilateral meeting on April 11. The United States, Japan, and the Philippines issued a trilateral statement on April 12 that condemned the PRC’s coercive use of their coast guard and maritime militia in the South China Sea.[34] She accused the trilateral meeting of targeting the PRC and introducing “camp confrontation” into the region. Mao inaccurately claimed that PRC coercion in the South China Sea was “lawful [and] justified” while blaming “certain countries [an implicit reference to the United States] outside the region” for “fanning the flames and provoking confrontation.”[35]
Northeast Asia
North Korea
CCP Politburo Standing Committee member Zhao Leji led a delegation to visit North Korea from April 11-13. Zhao emphasized the PRC’s willingness to “intensify high-level exchanges [and] deepen mutually beneficial cooperation” with the DPRK throughout this year, which the CCP calls the “China-DPRK Friendship Year” in celebration of the 75th anniversary of ties between the two countries. [36]
Europe
CCP General Secretary Xi Jinping promoted economic integration during a meeting with German Chancellor Olaf Scholz in Beijing. Xi said that PRC and German industrial and supply chains are “deeply embedded” in one another and claimed this is not a “risk” but a guarantee of future relations – a possible reference to the European Union’s “de-risking” policies toward the PRC. He stressed that the two countries have “huge potential” for “win-win cooperation,” including in green development, and said both sides should be wary of protectionism. He said that the PRC hopes for a “fair, open, and non-discriminatory German market.”[37] The two countries launched cooperation mechanisms on climate change and green transition, science and technology, and agriculture.[38] The PRC also lifted some restrictions on German agricultural imports after the meeting.[39] The PRC’s positive messaging on PRC-German free trade and economic cooperation comes as the European Union has taken a harsher stance on PRC trade practices, particularly focused on countering their damaging impact on European electric vehicles and green energy technology.[40] The PRC has repeatedly criticized “baseless” investigations into PRC firms and warned against “de-coupling” and “de-risking” policies.[41]
The PRC’s bilateral engagement with Germany is consistent with CCP efforts to undermine moves in the EU toward more hawkish policies against the PRC. The European Commission and its president Ursula von der Leyen have called EU-PRC trade “critically unbalanced,” criticized the PRC’s preferential treatment of its domestic companies and overcapacity in its production, and called for “de-risking” policies to reduce Europe’s economic dependence on the PRC.[42] The European Commission’s Economic Security Strategy released in 2023 said “de-risking” policies are meant to mitigate risks to supply chain resilience, risks to critical infrastructure, risks related to leakage of sensitive technology, and risks of economic coercion by diversifying supply chains and restricting European companies’ ability to produce sensitive technologies overseas.[43]
The PRC has promoted the strength of the PRC-Germany trade relationship to counter the broader European “de-risking” strategy.[44] PRC Ambassador to Germany Wu Ken claimed on March 26 that the resilience of PRC-Germany trade relations shows the “unpopularity” of the EU’s de-risking policy.[45] The overseas edition of the CCP’s official newspaper People’s Daily claimed after Scholz’s visit that Scholz signaled to other countries Germany’s opposition to “decoupling and breaking links” with the PRC despite the pressure of the EU’s de-risking strategy.[46]
CCP General Secretary Xi Jinping presented four “principles” to peacefully end the Russia-Ukraine war during his meeting with German Chancellor Olaf Scholz. Xi proposed “four dos and four don’ts” to “restore peace” in Ukraine — prioritize peace and stability and not “seek selfish gain,” cool down the situation and not “add fuel to the fire,” create the conditions for restoring peace and not aggravate the situation, and reduce the negative impact on the global economy and not undermine the stability of global industrial supply chains.[47] Xi’s vague and seemingly neutral language is consistent with the PRC’s portrayal of itself as an unbiased and fair “stabilizing force” in the war and its reticence to make the Sino-Russian partnership as deep as Russia desires, partially to maintain access to Western markets.[48] The PRC rhetorically aligns with the Russian framing of the war, however. It is critical of NATO, portrays the Western security order and arms sales to Ukraine as fueling the war, opposes sanctions on Russia, does not call the war a war, and calls for respect for Russia’s “legitimate security concerns. Xi’s four principles may therefore be read in this context as veiled criticisms of US and Western actions.
PRC state media has claimed Western military aid to Ukraine “adds fuel to the fire” in pursuit of profit for defense firms, for instance.[49] NATO and US officials have warned that China is helping to “prop up” the Russian defense industrial base and support Russia via microelectronics, optics, machine tools, and missile propellant deliveries.[50] Xi’s generally vague signaling to Scholz vis-a-vis Ukraine over the backdrop of reportedly intensifying Chinese support for Russia is therefore likely an attempt to secure PRC economic interests in Europe by garnering goodwill with Germany rather than a show of genuine interest in facilitating an end to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
Russia
Unnamed senior US officials said that the PRC is supplying Russia with equipment that Russia is using to rapidly increase military production for use in its war against Ukraine. The officials said on April 12 that the PRC is selling Russia large quantities of machine tools, drone and turbojet engines, technology for cruise missiles, microelectronics, and nitrocellulose used in ammunition. They also said that PRC and Russian entities have been jointly developing drones in Russia and that the PRC has provided Russia with satellite imagery that aided its war effort. The officials said the PRC provided Russia with more than 70% of its nearly $900 million in machine tools imports in the last quarter of 2023, which Russia has likely used to build ballistic missiles. In 2023 the PRC also provided 90% of Russia’s microelectronics imports, which are essential for producing missiles, tanks, and aircraft. One official said PRC materials are filling critical gaps in Russia’s defense production cycle and claimed that Russia would “struggle to sustain its war effort without PRC input.” [51] The PRC embassy in the United States denied that the PRC provided weaponry to any party in the Ukraine war.[52] The PRC’s role as a lifeline for the Russian economy and military-industrial complex undermines its repeated claims to be a neutral and impartial promoter of peace between Russia and Ukraine. The PRC has rhetorically aligned with Russia’s narrative about the war, which it does not call a “war,” and refused to pressure Russia to end the war.
Iran
The PRC condemned Israel’s April 1 strike on the Iranian embassy complex in Syria but did not condemn Iran’s missile attack on Israel on April 13. Israel killed Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Quds Force commander Brigadier General Mohammad Reza Zahedi on April 1 while he was at the Iranian embassy complex in Damascus.[53] On April 14, Chargé d'Affaires of the PRC Permanent Mission to the UN Dai Bing condemned “Israel’s aggression against its [Iran’s] diplomatic premises” in Syria.[54] The PRC MFA expressed “deep concern” on April 14 but did not condemn the Iranian missile attack on Israel.[55] On April 15, PRC Foreign Minister Wang Yi condemned the attack on the Iranian embassy in Syria and stated that “China appreciates Iran’s emphasis on not targeting [other] regional countries.”[56]
China-Taiwan Weekly Update, April 12, 2024
Click here to read the full report
Authors: Nils Peterson, Matthew Sperzel, and Daniel Shats of the Institute for the Study of War
Editors: Dan Blumenthal and Frederick W. Kagan of the American Enterprise Institute
Key Takeaways
- CCP General Secretary Xi Jinping met with former ROC President Ma Ying-jeou on April 10 for the first time since 2015. The Xi-Ma meeting is consistent with a CCP effort to legitimize the KMT as its negotiating partner in Taiwan and to promote the Ma administration’s cross-strait policies as its preferred vision of cross-strait relations.
- PRC civilian drones repeatedly approached islands of Taiwan’s Kinmen archipelago to film military facilities on the islands.
- The PLA participated in the Military Maritime Consultative Agreement (MMCA) Working Group with their American counterparts in early April for the first time since December 2021.
- The PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) criticized the United States and Japan for expanding security relations to counter the PRC. The PRC perceives a deterioration in the threat environment from Japan’s deepening integration into the US-led regional security framework.
- The PRC has normalized Chinese Coast Guard (CCG) harassment of Philippine Coast Guard (PCG) and supply ships near the Second Thomas Shoal since December 2023 to render the Philippines unable and unwilling to defend its claim to the Second Thomas Shoal.
Cross-Strait Relations
CCP General Secretary Xi Jinping met with former ROC President Ma Ying-jeou on April 10 for the first time since 2015. The Xi-Ma meeting is consistent with a CCP effort to legitimize the KMT as its negotiating partner in Taiwan and to promote the Ma administration’s cross-strait policies as its preferred vision of cross-strait relations. The two leaders met in Beijing near the end of Ma’s trip to the PRC, which spanned from April 1-11. Xi Jinping praised “Mr. Ma” for upholding the “1992 Consensus,” opposing Taiwanese independence, and promoting the peaceful development of cross-strait relations and exchanges.[1] He claimed that “compatriots on both sides of the Taiwan Strait are all Chinese” and that “there is no grudge that cannot be resolved, no issue that cannot be discussed, and no force that can separate us.” Xi stressed that people on both sides must “protect the common home of the Chinese nation” by opposing Taiwanese “separatism” and external interference, work together for their long-term well-being, build a sense of community for the Chinese nation, and “realize the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation.” He also said that “we have realized the blueprint drawn by Dr. Sun Yat-sen” and “created many achievements that far exceed Dr. Sun Yat-sen's imagination.”[2] Sun Yat-sen was the founder of the Republic of China and the Kuomintang, Ma’s political party.
Ma said that Chinese people on both sides of the strait have “made steps together toward Chinese revitalization” over the past 30 years. He acknowledged recent tensions but said that a cross-strait war would have "unbearably heavy" consequences. He urged both sides to adhere to the 1992 consensus, oppose Taiwan's independence, look for common ground while setting aside disputes, seek out "win-win" solutions, and pursue peaceful development. Ma described the 1992 consensus as both sides agreeing to a "one China principle," with each side free to determine what "China" means.[3] The 1992 Consensus is an alleged verbal agreement between semi-official representatives of the PRC and the then KMT-ruled ROC following negotiations in 1992. It states that both sides agree there is only one China and that Taiwan is part of China. The CCP interprets this “one China” to be the People’s Republic of China, while the KMT interprets it to be the Republic of China. The PRC has never publicly recognized the part of the “consensus” that acknowledges differing interpretations of “China” and did not include this part of Ma’s comments in its official readout of the meeting.
Radio Free Asia and Taiwanese media reported that Ma’s meeting with Xi, which neither Ma nor the CCP confirmed in advance, was originally scheduled for April 8 but was postponed to April 10.[4] The April 10 date coincides with a meeting between US President Joe Biden and Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida as well as the 45th anniversary of the signing of the Taiwan Relations Act in the United States.[5] Taiwan’s Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) legislative caucus speculated that in moving the meeting to April 10, the CCP has made Ma into a “pawn” in its confrontational “game” with the United States.[6]
Ma did not meet Xi in an official capacity, as he is no longer an official in Taiwan’s government or his party, the Kuomintang (KMT). The stated purpose of Ma’s trip, which he called a “journey of peace and friendship,” was to lead a delegation of Taiwanese students to participate in exchanges with mainland youth, visit cultural and historical sites, and promote cross-strait stability.[7] Ma claimed throughout his trip that Taiwanese people have a strong belief in Chinese culture and national identity. He stressed that disputes must be resolved peacefully.[8] Ma visited the Chinese People's Anti-Japanese War Memorial Hall and Marco Polo Bridge in Beijing on April 9, important sites representing the KMT and CCP’s joint resistance against Imperial Japan during World War II. Ma also visited the Forbidden City with TAO Director Song, where he stressed that “de-Sinicization” will not succeed.[9]
Ma last met Xi in Singapore in 2015, when Ma was the president of Taiwan. This was the first meeting between the leaders of the PRC and Taiwan. In March 2023, Ma became the first former Taiwanese president to visit the PRC, in a visit that overlapped with sitting president Tsai Ing-wen’s trip to the United States. Ma did not meet Xi on that visit, however.
TAO spokesperson Chen Binhua said on March 14 that Taiwan would be able to alleviate tensions and “sleep soundly” if it could relive the “peaceful development period across the Taiwan Strait from 2008-2016.” Chen’s statement refers to the years of Ma’s presidency.[10] The PRC cut off official exchanges with Taiwan after Tsai Ing-wen of the DPP became president of Taiwan in 2016. CCP officials have repeatedly met with KMT officials during this time. The CCP insists that all cross-strait negotiations must be on the mutual basis of the “1992 consensus,” which Ma and the KMT recognize but Tsai and the DPP do not.
Taiwan’s political parties were split in their reaction to Ma’s meeting with Xi. The incumbent DPP administration’s Mainland Affairs Council (MAC) said it “deeply regrets” that Ma “failed to publicly convey to China the Taiwanese people's insistence on safeguarding the sovereignty of the Republic of China and its democratic and free system.” The MAC also urged the PRC to engage in dialogue without political preconditions, noting a poll that found nearly 80% of Taiwanese people did not agree with the CCP’s insistence that accepting the “1992 Consensus” is a precondition to cross-strait dialogue.[11] Taiwan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) said that Taiwanese people are concerned about the PRC’s escalating military intimidation, diplomatic pressure, and economic coercion against Taiwan, rather than any “discussions that do not represent mainstream Taiwanese public opinion.”[12] The KMT legislative caucus, however, praised the Ma-Xi meeting as a break in the deadlock and antagonism between the two sides of the Taiwan Strait. It said the meeting showed the PRC and the international community that Taiwan does not only have “anti-China” voices. It said opposition to Taiwanese independence is the international consensus, including among Taiwan-friendly countries like the United States and Japan. It also praised Ma for bringing up to Xi that the “1992 Consensus” includes differing interpretations of “China.”[13]
The PRC Taiwan Affairs Office said on the 45th anniversary of the Taiwan Relations Act (TRA) that the TRA and the United States’ “Six Assurances” to Taiwan are “completely wrong, illegal, and invalid.” TAO spokesperson Zhu Fenglian claimed the TRA and Six Assurances “seriously violate the one-China principle and the three communiques, violate the norms of international relations, and grossly interfere in China’s internal affairs.”[14] The TRA and the Six Assurances to Taiwan form the basis of the modern US relationship with Taiwan. US President Jimmy Carter signed the TRA in 1979 to define the basis of US-Taiwan relations after the United States ended its diplomatic recognition of Taiwan to form relations with the PRC. The law authorized the United States to maintain de facto relations with Taiwan through the American Institute in Taiwan (AIT). It also committed the United States to sell military equipment to Taiwan as necessary to allow Taiwan to maintain “sufficient self-defense capacity” and to allow the United States to “resist any resort to force or other forms of coercion that would jeopardize the security, or social or economic system, of the people on Taiwan.”[15] The Six Assurances are a series of clarifying statements that the United States released in 1982 to reassure Taiwan of its continued commitments after the United States switched diplomatic recognition to the PRC and issued three joint communiques with the PRC. The last joint communique said that the United States does not seek to carry out a long-term policy of arms sales to Taiwan and intends gradually to reduce them. The Six Assurances stated that the United States: 1) did not agree to set a date for ending arms sales to Taiwan; 2) did not agree to consult with the PRC on arms sales to Taiwan; 3) will not mediate between Taipei and Beijing; 4) did not agree to revise the Taiwan Relations Act; 5) has not altered its position regarding sovereignty over Taiwan; and 6) will not pressure Taiwan to enter into negotiations with the PRC.[16]
The PRC deputy representative to the United Nations accepted condolences for the casualties of the earthquake in Taiwan on behalf of Taiwan. A 7.4 magnitude earthquake struck the east coast of Taiwan on April 3, killing at least 9 people and injuring at least 1,000. This was the strongest earthquake to hit Taiwan since 1999.[17] PRC Deputy Permanent Representative to the UN Geng Shuang told the UN Security Council that day that the PRC expressed its condolences to “Taiwan compatriots” for the earthquake that occurred in “Taiwan, China,” was willing to provide disaster assistance, and was “grateful to the international community for their expressions of sympathy and concern.”[18] Taiwan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs condemned the PRC’s “shameless behavior of using the Taiwan earthquake to carry out cognitive warfare in the international community.” It said Geng’s statement demonstrated that the PRC only has “political calculations” against Taiwan and no goodwill.[19] ROC Foreign Minister Joseph Wu also strongly condemned Bolivia for expressing solidarity with the PRC after the earthquake. Wu said Bolivia “shouldn’t be the evil, expansionist PRC’s pathetic puppet that jumps when Beijing says jump. Just like Taiwan, Bolivia is NOT part of communist China. No more, no less.”[20] The ROC Ministry of Foreign Affairs said Bolivia was “bewitched by the Chinese government” and spread false statements that belittled Taiwan’s sovereignty.[21]
PRC civilian drones repeatedly approached islands of Taiwan’s Kinmen archipelago to film military facilities on the islands. PRC aerial photography drones repeatedly flew over Taiwan’s Erdan and Dadan islands, part of the Kinmen Island group located 10 kilometers (around 6 miles) from the PRC mainland, and filmed footage that was later posted on the internet. Drones filmed Taiwan Army activities on the island of Erdan on March 30.[22] A video that circulated on the Internet on April 1 claimed to show Taiwanese soldiers on Erdan and Dadan being “scared away” by the drone filming them.[23] The Army’s Kinmen Defense Command said it used flares and jamming guns to drive away PRC civilian drones approaching Erdan and Menghu Island on April 8.[24] ROC Army Chief of Staff Chen Chien-yi said on April 3 that such drones constituted “gray zone intrusions” and “cognitive operations” by the PRC. He dismissed the possibility that “mainland civilian bloggers trying to gain popularity on the Internet” were responsible for the drone incursions and instead said it was part of PRC “cognitive warfare” to undermine Taiwanese and international confidence in Taiwan’s military. Chen said such drone incursions had happened before and would happen again in the future. He said it was standard policy to shoot down drones over military facilities if the drones are in range.[25]
Civilian drone incursions into Kinmen’s airspace may be part of a broader effort to test and erode Taiwan’s military readiness and control over Taiwan’s territory. The PRC has normalized daily air and naval activities around Taiwan, including near-daily aerial crossings of the median line in the Taiwan Strait into Taiwan’s Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ), since 2020.[26] It also normalized the use of high-altitude balloons that fly through Taiwan’s ADIZ near or directly over Taiwan, including near-daily balloon overflights in the weeks before and immediately after Taiwan’s election in January 2024. Taiwan does not scramble aircraft in response to all PRC ADIZ violations, but it does put military personnel on standby to respond quickly if needed. The high frequency of ADIZ violations drains Taiwan’s resources, exhausts military personnel, and degrades Taiwan’s threat awareness. The use of civilian assets such as photography drones and balloons in tandem with law enforcement and military incursions further wears down Taiwan’s response capability by making it more difficult for Taiwan to determine which air incursions constitute actual threats.
Taiwan
Czech media reported that a PRC military attaché tailed Taiwan vice president-elect Hsiao Bi-khim while she was in Prague in March. Hsiao visited the Czech Republic on March 17-19 at the invitation of Czech Senate President Miloš Vystrčil. Czech media Seznam Zpravy reported that Prague police stopped a PRC embassy staff member who ran a red light and almost caused a car accident while tailing Hsiao’s motorcade through Prague. The diplomat followed Hsiao to her hotel. The Czech foreign ministry summoned PRC Ambassador to Czechia Feng Biao for an explanation. Czech Foreign Minister Jan Libavsky said he was not satisfied with Feng’s explanation and did not consider the matter closed.[27] Members of the DPP condemned the incident.[28] The TAO reiterated on April 10 that the PRC has always opposed “any form of official exchanges between countries that have diplomatic relations with China and Taiwan.” It said that the DPP, Hsiao’s political party, was “colluding with external forces” but “cannot change the fact that Taiwan is part of China.”[29]
China
The PLA participated in the Military Maritime Consultative Agreement (MMCA) Working Group with their American counterparts in early April for the first time since December 2021.[30] President Joe Biden and CCP General Secretary Xi Jinping previously agreed to restart the MMCA during their meeting on November 15, 2023.[31] The United States views military-to-military talks as a means of escalation management to prevent and control crises. The CCP views these talks, at least in part, as a bargaining chip that it can use to influence US behavior to the party’s benefit, however. The CCP could end military-to-military dialogue in response to a US action it opposes, for example. The party previously did this by cutting off high-level military dialogue in the aftermath of then-Speaker Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan in August 2022.[32]
Northeast Asia
Japan
The PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) criticized the United States and Japan for expanding security relations to counter the PRC. The United States and Japan announced a series of measures to deepen their security and defense cooperation on April 10 during Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida’s state visit to the United States. The White House announced that the two countries would modernize command and control structures and work towards improving interoperability between their militaries, in what President Biden called “the most significant upgrade to the US-Japan alliance” since its inception.[33] MFA spokesperson Mao Ning framed the Biden-Kishida meeting as representative of a “Cold War mentality” and labeled their cooperation as harmful to regional stability.[34] Mao centered the PRC’s disapproval around US-Japan interference in Taiwan after Biden commended Kishida for his support in maintaining peace in the Taiwan Strait. Kishida’s visit culminated in a trilateral summit with Philippines President Bongbong Marcos on April 11, during which the three heads of state advocated for “multilayered cooperation” in the interest of maintaining a free and open Indo-Pacific.[35] Mao expressed the PRC’s disapproval of the trilateral summit, criticizing it for forming “exclusive small circles and camp confrontation.”[36]
PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesperson Mao Ning also criticized AUKUS for forming exclusive cliques and instigating an arms race in the Asia Pacific.[37] Japan is in talks to increase cooperation with AUKUS, the trilateral security partnership including the US, UK, and Australia. The AUKUS Defense Ministers issued a joint statement on April 8 signaling their intent to bolster collaboration with Japanese industry on developing military technologies.[38] Mao’s comments echo the PRC’s concerns that a US-led regional security network risks the formation of a united front to collectively deter Chinese aggression, carrying implications for the PRC’s irridentist claims to Taiwan and the South China Sea.
The PRC is taking steps to discourage the formation of PRC-facing multilateral security cooperation. The People’s Liberation Army (PLA) Southern Theater Command conducted joint naval and air exercises in the South China Sea on April 7-8, coinciding with joint exercises in between the US, Japan, Australia, and the Philippines in the latter’s exclusive economic zone.[39] The Southern Theater Command announced that military activities aimed at disrupting the South China Sea and creating “hot spots” were under control.[40] Mao called the exercises an act of hegemony and emphasized that the PRC would not be deterred from safeguarding its territorial sovereignty and maritime rights.[41]
The national security advisors from the US, Japan, and the Philippines held a joint call in December, in which they reaffirmed their commitment to strengthen trilateral cooperation amidst escalating PRC provocations against the Philippines over disputed islands in the South China Sea.[42] The three advisors previously agreed to enhance trilateral defense and security capabilities by leveraging mechanisms such as Japan’s technology and equipment-sharing policy and the QUAD’s Indo-Pacific Partnership for Maritime Domain Awareness (IPMDA) training and technology initiative.[43] Japan recently took steps to increase the transfer of military equipment to the Philippines, demonstrated by its sale of an advanced air surveillance radar system to the Philippines on December 20.[44] Japan is also in the process of finalizing a Reciprocal Access Agreement with the Philippines, which would enable the temporary stationing of troops to each other’s territory for exercises and patrols.[45] Japan finalized a Reciprocal Access Agreement with Australia in August 2023. [46]
Southeast Asia
Philippines
The PRC has normalized Chinese Coast Guard (CCG) harassment of Philippine Coast Guard (PCG) and supply ships near the Second Thomas Shoal since December 2023 to render the Philippines unable and unwilling to defend its claim to the Second Thomas Shoal. The CCG harassed the PCG and associated supply ships six times at the Second Thomas Shoal between November 2021 and November 2023.[47] The CCG has increased the rate of harassment at the Second Thomas Shoal by doing so 11 times since December 1, 2023. The methods of harassment that the CCG employs have remained constant during the past three years. The CCG shines military-grade lasers to blind the PCG crews, sprays water cannons to immobilize supply ships and injure Filipino sailors, and rams PCG ships.[48] CCG water cannons damaged the Unaizah Mae 4 supply ship twice in March. The Philippines stated that such actions aim to deter it “from exercising our legal rights over our maritime zines, including Ayungin Shoal [Second Thomas Shoal] which forms part of our EEZ and continental shelf.”[49] The PRC MFA also stated on April 3 that the Philippines is the “root cause” of the South China Sea dispute by “relying on the support of external forces… and repeatedly provoking China.” [50] The harassment of PCG ships combined with the PRC MFA statement indicates that the CCP aims to degrade the Philippines’ willingness and capability to defend its presence on the shoal.
The CCP used a similar strategy in 2012 that resulted in the Philippines withdrawing from the Scarborough Shoal, indicating the party’s intent with CCG activity around disputed shoals is to gain control of that territory. The CCP engaged in negotiations with the Philippines in 2012 to end a standoff at the Scarborough Shoal, which Manilla administered at the time, while steadily increasing the number of Chinese Coast Guard ships near the shoal.[51] This resulted in the Philippines withdrawing its ships from the shoal in mid-June 2012 under a now-disputed agreement that the PRC would do the same.[52] The CCP subsequently kept its ships near the shoal and achieved its political objective of gaining de facto control of the Scarborough Shoal by July 2012.[53]
Oceania
Fiji
Fiji ordered PRC police to leave the country after choosing to maintain a Fiji-PRC policing agreement. Fiji decided on March 15 to uphold a Fiji-PRC police cooperation agreement signed in 2011 after putting the agreement on hold for a 12-month review.[54] Fiji Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka announced on March 27 that his government has removed PRC officers who were embedded with Fiji’s police force, however. Rabuka said Fiji had no need for the embedded PRC officers and expressed concern that the PRC’s growing presence in the Pacific could undermine democratic systems. Rabuka said senior Fiji police officers would continue training in the PRC.[55]
Tonga
Tonga is open to security cooperation with the PRC during the Pacific Islands Forum in August. Tonga Prime Minister Siaosi Sovaleni said on April 4 that he is open to the PRC’s offer of security support when Tonga hosts leaders of the Pacific Islands Forum in August if Tonga police deem it necessary. He said discussions with the PRC have focused on the PRC providing vehicles and training for Tongan police ahead of the forum. The PRC is not a member of the Pacific Islands Forum. The PRC has pursued security and policing cooperation with many South Pacific countries, including a controversial security pact with the Solomon Islands in 2022. The United States has urged countries in the region not to strike security pacts with the PRC over fears that the PRC could use such agreements to expand its influence and military involvement in the region.[56]
Tongan officials privately criticized Australia and New Zealand’s negative response to the PRC security agreement with the Solomon Islands. A leaked document from Tonga's Ministry of Foreign Affairs showed officials criticizing Australia and New Zealand’s “condescending” and “frantic” response to a controversial 2022 security agreement between the PRC and the Solomon Islands. The document characterized Australia and New Zealand’s views were that “only they (or the Pacific [region collectively]) can decide which countries Pacific states should align themselves with.” The document acknowledged that many Pacific Island states are facing "threats to strategic independence as a result of growing indebtedness to Beijing.” It stressed that the Solomon Islands is a sovereign nation and has the right to make decisions about its security, however.[57] A leaked draft of the PRC-Solomon Islands agreement included language granting the PRC access and replenishment rights to Solomon Islands ports, as well as the right to use its armed forces to protect Chinese projects and personnel in the Solomon Islands.[58] Australia, New Zealand, and the United States warned at the time that the broadly worded agreement could open the door for PRC troops or even a PRC military base on the Solomon Islands.[59]
Russia
Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov met with CCP General Secretary Xi Jinping and Foreign Minister Wang Yi on April 9 in the leadup to a Xi-Putin meeting in the unspecified future. Kremlin newswire TASS reported that Wang suggested that China and Russia engage in “dual counteraction” in response to alleged Western attempts at “dual containment” targeting Russia and China.[60] Xi reaffirmed his commitment to “intensify” bilateral collaboration with Russia and through international bodies to “promote the reform of the global governance system.”[61] Kremlin Spokesman Dmitry Peskov declined to specify the date of Putin’s visit, but stated on April 9 that Lavrov’s visit “can be seen as preparation for upcoming contact at the highest level.”[62] Reuters reported on March 19 that Putin will travel to China in May to meet with Xi.[63]
China-Taiwan Weekly Update, April 5, 2024
Click here to read the full report
Authors: Matthew Sperzel, Daniel Shats, and Nils Peterson of the Institute for the Study of War
Editors: Dan Blumenthal and Frederick W. Kagan of the American Enterprise Institute
Data Cutoff: April 3 at 5 pm ET
Key Takeaways
- Former Republica of China (ROC) President Ma Ying-jeou met with the People's Republic of China's (PRC) Taiwan Affairs Office Director Song Tao in Shenzhen.
- The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) proposed legislative reforms in response to the Kuomintang (KMT) and Taiwan People’s Party's (TPP) reforms that threaten to undermine the DPP's governance.
- CCP Secretary General Xi Jinping emphasized Taiwan and economic issues in a phone call with US President Joe Biden. The PRC readout of the call did not mention the US key security concerns.
- Top PRC officials met with US business and academic leaders to boost foreign investment.
- A flotilla of PLA Southern Theater Command naval warships carried out live-fire drills in an unspecified area of the South China Sea on the weekend of March 30.
Former ROC President Ma Ying-jeou met with the PRC’s Taiwan Affairs Office Director Song Tao on April 1 in Shenzhen. Song repeated standard rhetoric expressing the PRC’s cross-strait policy, including urging adherence to the “1992 Consensus” and opposing Taiwanese independence and foreign interference. Ma echoed Song’s statements and advocated for stronger cross-strait cooperation and exchanges in all areas, especially between the youth.[1] Ma’s meeting with Song occurred on the first day of his trip to the PRC and did not appear on his public itinerary.[2] The stated purpose of Ma’s visit to the PRC is to lead a delegation of Taiwanese students to participate in exchanges with mainland youth and promote cross-strait stability from April 1-11.[3]
The CCP insists that all cross-strait negotiations must be on the mutual basis of the “1992 consensus,” which Ma and the Kuomintang (KMT) recognize but the ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) does not. The 1992 Consensus is an alleged verbal agreement between semi-official representatives of the PRC and the then KMT-ruled ROC following negotiations in 1992. It states that both sides agree there is only one China and that Taiwan is part of China. The CCP interprets this “one China” to be the People’s Republic of China, however, while the KMT interprets it to be the Republic of China. The CCP does not acknowledge that the KMT’s interpretation of the 1992 Consensus does not align with its own. The PRC severed official cross-strait contact in 2016 based on the DPP’s refusal to accept the 1992 Consensus.[4]
CEO of the Ma Ying-jeou Foundation and former Ma aide Hsiao Hsu-tsen mentioned the possibility that Ma will meet with CCP General Secretary Xi Jinping on April 8.[5] Ma last met Xi in Singapore in 2015, when Ma was ROC president. The 2015 meeting was the first between the leaders of the PRC and Taiwan. Ma became the first former Taiwanese president to visit the PRC in March 2023 during a visit that overlapped with sitting president Tsai Ing-wen’s trip to the United States. Ma did not meet Xi on that visit, however. PRC officials have repeatedly lauded the period during Ma’s presidency as a high point in cross-strait relations to portray relations as having failed under the DPP. The PRC’s Taiwan Affairs Office (TAO) spokesperson Chen Binhua stated on March 13 that Taiwan should aim to relive the prosperity and peaceful development that cross-strait relations enjoyed from 2008 to 2016.[6]
Several senior KMT officials reacted positively to Ma’s trip. KMT Vice Chairman Andrew Hsia, who has held numerous meetings with CCP officials since assuming his role in 2021, expressed confidence that Ma’s trip will have a placatory and stabilizing effect on cross-strait relations.[7] Legislative Yuan Deputy Speaker Johnny Chiang urged respect for Ma’s itinerary and advocated for “diverse and multi-level” cross-strait exchanges.[8] DPP members have been critical of Ma’s trip, however. DPP Caucus Whip Rosalia Wu expressed disapproval of Ma’s gracious attitude despite the CCP’s failure to acknowledge Ma as the former president. Wu warned Ma to be cautious with his words and actions during his trip.[9] Premier Chen Chien-jen called on Ma to assert that “Taiwan is a sovereign and independent country” in front of Xi Jinping if the two of them meet.[10]
Taiwan
The DPP proposed legislative reforms on April 3 in response to KMT-TPP reform plans that threaten to undermine the DPP's governance.[11] The KMT proposed a series of legislative reforms to increase the Legislative Yuan’s (LY) oversight of the government on March 6. The reforms call for the establishment of inquiry committees and hearing procedures to compel individuals— including the president— to testify before the LY, assert penalties for perceived non-compliance or dishonesty in responses, and empower the LY to confirm political appointments.[12] The Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) released a similar draft on February 16.[13] The DPP’s recommended reforms do not include core elements of the opposition’s proposals, including the creation of special inquiry committees and the ability to hold testifiers in contempt.
The TPP and KMT have consistently stated that establishing a legislative investigative task force to intensify supervision of the executive branch is at the top of their agenda.[14] TPP Caucus Whip Huang Kuo-chang stated the TPP and KMT align in their reform direction, and the TPP’s support for the KMT in the LY will be aimed at achieving reform.[15]
The KMT has largely dismissed the DPP’s proposal as an attempt to water down necessary reforms and pledged to continue pursuing the reforms that it proposed. KMT legislator Luo Chih-chiang stated that the KMT would persist in defending the LY’s dignity and legislative reform.[16] KMT Caucus Secretary-General Hung Mong-kai claimed the DPP’s version would not achieve the goal of strengthening legislative oversight to increase the representation of public opinion in the LY.[17] KMT Caucus Whip Fu Kun-chi, a leader of the reforms, has consistently urged for the need to impose checks and balances on the government to limit its power and expose corruption.[18]
DPP Caucus Whip Ker Chien-ming emphasized the constitutionality of the DPP’s proposed reforms and stated that they would never sow chaos in politics, unlike the reforms that the opposition parties put forth.[19] The DPP has consistently criticized the opposition’s dogged determination to pursue the legislative reforms. Ker stated that “the evil forces of Blue and White,” referring to the KMT and TPP, are taking advantage of their collective majority in the LY to expand their power and wage a new “White Terror” against the executive branch.[20] DPP General Secretary Rosalia Wu emphasized the unconstitutionality of the opposition’s proposals and stressed that the LY cannot directly interfere with the executive branch by subjecting the president to legislative oversight.[21]
The opposition’s plan to impose checks and balances on the DPP could significantly hamper the government’s ability to pass policy by miring it in defensive actions against accusations of overstepping authority or corruption. KMT Caucus Deputy Secretary-General Lin Tzu-ming earlier referred to the proposed reforms as a “great weapon” that the LY must use to supervise the government.[22] The KMT’s outspoken rejection of the DPP’s reform proposal indicates the two largest parties will not compromise on the DPP’s revised version. Collaboration between the KMT and the TPP to advance their reforms suggests their version will pass with a majority in the LY, as the TPP’s eight seats constitute a crucial swing vote. The opposition’s determination to derail the DPP government is favorable to Chinese Communist Party (CCP) interests, especially if it hinders the government’s ability to implement its foreign and defense policy.
The LY’s Judiciary and Organic Laws and Statutes Committee will review the DPP’s proposal under the KMT’s rotating chairmanship of the committee next week.[23]
China
CCP General Secretary Xi Jinping emphasized cross-strait relations and economic issues in the US-PRC relationship during a phone call with US President Joe Biden on April 2. The PRC readout of the call did not address the US security concerns, including the PRC's support for Russia and heightened tensions in the South China Sea. Xi and Biden spoke by phone on April 2, in their first direct conversation since their meeting in San Francisco on November 15, 2023. According to the PRC readout of the call, Xi warned that the PRC considers the “Taiwan question” a “red line” and will act to counter Taiwanese “separatists” and external support for them. He also objected to US sanctions measures on PRC companies which he claimed are “suppress[ing] China’s trade and technology development,” saying the PRC welcomes mutually beneficial trade with the United States but will not “sit back and watch” if the United States seeks to “deprive China of its legitimate right to development.” Xi also said the three underlying principles of US-PRC relations in 2024 should be to value peace, to prioritize stability, and to uphold the credibility of commitments to each other.[24]
The PRC readout did not elaborate on many other issues the two discussed according to the White House readout, including freedom of navigation in the South China Sea, PRC support for Russia’s defense industrial base, and denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula.[25] The Xi-Biden call followed a call between US Deputy Secretary of State Kurt Campbell and PRC Vice Foreign Minister Ma Zhaoxu on March 27, which discussed similar issues.[26] The focus of the PRC readout shows the CCP is trying to portray trade issues and US support for Taiwan as the core disputes in an otherwise stable US-PRC relationship while downplaying US concerns about the PRC’s threats to regional and US national security.
The PRC used a series of high-profile meetings with US political, business, and academic leaders to boost foreign investment. The PRC invited top US business, academic, and strategic leaders to the PRC for the China Development Forum on March 25-26 and a meeting with Xi Jinping on March 27. Nearly all top PRC officials for economic affairs, including Premier Li Qiang, Vice Premiers Ding Xuexiang and He Lifeng, Vice President Han Zheng, and Xi Jinping’s Chief of Staff Cai Qi held high-level meetings with foreign business executives including Blackstone CEO Stephen Schwarzman, Qualcomm CEO Cristiano Amon, and US-China Business Council president Craig Allen.[27] Academics, such as former Harvard Kennedy School dean Graham Allison, also attended meetings with Xi and other top officials, as did National Committee on US-China Relations (NCUSCR) Chairman Evan Greenberg.[28] The meetings and PRC state media reporting about them sought to boost foreign investor confidence in the PRC economy and signal “win-win opportunities” for investors.
Xi used the occasion to reiterate that US-China "incorrect perceptions" from the US side are a key cause of tensions in the US-China relationship.[29] PRC state media Xinhua ran a series of commentary articles promoting the development of healthy US-PRC relations.[30] Global Times published an interview with Allison in which he said the United States and PRC were “inseparable, conjoined Siamese twins” and praised PRC leaders for seeking to escape the “Thucydides Trap,” a term Allison coined to describe the historical tendency of rising powers and established great powers to go to war.[31] CCP meetings with US business leaders, academics, and PRC-friendly groups like NCUSCR and the US-China Business Council may offer avenues for the CCP to influence US policy and lend credence to CCP narratives, such as the narrative that problems in US-PRC relations are caused by “incorrect perceptions” in the United States and the promotion of investment opportunities in the PRC.
The PRC also promoted stabilizing relations and boosting investment in meetings with European officials, including Premier Li Qiang and Foreign Minister Wang Yi’s meetings with French Foreign Minister Stéphane Séjourné on April 1.[32]
PRC officials expressed opposition to the expansion of the AUKUS security partnership. New Zealand Foreign Minister Winston Peters said New Zealand expects the PRC to respect its right to explore joining AUKUS, a trilateral security partnership between Australia, the United Kingdom, and the United States. MFA spokesperson Lin Jian responded by expressing the PRC’s “strong concerns” about AUKUS and noting that the PRC opposes “camp confrontation” and forming “exclusive small circles.”[33] PRC Ministry of Defense (MOD) spokesperson Wu Qian criticized the expansion and upgrading of AUKUS as a “dangerous step in a more dangerous direction.” Wu was referring to an AU$4.6 billion agreement for the UK to build nuclear submarines for Australia and US plans to discuss Japan’s technical cooperation with AUKUS when Japan Prime Minister Fumio Kishida meets with US President Joe Biden in April.[34] CCP opposition to AUKUS is consistent with the CCP view that all US alliance structures are in alignment against the PRC. The MOD also expressed concerns about NATO’s “eastward march into the Asia-Pacific and the Taiwan issue” during the 8th China-NATO security policy dialogue held in mid-March.[35]
Northeast Asia
North Korea
The PRC abstained from voting for a United Nations Security Council resolution about extending a monitoring panel that tracks adherence to UN sanctions against North Korea. Russia vetoed the UNSC resolution on March 28.[36] The UN Security Council has unanimously adopted the annual renewal of the North Korean sanctions monitoring panel’s mandate since its inception in 2009.[37] The PRC Permanent Mission to the UN stated that the “sanctions should not be set in stone, nor should it be indefinite.” It instead called for “adjust[ing] the sanctions against the DPRK in the humanitarian and livelihood field.”[38] The PRC MFA Spokesman Lin Jian claimed on March 29 that there was “still time for consultations” when the UNSC “rushed" the resolution for a vote.[39]
Japan
Chinese Coast Guard (CCG) vessels entered disputed waters around the Senkaku islands 101 days in a row as of April 1 in an ongoing effort to assert PRC sovereignty over the islands. The Senkaku Islands, called the Diaoyu Islands in Chinese, are an uninhabited archipelago about 120 miles northeast of Taiwan and 200 miles southwest of Japan's Okinawa Prefecture. Japan administers the islands, but the PRC and Taiwan also claim the islands.[40] The CCG has normalized daily incursions into the contiguous zone around the Senkaku Islands, which is between 12 and 24 nautical miles from the islands. The current string of consecutive daily CCG incursions into the islands’ adjacent waters began on December 22, 2023, the same day Japan’s Cabinet approved a record-high defense budget of 7.95 trillion yen ($48 billion) for 2024.[41] The PRC has repeatedly expressed opposition to Japan increasing its defense budget or taking a more active military role in the region.[42]
The CCG began near-daily incursions into the Senkaku Islands’ adjacent waters in 2012 and significantly increased the volume of these incursions in 2019. It has made 90-110 incursions in most months since April 2019 into the Senkaku Islands’ contiguous zone, as well as 4-12 incursions into the territorial waters within 12 nautical miles of the islands. CCG ships entered 121 times into the archipelago’s contiguous zone and 10 times into its territorial waters in March 2024.[43] There were only 10 days since April 1, 2023, without CCG incursions into the contiguous waters.
The PRC is framing growing US-Japan military cooperation as a threat to the PRC. The Japanese Parliament passed its record $48 billion defense budget on March 28 for the fiscal year beginning April 1. This is the same budget the Cabinet approved in December. MFA spokesperson Lin Jian said Japan’s annually increasing defense budget, relaxation of restrictions on arms exports, and breakthrough military developments raise “strong doubts” about whether Japan is sincerely focused on defense and peaceful development. He urged Japan to respect the security concerns of its neighbors, “deeply reflect on its history of aggression,” and avoid “further breaking the trust of its Asian neighbors.”[44] MOD spokesperson Wu Qian framed the possibility of Japanese technical cooperation with AUKUS as a “dangerous step in a more dangerous direction.”[45] Foreign Minister Wang Yi met former Japanese Prime Minister Yasuo Fukuda and urged Japan to “do more things conducive to regional peace and stability, rather than the opposite.”[46] PRC state-owned tabloid Global Times claimed the US-Japan alliance is evolving into an “axis of evil” that threatens regional stability and cited scholars who claimed the US recruitment of Japan to participate in trilateral US-Philippines-Japan patrols in the South China Sea was part of a US attempt to “consume allies’ resources and weaken China.”[47] US President Joe Biden will host Japan Prime Minister Fumio Kishida on April 10 to discuss enhanced military cooperation.[48]
Southeast Asia
Philippines
A flotilla of PLA Southern Theater Command naval warships carried out live-fire drills in an unspecified area of the South China Sea on the weekend of March 30. The drills included fire targeting an armed militia fishing boat and an enemy jet. The drills followed separate daytime and nighttime exercises in the South China Sea that the PLAN carried out on an unspecified date in early spring.[49] State-owned tabloid Global Times quoted PRC analysts who said the drills signaled that the PRC will be on “high alert” regardless of US, Philippine, or Japanese activities in the region.[50]
China-Taiwan Weekly Update, March 28, 2024
Click here to read the full report
Authors: Nils Peterson, Matthew Sperzel, and Daniel Shats of the Institute for the Study of War
Editors: Dan Blumenthal and Frederick W. Kagan of the American Enterprise Institute
Data Cutoff: March 26 at 5 pm ET
Key Takeaways
- Taiwanese media reported that former ROC President Ma Ying-jeou will meet CCP General Secretary Xi Jinping during a “private” visit to the PRC in April. The CCP may use the meeting to advance its preferred vision of cross-strait relations and legitimize the KMT as a negotiating partner on behalf of Taiwan.
- The Chinese Coast Guard has normalized patrols around Kinmen since February 14. Normalizing operations around Taiwan’s waters sets conditions for the PRC to apply further pressure on Taiwan in the future.
- ROC President Tsai Ing-wen declined to visit Taiwan-controlled Itu Aba in the South China Sea before her term ends. The Tsai administration has cited regional and personal security concerns in explaining Tsai’s decision to not visit Itu Aba.
- The United States, United Kingdom, and New Zealand accused PRC-state-sponsored cyber threat actors of conducting malicious cyber operations against democratic institutions.
- The Chinese Coast Guard is driving heightened tensions in the South China Sea while the PRC blames the Philippines and the United States for the crises.
Cross-Strait Relations
Taiwanese media reported that former ROC President Ma Ying-jeou will meet CCP General Secretary Xi Jinping during a planned “private” visit to the PRC in April. CEO of the Ma Ying-jeou Foundation and former Ma aide Hsiao Hsu-tsen announced on March 25 that Ma will lead a delegation of students to the PRC on April 1-11 to visit sites in Guangdong, Shaanxi, and Beijing. When asked if Ma would meet with Xi, Hsiao did not confirm the meeting but hinted that Ma was hopeful to meet “an old friend” if PRC arrangements permit it.[1] PRC Taiwan Affairs Office (TAO) Spokesperson Chen Binhua said that the PRC welcomed Ma to participate in cultural activities but did not mention any meetings with Xi or other CCP officials.[2] Taiwan’s Storm Media reported on March 26 that former ROC President Ma Ying-jeou will meet with CCP General Secretary Xi Jinping on April 8 during his visit, however.[3]
Ma last met Xi in Singapore in 2015, when Ma was ROC president. This was the first meeting between the leaders of the PRC and Taiwan. In March 2023, Ma became the first former Taiwanese president to visit the PRC, in a visit that overlapped with sitting president Tsai Ing-wen’s trip to the United States. Ma did not meet Xi on that visit, however.
Ma is a member of the Kuomintang (KMT) political party and is known for his PRC-friendly views and controversial statements on Taiwan-PRC and Taiwan-US relations, especially after leaving office. Ma said in a January interview that Deutsche Welle posted several days before the ROC’s 2024 presidential election that Taiwan must trust Xi Jinping when it comes to cross-strait relations.[4] The comment drew condemnation from the ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) and prompted KMT presidential candidate Hou Yu-ih to politically distance himself from Ma, saying his views were “somewhat different.”[5] In a speech at New York University in October 2023, Ma said that the United States and other Taiwan-friendly Western countries should encourage Taiwanese leaders to engage in dialogue with the PRC rather than encouraging them “to move toward Taiwanese independence or even transforming Taiwan into a second Ukraine.”[6] Ma’s allegation that the United States is pushing Taiwan toward independence and risking war with the PRC aligns with CCP rhetoric on the US-Taiwan relationship.
The CCP may use a Xi-Ma meeting to advance its preferred vision of cross-strait relations and legitimize the KMT as a negotiating partner on behalf of Taiwan in contrast to the DPP. TAO spokesperson Chen Binhua said on March 14 that Taiwan would be able to alleviate tensions and “sleep soundly” if it could relive the “peaceful development period across the Taiwan Strait from 2008-2016.” Chen’s statement refers to the years of Ma’s presidency.[7] A meeting between Xi and Ma would also be consistent with the CCP’s effort to legitimize the KMT as a negotiating partner while not directly interacting with Taiwan's DPP-led government. The PRC cut off official exchanges with Taiwan after Tsai Ing-wen of the DPP became president of Taiwan in 2016. CCP officials have repeatedly met with KMT officials during this time. The CCP insists that all cross-strait negotiations must be on the mutual basis of the “1992 consensus,” which Ma and the KMT recognize but Tsai and the DPP do not. The 1992 Consensus is an alleged verbal agreement between semi-official representatives of the PRC and the then KMT-ruled ROC following negotiations in 1992. It states that both sides agree there is only one China and that Taiwan is part of China. The CCP interprets this “one China” to be the People’s Republic of China, however, while the KMT interprets it to be the Republic of China. Although Ma no longer holds an official position in the KMT, KMT Vice Chairman Andrew Hsia said the KMT would be glad if Ma meets Xi and hopes his trip can help stabilize cross-strait relations.[8]
The Chinese Coast Guard (CCG) has normalized patrols around Kinmen since February 14. A PRC fishing boat in Taiwan’s prohibited waters near Kinmen capsized while fleeing from a legal Taiwanese Coast Guard pursuit on February 14. The capsizing resulted in the deaths of two of the four fishermen onboard. The CCG pledged on February 18 to strengthen law enforcement activities around Kinmen. The CCG has maintained a consistent presence around Kinmen and repeatedly violated Taiwan’s maritime boundaries since then. The CCG boarded a Taiwanese sightseeing ship on February 19, marking the first time a CCG ship conducted inspections in Taiwanese waters.[9] Five CCG marine surveillance ships entered Taiwan’s contiguous zone around Kinmen on February 26, including one that crossed into territorial waters.[10] The total number of CCG ships around Kinmen reached 11 on February 27, including two that entered Taiwan’s contiguous zone. Four CCG ships operated in Taiwan’s territorial waters around Kinmen Island for two consecutive days for the first time on March 15 and 16.[11] One of the ships was a converted naval corvette that conducted the passage with its gun covers removed.[12] The CCG’s removal of its gun covers during its passage through Taiwan’s waters illustrates its offensive posturing, indicating its actions are intended to intimidate the Taiwanese Coast Guard rather than uphold a safe maritime environment. CCG ships have previously used this tactic to intimidate rival law enforcement in contested waters, including the Philippines Coast Guard around Second Thomas Shoal in the South China Sea.[13]
Normalizing operations around Taiwan’s waters sets conditions for the PRC to apply further pressure on Taiwan in the future. It provides the precedent for the PRC to justify future CCG around other offshore ROC islands, such as Matsu. The patrols near the offshore islands create domestic political pressure on the ROC government to negotiate with the PRC from a position of weakness to mitigate the frequency of patrols and defend ROC sovereignty.
The CCP has normalized the patrols around Kinmen while keeping the Kinmen incident and subsequent CCG incursions from escalating into a crisis. The use of the CCG rather than the PLA Navy is one way the CCP employs force to change the status quo without eliciting a foreign response because the former is not a military vessel. This activity is part of a trend of coercive actions that change the status quo in the PRC’s favor and do not reach the threshold of a ROC or third-party military response. The lower levels of PLA Air Force violations of Taiwan’s ADIZ in 2024 compared to 2023 demonstrate that the party has avoided pursuing opportunities to escalate tensions to the point of inciting a military response. Every month from January to November 2023 averaged over 100 ADIZ violations. No month in 2024 has yet reached 100 ADIZ violations.[14] This aligns with two unspecified Taiwanese security officials’ comments to Bloomberg on March 18 that the PLA activity around Taiwan has not increased in intensity since the January presidential election.[15]
The Chinese Coast Guard (CCG) delayed the release of a Taiwanese fisherman that it rescued near Kinmen for over a week on suspicion that he is a ROC soldier. The CCG rescued two Taiwanese fishermen early in the morning of March 18 after their boat ran out of fuel and drifted out of Taiwanese waters around Kinmen. It held the fishermen in Quanzhou, a PRC coastal city a short distance from Kinmen. The PRC planned to hand the fishermen over to Taiwanese authorities on March 19 but delayed the handover after claiming one of the fishermen tried to hide that he was an active member of the Taiwan military.[16] Taiwan’s Ministry of National Defense confirmed on March 23 that the fisherman is part of the Kinmen garrison brigade.[17] The CCG finally released one of the fishermen and his boat on March 23 but continues to hold the soldier in custody.[18] The ROC Coast Guard, Kinmen County government, and KMT legislator Jessica Chen of Kinmen maintained communication with PRC authorities to secure the release of the fishermen and allow their families to visit them. Chen denied that the PRC was engaging in “hostage diplomacy.”[19]
Taiwan
ROC President Tsai Ing-wen declined to visit Taiwan-controlled Itu Aba in the South China Sea before her term ends. Itu Aba is the largest island in the Spratly archipelago and the only one that Taiwan controls. The PRC, the Philippines, and Vietnam also claim Itu Aba as their territory. The KMT has called on Tsai to visit Itu Aba, known in Chinese as Taiping Island, in the South China Sea to assert Taiwan’s sovereignty there before the end of her presidency on May 20.[20] Tsai’s predecessors Ma Ying-jeou of the KMT and Chen Shui-bian of the DPP both visited the island before leaving office.[21] KMT politicians criticized Tsai for not attending the inauguration ceremony for a newly renovated pier on Taiping Island on March 26.[22]
The Tsai administration has cited regional and personal security concerns in explaining Tsai’s decision to not visit Itu Aba. Taiwan Foreign Minister Joseph Wu and National Security Bureau (NSB) director Tsai Ming-yen advised President Tsai not to travel to Itu Aba due to high regional tensions and militarization of the South China Sea. Wu said the PRC has built “enormous” military bases on three islands surrounding Itu Aba – Mischief Reef, Subi Reef, and Fiery Cross Reef – and has 20 warships patrolling the South China Sea daily. He also noted escalating tensions in the region between the Philippines and the PRC and said Taiwan should consider “peaceful means” to avoid aggravating the situation.[23] NSB Director Tsai said there were security risks to President Tsai’s flight if she visits the island. He said PRC forces have harassed aircraft and ships replenishing Taiwan’s base on Itu Aba.[24]
The KMT criticized Tsai for not visiting Itu Aba and organized a legislative delegation to visit the island on May 16 to assert Taiwan’s sovereignty. Ma Wen-chun, who is the co-chair of the Foreign Affairs and National Defense Committee in the Legislative Yuan, said that her delegation would go to the island regardless of whether President Tsai went.[25] Ten KMT legislators including Ma, three TPP legislators, and one DPP legislator also have signed up for the trip. These include LY Deputy Speaker Johnny Chiang Chi-chen of the KMT, who is a member of the committee. LY Speaker Han Kuo-yu of the KMT, who is also on the committee, said he would not go due to political considerations, however.[26]
KMT Chairman Eric Chu dismissed the Tsai administration’s concerns about Tsai visiting Itu Aba as an “excuse,” noting that Taiwan has its own coast guard and military personnel on the island to protect the president’s flight and that past presidents visited despite similar concerns.[27] Former president Ma urged Tsai to visit the island to “safeguard national interests.”[28] Some KMT legislators alleged that the true reason for Tsai Ing-wen’s unwillingness to visit Itu Aba is related to her unwillingness to upset the United States.[29] This framing from the KMT implicitly criticizes US influence over Taiwan and frames Tsai as subordinate to US interests at the expense of Taiwanese sovereignty. The American Institute for Taiwan, the de-facto US embassy in Taiwan, said it was “disappointed” when Ma Ying-jeou announced plans to visit the island in 2016 because the trip could exacerbate tensions.[30]
China
The United States, United Kingdom, and New Zealand accused PRC-state-sponsored cyber threat actors of conducting malicious cyber operations against democratic institutions. The US Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and Department of Justice (DOJ) charged seven PRC nationals with cybercrimes on March 25. The cybercrimes were espionage and transnational repression in a far-reaching campaign that the PRC’s Ministry of State Security (MSS) directed.[31] The indictment accused the MSS-backed group, referred to as Advanced Persistent Threat 31 (APT 31), of malicious cyber activities focused on infiltrating government networks globally to collect sensitive data from public officials who criticized the PRC. The indictment alleges that APT31 embedded malware in over 10,000 emails that collected data on target recipients, including political candidates and campaign personnel. APT31 used the data to enable direct hacking operations against targets, including infiltrating home routers. The US indictment corresponds to earlier reports from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) that revealed PRC cyber actor attempts to interfere with federal election infrastructure networks in 2020 and 2022.[32]
APT31’s hacking campaign has been going on for the past 14 years.[33] APT31 and its members have perpetrated numerous other malicious cyber campaigns in recent years, including spear-phishing operations targeting the United States Naval Academy, the Naval War College’s China Maritime Studies Institute, and Hong Kong legislators and democracy advocates.[34]
The US charges coincide with similar accusations against the PRC from the United Kingdom and New Zealand. The UK’s National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC) assessed with high confidence on March 25 that APT31 conducted extensive cyber espionage on UK parliamentarians in 2021.[35] NCSC also officially attributed the compromise of Electoral Commission networks in 2021 to the PRC, which exfiltrated the data of over 40 million people from electoral registers.[36] The head of New Zealand’s Government Communications Security Bureau (GCSB) Judith Collins declared her country’s support for the UK’s condemnation of the PRC’s cyber operations. Collins announced on March 26 that GCSB also traced malicious cyber activity targeting parliamentary entities to PRC state-sponsored cyber group APT40.[37]
The US and UK jointly imposed sanctions on March 25 against two defendants and an entity they allege is an MSS front company that enables cyber operations.[38] The UK Foreign Office summoned the PRC chargé d’affaires on March 26 to express “unequivocal condemnation” of the PRC’s hacking activities.[39] UK political figures such as former Tory leader Sir Iain Duncan Smith and former immigration minister Robert Jenrick are urging the government to take harsh punitive action against the PRC.[40]
The latest revelations about the PRC’s hacking activities highlight the PRC’s large-scale data theft and espionage against its adversaries. The MSS conducted a large-scale hacking operation from 2014 to 2015 against the Office of Personnel Management, the United States government’s chief human resources agency that manages federal employees’ records for security clearances. The MSS exfiltrated the background investigation data of over 22 million federal employees and contractors.[41] A PRC state-backed cyber actor related to APT40, known in open source as Hafnium, exploited vulnerabilities in Microsoft email servers in 2021 to extract sensitive data from organizations around the globe, compromising 30,000 companies and entities in the US alone.[42] NCSC called the espionage-focused incident the largest cyber intrusion against the UK and its allies to date.[43] The alleged APT31 operation also targeted companies of “national economic importance,” including defense contractors who supply the US military and a “leading provider” of 5G network equipment.[44]
The PRC’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) spokesperson Lin Jian denied the allegations on March 26 and pointed to recent PRC reports of US government cyber operations against the PRC. Lin accused the United States of recruiting Five Eyes allies to spread disinformation and villainize the PRC.[45] The PRC’s counter accusations are consistent with its past reactions to reverse the narrative, portraying itself as a responsible actor in cyberspace and a victim of US transgressions.
Northeast Asia
North Korea
Top CCP officials met with a North Korean delegation led by Minister of the International Department of the Workers’ Party of Korea (WPK) Kim Sung-nam in Beijing to discuss bilateral relations.[46] Kim met separately with Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC) Chairman Wang Huning and Director of the CCP International Liaison Department Liu Jianchao on March 21.[47] Wang Huning stressed unwavering ties despite changes in the international situation, according to Pyeongyang’s official media.[48] Kim met with Secretary of the CCP Secretariat Cai Qi on March 22.[49] PRC Foreign Minister Wang Yi and Kim met on March 23, during which Wang expressed the PRC’s will to maintain and develop its friendship with North Korea.[50] Kim declared North Korea’s support for the PRC in all Taiwan, Hong Kong, and Xinjiang-related issues. This is Kim’s first overseas trip since assuming his position as the head of International Department of the WPK.[51]
PRC readouts of the meetings repeated expressions of goodwill between the two countries and pledges to strengthen bilateral cooperation. The PRC did not comment on North Korea’s aggressive behavior in the region, which is consistent with PRC actions since mid-December. The CCP has not publicly criticized North Korea for launching ballistic missiles, testing alleged underwater nuclear drones, or labeling South Korea as its “primary foe.” The CCP has instead called for dialogue to portray the party as a responsible regional stakeholder while avoiding steps to stop North Korea's provocations. The PRC MFA has messaged since mid-December that “trying to solve the problem [on the Korean Peninsula] through military deterrence and pressure will not work…[and] dialogue and consultation” are how to resolve the issue.[52] The CCP has also emphasized the PRC’s close relations with North Korea and plans to deepen “mutually beneficial cooperation” this year, which will be the 75th anniversary of diplomatic relations between the two countries.[53]
Southeast Asia
Philippines
The Chinese Coast Guard (CCG) is driving heightened tensions in the South China Sea while the PRC blames the Philippines and the United States for the crises. Philippine Coast Guard (PCG) Spokesperson Jay Tarriela stated that Filipino marine scientists conducted research at Sandy Cay on March 21, two nautical miles from the Philippine-controlled Thitu Island, while the CCG and maritime militia harassed the researchers, including by helicopter.[54] Over 15 CCG vessels remained in the area between Sandy Cay and Thitu Island on March 22.[55] The CCG blamed the Philippines for “infringing on China’s territorial sovereignty,” since the PRC claims both Sandy Cay and Thitu Island as its own.[56]
The CCG also fired water cannons at a Philippine supply ship heading to the Second Thomas Shoal on March 23. The water cannons rendered the ship immobile and caused unspecified injuries to the Filipino crew. Two PCG ships towed the supply ship away while a motorboat successfully transported new soldiers and supplies to the Second Thomas Shoal.[57] The Second Thomas Shoal is a submerged reef in the Spratly Islands in the South China Sea which the Philippines and the PRC both claim. The Philippines controls the shoal with troops based on the grounded warship BRP Sierra Madre. Filipino Undersecretary for Bilaterial Relations and ASEAN Affairs Theresa Lazaro protested the CCG and maritime militia actions to PRC Vice Foreign Minister Chen Xiaodong via phone call on March 25.[58]
The CCG actions since March 21 are part of a coercive trend targeting the Philippines. A CCG vessel attempted to block and collided with a Philippine Coast Guard (PCG) vessel escorting a supply mission to Second Thomas Shoal on March 5, causing minor damage to the Philippine ship.[59] Two CCG ships also fired water cannons at a separate Philippine supply ship, injuring four Philippine personnel, and later collided with it.[60]
The CCG actions In the South China Sea support PRC claims of sovereignty over nearly the entirety of the South China Sea, including the Spratly Islands, through the “nine dash line” maritime boundary. The PRC rejects a 2016 Permanent Court of Arbitration ruling that declared the nine dash line claims are unlawful.[61] The PRC has constructed, seized, and attempted to seize many islands in the South China Sea so it can build a military presence throughout the critical waterway. The PRC has built military infrastructure on islands that it has seized control of or artificially constructed to expand its power projection capability, strengthen domain awareness, and increase its control over critical Sea Lines of Communication (SLOCs) through the South China Sea. Developing the capability to monitor or restrict ships through the South China Sea would support a future PRC effort to implement a blockade of Taiwan or block US and allied reinforcements from reaching the Taiwan Strait in wartime.
The PRC blames the Philippines and the United States for the regional tension. Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. gave an interview to Bloomberg on March 19 where he stated the Philippines is trying to keep relations with the PRC “on an even keel” but “since the threat [from the PRC] has grown, we must do more to defend our territory.”[62] The PRC MFA responded on March 20 that the Philippines is driving the crisis by alleged “maritime infringements” on South China Sea islands the PRC claims as its own.[63]
The PRC MFA is framing the planned United States-Japan-Philippines summit on April 11 as provocative toward the PRC.[64] PRC MFA Spokesman Wang Wenbin claimed on March 14 that the United States “traveled thousands of miles to China’s doorstep to … provoke trouble” as part of its “hegemonic activity.”[65] He then framed the revisionist PRC territorial aggression in the South China Sea as a protection of his country’s “territorial sovereignty.”[66] Wang’s rhetoric is consistent with previous PRC messaging about the US role in the region. The PRC MOD framed the United States as “creating bloc confrontations that escalate regional tension” after the June 2023 US-Japan-Philippines trilateral summit.[67] Wang’s comments exemplify the view of CCP leadership that the United States-led security architecture in East Asia is inherently aggressive rather than defensive in nature.
China-Taiwan Weekly Update, March 22, 2024
Click Here to Read the Full Report
Authors: Nils Peterson, Matthew Sperzel, and Daniel Shats of the Institute for the Study of War
Editors: Dan Blumenthal and Frederick W. Kagan of the American Enterprise Institute
Data Cutoff: March 22 at 12pm ET
The China–Taiwan Weekly Update focuses on the Chinese Communist Party’s paths to controlling Taiwan and cross–Taiwan Strait developments.
Key Takeaways
- The Chinese Coast Guard (CCG) is expanding efforts to erode the Republic of China's (ROC) sovereignty around Kinmen Island.
- The PRC Ministry of Defense (MOD) warned the United States was “playing with fire” in stationing Green Berets on the Kinmen and Penghu islands.
- The PRC is framing the upcoming April 11 US-Japan-Philippines trilateral as a way for the United States to drive tension in the South China Sea.
- The PRC MFA framed the United States–South Korea Freedom Shield military exercise as causing instability on the Korean Peninsula.
- The PRC had its first public diplomatic meeting with a Hamas official and its first diplomatic visits to Israel and Palestine since Hamas’ attack on Israel on October 7.
Cross-Strait Relations
Taiwan
The Chinese Coast Guard (CCG) expanded its efforts to erode the Republic of China's (ROC) sovereignty around Kinmen Island. Four CCG ships operated in Taiwan’s territorial waters around Kinmen Island for two consecutive days for the first time on March 15 and 16.[1] One of the ships was a converted naval corvette that conducted the passage with its gun covers removed.[2] The CCG framed its operations as legitimate law enforcement to safeguard Chinese fishermen, including those from Taiwan.[3] The CCG’s removal of its gun covers during its passage through Taiwan’s waters illustrates its offensive posturing, indicating its actions are intended to intimidate the Taiwanese Coast Guard rather than uphold a safe maritime environment. CCG ships have previously used this tactic to intimidate rival law enforcement in contested waters, including the Philippines Coast Guard around Second Thomas Shoal in the South China Sea.[4]
Kinmen is a Taiwan-controlled island with a large military garrison roughly 3 kilometers from the coast of the PRC. The Taiwan Coast Guard Administration (CGA) enforces maritime laws around Kinmen and its lesser islands. The CCP does not accept Taiwan’s sovereignty over the waters around the island, however.[5]
The latest violations are part of a trend of CCG incursions following an incident on February 14 in which a PRC fishing boat in Taiwan’s prohibited waters near Kinmen capsized while fleeing from a legal Taiwanese Coast Guard pursuit. The capsizing resulted in the deaths of two of the four fishermen onboard. The CCG pledged on February 18 to strengthen law enforcement activities around Kinmen. The CCG has maintained a persistent presence around Kinmen and repeatedly violated Taiwan’s maritime boundaries since then. The CCG boarded a Taiwanese sightseeing ship on February 19, marking the first time a CCG ship conducted inspections in Taiwanese waters.[6] Five CCG marine surveillance ships entered Taiwan’s contiguous zone around Kinmen on February 26, including one that crossed into territorial waters.[7] The total number of CCG ships around Kinmen reached 11 on February 27, including two that entered Taiwan’s contiguous zone. Normalizing operations around Taiwan’s waters sets conditions for the PRC to apply further pressure on Taiwan in the future.
The rapid normalization of CCG operations in Kinmen’s waters in response to the incident suggests the PRC had pre-formulated reactions to this type of contingency. The PRC exploited the capsizing incident as a pretense to initiate a concerted coercion campaign that serves to incrementally challenge and erode the ROC’s sovereignty in its adjacent waters.
The PRC has shown that it is unwilling to return to the status quo before the Kinmen incident. The CCG and CGA cooperated on a joint search and rescue effort after a PRC fishing vessel capsized in PRC-controlled waters around Kinmen on March 14.[8] Both coast guards conducted search operations within their respective jurisdictions. CGA Director Chou Mei-wu framed the cooperation as a means to ease tensions with the PRC after the initial capsizing incident in February.[9] The CCG’s successive border violations on March 15 and 16 demonstrate the PRC’s rejection of opportunities to de-escalate tensions as it continues to erode ROC sovereignty around its outer islands.
The Kuomintang (KMT) and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) are pursuing political reforms that threaten to undermine the Democratic Progressive Party’s (DPP) governance by expanding legislative oversight of the executive branch. The reforms aim to strengthen the Legislative Yuan’s (LY) investigation rights by granting it more power to conduct inquiries and call on officials to testify before the LY, establish penalties for perceived non-compliance or dishonesty in responses, and empower the LY to confirm political appointments.[10] The TPP and KMT have consistently stated that establishing a legislative investigative task force to strengthen oversight of the executive branch is at the top of their agenda.[11] KMT caucus Secretary-General Lin Tzu-ming earlier referred to the proposed mechanism as a “great weapon” that the LY must use to supervise the government.[12] Collaboration between the KMT and the TPP on the proposals suggests that the reforms will pass with a majority in the LY, as the two opposition parties outnumber the DPP in the LY. The opposition’s plan to impose checks and balances on the DPP could significantly hamper the government’s ability to pass policy by miring it in defensive actions against accusations of overstepping authority or corruption.
The reforms have passed the initial stage and are scheduled for review by the LY’s Judiciary and Organic Laws and Statutes Committee. DPP Caucus Whip and LY Judicial Committee member Ker Chien-ming argued that the reforms are unconstitutional. Ker threatened a procedural objection that could delay the committee’s review process if the KMT did not arrange a public hearing to scrutinize the bill.[13] KMT Caucus Whip and LY Judicial Committee member Fu Kun-chi accused the DPP of obstruction and stated that “only checks and balances will prevent the DPP from falling into corruption.”[14]
The PRC Ministry of Defense (MOD) warned the United States was “playing with fire” in stationing Green Berets on the Kinmen and Penghu islands. US-based special operations-focused online publication SOFREP first reported on March 8 that US Army Special Forces (Green Berets) would be permanently stationed at the Taiwanese Army’s amphibious command centers on the outlying islands of Kinmen and Penghu.[15] ROC Defense Minister Chiu Kuo-cheng responded to media inquiries about the permanent presence of US troops in Taiwan on March 14 without confirming the details of the SOFREP report. Chiu stated that interactions with friendly countries fall within the scope of exchange and cooperation, and help Taiwan’s armed forces recognize blind spots and shortcomings in military preparedness.[16] US service members have trained Taiwanese military personnel for decades in an arrangement that Taiwan President Tsai Ing-wen first acknowledged in 2021.[17] Commander of the US Indo-Pacific Command John Aquilino said on March 20 that reports of US troops “permanently stationed” on Kinmen were inaccurate, however.[18]
PRC MOD spokesperson Zhang Xiaogang responded to the ROC claim on March 15 by stressing that the “Taiwan issue” is the first “insurmountable red line” in US-PRC relations. Zhang said that the US troop deployment and arms sales to Taiwan aimed to “weaken, hollow out, and distort” the one-China principle and warned that “those who connive at and support ‘Taiwan independence’ separatist forces will get burned for playing with fire and taste the bitter fruit of their own doing.” He said the PRC military will “resolutely smash ‘Taiwan independence’ separatist activities and external interfering attempts.”[19]
PRC officials strongly objected to Taiwan Vice President-Elect Hsiao Bi-khim’s visits to the United States and Czechia. Hsiao, Taiwan’s former envoy to the United States, began a low-profile “personal trip” to Washington DC during the week of March 12. Media reports said that US and Taiwanese officials tried to keep the trip a secret to avoid angering the PRC, but cited unnamed sources who said Hsiao would meet with unspecified US officials to discuss her incoming administration’s agenda.[20] Spokesperson for the PRC embassy in the United States Liu Penghu called Hsiao a “diehard Taiwan independence separatist” and expressed Beijing’s firm opposition to her trip.[21] Liu and MFA spokesperson Wang Wenbin both stressed the PRC “firmly opposes” any official interaction between the United States and Taiwan.[22] Hsiao also visited Czechia on March 19 and met with Czech Senate President Miloš Vystrčil at a think tank event.[23] MFA spokesperson Lin Jian expressed opposition and warned Czechia to end its “bad behavior” of holding exchanges with Taiwan.[24]
China
The PRC signaled strong opposition to a US bill that would ban TikTok in the United States if TikTok’s PRC parent company does not sell its stake. TikTok is owned by the PRC technology firm Bytedance. PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) spokesperson Wang Wenbin accused the United States of overstretching the concept of “national security” to hinder foreign competition, said the attempt to force the sale of TikTok was based on “sheer robbers’ logic,” and warned that the US moves would eventually backfire. Wang claimed the US government has never found evidence that TikTok poses a national security threat.[25] Wang also claimed the PRC’s bans on Facebook, Instagram, and other Western social media were “completely incomparable” to the US approach to TikTok because the PRC allegedly welcomes all foreign products and platforms “as long as they observe Chinese laws,” while the US government was discriminating against a specific company.[26]
TikTok has claimed it never shares US user data with the PRC, but the US government recommended that government employees avoid the app over concerns that it may allow PRC access to user data.[27] Former head of engineering for TikTok in the United States Yintao Yu claimed in 2023 that CCP officials could access US user data from the app.[28] TikTok’s parent Bytedance is a private company but has an internal CCP committee to regulate its “political direction,” like most large PRC firms.[29] The US Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) additionally stated that TikTok accounts run by a “PRC propaganda arm” targeted US Congressional candidates during the 2022 midterm elections.[30]
Northeast Asia
Japan
The PRC MOD framed the growth of Japan’s defense budget increase as unjustified and militaristic rather than a response to regional security issues, including PLA military coercion targeting Japan. The Japanese Cabinet approved a USD 55.9 billion defense budget for Fiscal Year 2024 in December 2023. The budget stipulates annual increases until it reaches USD 62.5 billion for Fiscal Year 2027.[31] The PRC MOD claimed on March 15 that this increase makes “the international community question whether Japan… adheres to the path of peaceful development.”[32] The Japanese defense budget increase comes in response to PRC aggression around the Japanese home islands. Japan’s Joint Staff noted in January 2024 that it scrambled fighters 555 times in the last nine months of 2023.[33] 98 percent of the scrambles responded to Chinese and Russian aircraft, and more than 50 percent occurred near Japan’s southwest airspace, which encompasses the Miyako Strait.[34]
North Korea
Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Andrei Rudenko met with Chinese Special Representative on Korean Peninsula Affairs Liu Xiaoming in Moscow on March 19 to discuss the situation on the Korean Peninsula.[35] Rudenko and Liu accused the United States and its allies of threatening the military situation in northeastern Asia and warned the United States against the proliferation of Cold War-style “bloc thinking.”[36] The PRC MFA issued similar comments in framing the United States–South Korea Freedom Shield military exercise as causing instability on the Korean Peninsula.
Southeast Asia
Philippines
The PRC is framing the United States as a destabilizing force in the South China Sea ahead of the April 11 US-Japan-Philippines trilateral summit.[37] PRC MFA Spokesman Wang Wenbin remarked on March 14 to a question about the summit that the “US has traveled halfway around the world to China’s doorsteps to form exclusive circles, flex muscles and make provocations.”[38] United States Secretary of State Antony Blinken reiterated an “ironclad” commitment to the US-Philippine alliance on March 19 in the ongoing aftermath of PRC revisionism in the SCS.[39] PRC MFA Spokesman Lin Jian responded on March 19 that the United States is “not a party” to South China Sea issues and therefore has no right to “intervene” in Sino-Philippine disputes.[40] The MFA’s rhetoric is consistent with previous PRC messaging about the US role in the region. The PRC MOD framed the United States as “creating bloc confrontations that escalate regional tension” after the June 2023 US-Japan-Philippines trilateral summit.[41]
The messaging from the PRC MFA aims to deflect blame from the PRC for heightened tensions in the South China Sea, namely over the Scarborough Shoal and Second Thomas Shoal. Scarborough Shoal is a contested atoll that the PRC and the Philippines claim and that has been under de facto PRC control since 2012.[42] The Chinese Coast Guard (CCG) erected a floating barrier and intercepted Philippine Coast Guard vessels in February to deny the Philippines access to the shoal.[43] The CCG has also disrupted Philippine Coast Guard missions to ensure the security of Filipino fishermen near the shoal. The Second Thomas Shoal is a submerged reef in the Spratly Islands in the South China Sea which the Philippines and the PRC both claim. The Philippines controls the shoal with troops based on the grounded warship BRP Sierra Madre. A CCG vessel attempted to block and collided with a Philippine Coast Guard (PCG) vessel escorting a supply mission to Second Thomas Shoal on March 5, causing minor damage to the Philippine ship.[44] Two CCG ships also fired water cannons at a separate Philippine supply ship, injuring four Philippine personnel, and later collided with it.[45]
The CCG actions In the South China Sea support PRC claims of sovereignty over nearly the entirety of the South China Sea, including the Spratly Islands, through the “nine dash line” maritime boundary. The PRC rejects a 2016 Permanent Court of Arbitration ruling that declared the nine dash line claims are unlawful.[46] The PRC has constructed, seized, and attempted to seize many islands in the South China Sea so it can build a military presence throughout the critical waterway. The PRC has built military infrastructure on islands that it has seized control of or artificially constructed to expand its power projection capability, strengthen domain awareness, and increase its control over critical Sea Lines of Communication (SLOCs) through the South China Sea. Developing the capability to monitor or restrict ships through the South China Sea would support a future PRC effort to implement a blockade of Taiwan or block US and allied reinforcements from reaching the Taiwan Strait in wartime.
Australia
PRC Foreign Minister Want Yi visited Australia and New Zealand between March 17 and 21. Wang’s meeting with New Zealand Foreign Affairs Minister Winston Peters addressed implementing the China-New Zealand Free Trade Agreement, as well as disagreements over New Zealand’s potential ascension into AUKUS.[47] The PRC MFA framed Wang’s separate meetings with Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and Australian Foreign Affairs Minister Penny Wong as seeking common ground and opportunities for Sino-Australian collaboration.[48] Wang’s visit to Australia also included meetings with the Australian business community and former Prime Minister Paul Keating.[49] Keating is a prominent critic of AUKUS and a former board member of the CCP-run China Development Bank.[50] This is the first visit by a PRC foreign minister to Australia since 2017.[51]
Europe
Russia-Ukraine War
The PRC advocated for direct dialogue between Russia and Ukraine without committing to the Ukraine-proposed “global peace summit” in Switzerland. PRC Ambassador to Switzerland Wang Shihting said in an interview on March 18 that the PRC supports direct dialogue between Russia and Ukraine as soon as possible. He also stated that the PRC is “examining the possibility of taking part” in the Ukraine-proposed “global peace summit." [52] MFA spokesperson Lin Jian subsequently avoided directly answering whether the PRC would participate in the summit or whether it would push for Russia to participate.[53]
Wang Shihting’s comments do not signal a change in PRC policy toward the war in Ukraine. The PRC has consistently backed peace talks or negotiations between Russia and Ukraine, in abstract terms, and portrayed itself as an impartial and “stabilizing” force in pushing for a political settlement to end the war. It has not committed to any specific peace talk proposals, however. PRC Foreign Minister Wang Yi dismissed Ukraine’s proposal for peace talks in Switzerland on February 17 during the Munich Security Conference, stating that there were not “ripe conditions” for peace talks, in comments that were omitted from PRC readouts.[54] Wang Yi told the National People’s Congress on March 7 that the PRC supports holding “in due course” an international peace conference recognized by both Russia and Ukraine.[55] Russia has said it will not participate in the summit even if invited.[56] PRC Special Envoy for Eurasian Affairs Li Hui reiterated PRC support for a “timely convening of an international peace conference” but acknowledged on March 22 that “there is a relatively big gap in [the Russian and Ukrainian] understanding of peace talks.” Li’s acknowledgement of differences in the two sides’ understanding of peace talks was absent from the PRC readout of his remarks.[57]
The PRC rhetorically aligns with Russian framing in criticizing NATO, portraying the Western security order and arms sales to Ukraine as fueling the war, opposing sanctions on Russia, and calling for respect for Russia’s “legitimate security concerns.”[58] The PRC has not shown any willingness to pressure Russia to end the war.
Middle East
Israel-Hamas War
The PRC had its first public diplomatic meeting with a Hamas official and its first diplomatic visits to Israel and the West Bank since Hamas’ attack on Israel on October 7. PRC MFA envoy Wang Kejian met with the head of Hamas’ political bureau Ismail Haniyeh in Doha, Qatar on March 17. This was the first meeting between PRC and Hamas officials that the PRC has publicly acknowledged since the war in Gaza began in October 2023. Hamas claimed that Wang called Hamas “part of the Palestinian national fabric” and said the PRC is “keen on relations with it.”[59] The PRC readout simply said Wang and Haniyeh “exchanged views on the Gaza conflict.”[60] The PRC has not publicly criticized Hamas since the war began. MFA Spokesperson Lin Jian said on March 19 that the PRC supports the Palestinian Authority in governing all Palestinian territories and called for “internal reconciliation” among all political factions in Palestine, however.[61]
Wang, who is a former ambassador to Lebanon, has been in the Middle East since at least March 10 discussing the Gaza war with officials in Egypt, Israel, the West Bank, and Qatar.[62] He led the PRC’s first diplomatic trip to Israel and Palestine since the war began, meeting with Palestinian Authority Foreign Minister Riyad al Maliki in the West Bank on March 13 and Israeli foreign ministry officials Hagai Shagrir and Rachel Feinmesser in Israel on March 14. The PRC readouts for the meetings in Israel and the West Bank said Wang reiterated the PRC support for a ceasefire in Gaza, humanitarian aid, and the promotion of a two-state solution, though these policy positions were absent from the readout of the Hamas meeting.[63] This has been the PRC’s consistent stance on the conflict, which broadly aligns with the view of Arab states and allows the PRC to portray itself as a responsible great power that is pushing for peace. PRC Foreign Minister Wang Yi endorsed Palestine becoming a full member of the UN on March 7.[64]
China-Taiwan Weekly Update, March 15, 2024
Click here to read the full report
Authors: Nils Peterson, Matthew Sperzel, and Daniel Shats of the Institute for the Study of War
Editors: Dan Blumenthal and Frederick W. Kagan of the American Enterprise Institute
Data Cutoff: March 14 at 5 pm ET
Key Takeaways
- Taiwan’s Ministry of National Defense announced that it redefined its criteria for a “first strike” against PRC military assets, which now include a “first move” by PLA aircraft and vessels across Taiwan’s territorial boundaries.
- A PRC Taiwan Affairs official participated in the negotiations on Kinmen, which is inconsistent with the CCP policy of not holding official exchanges with Taiwan’s DPP government.
- Taiwan’s Kuomintang is implementing party reforms to restrain the influence of a hardline faction and better appeal to young voters in future elections.
- The PRC’s Taiwan Affairs Office (TAO) spokesperson Chen Binhua stated that “peaceful reunification” with Taiwan remains the PRC’s policy despite the omission of the term “peaceful” from the Two Sessions government work report.
- The PRC, Russia, and Iran held the joint Maritime Security Belt – 2024 naval exercise in the Gulf of Oman from March 11 to 15.
- The People’s Liberation Army increased the number of military aircraft flights through the Miyako Strait in March, likely as part of an effort to normalize flights outside of the first island chain.
- The PRC portrayed the Philippines as a provocateur rather than a partner for managing disputes in the South China Sea while the Chinese Coast Guard drives heightened tensions in the South China Sea.
- The PRC defined its coastal baseline that extends its territorial waters and claims of sovereignty in the Gulf of Tonkin. The baseline is not in line with the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Seas, to which the PRC is a signatory.
Cross-Strait Relations
Taiwan’s Ministry of National Defense (MND) announced that it redefined its criteria for a “first strike” against PRC military assets, which now include a “first move” by PLA aircraft and vessels across Taiwan’s territorial boundaries. ROC Defense Minister Chiu Kuo-cheng told Taiwan’s Legislative Yuan that Taiwan reserves the right to take military countermeasures if enemy military planes or ships enter Taiwan’s territorial waters or airspace and Taiwan fails to expel them by interception, identification, and warning. He did not clarify if the “first strike” concept applies to Taiwan’s outlying islands. Chiu said that the MND adopted the concept of a “first move” in February 2021. It further developed the concept after the large-scale PLA air and naval exercises around Taiwan in August 2022, which the PRC launched in response to then-US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan. Chiu said the MND’s definition of an enemy “first strike” before the policy change specifically referred to enemy artillery or missile fire at Taiwan. The reason for changing the definition was to counter the PRC’s “gray zone” operations around Taiwan.[1] The CCP has not publicly commented on the policy change as of March 13.
Chiu also described the security situation in the Taiwan Strait to legislators and explained that it is “on the brink” of escalating to a heightened threat alert level. He referenced recent events that have contributed to escalating tensions, including the PRC’s explicit denial of the median line in the Taiwan Strait and the death of two PRC fishermen near Kinmen, whose boat capsized while they fled from Taiwan’s Coast Guard. Chiu also said that the PRC has increased the frequency of its air and naval missions near Taiwan and that these missions take place closer to Taiwan than before. He said he did not expect war to break out, however.[2]
The PRC is conducting dredging operations in the Liuwudian Channel near Taiwan’s Kinmen island group, possibly to facilitate the passage of PRC vessels. The Liuwudian Channel is located between Lieyu Island (known as Little Kinmen) and the islands of Dadan and Erdan, which are part of Taiwan’s Kinmen Island group. The ROC agreed in 2015 to let PRC ships pass through the Liuwudian Channel between Xiamen port on the PRC mainland and the sea even though the channel passes through Kinmen’s restricted and prohibited waters. The PRC did not make use of the channel after Tsai Ing-wen was elected president of Taiwan in 2016, however. Deputy Minister of Taiwan’s Ocean Affairs Council Chou Mei-wu said that the dredging activities were routine operations on the PRC side of the Liuwudian channel, but that the dredgers sailed through restricted and prohibited waters around Kinmen.[3]
Retired ROC General Lee Cheng-chieh said the dredging of the channel means the PRC plans to use the waterway in the future. He said the PRC could use ships in the Liuwudian channel in the future to block military supply shipments to Taiwanese garrisons on Dadan and Erdan.[4] Lee is a frequent commentator on foreign and military affairs whose opinions are often covered by KMT-aligned media and PRC media.[5] ROC Defense Minister Chiu Kuo-cheng said dredging vessels operating in Kinmen’s restricted waters do not constitute a “first strike” under the MND policy which authorizes Taiwan to respond with military force to enemy military incursions into its territory.[6]
Dredging sand in Taiwan-controlled waters is one of a growing range of “gray zone” tactics the PRC uses to harass Taiwan, assert its territorial claims, and strain Taiwan’s resources and response capability.[7]
Thousands of PRC dredgers have illegally operated in and around Taiwan’s restricted waters, including around the Kinmen and Matsu islands, for at least a decade. The dredgers usually extract sand and gravel from the seabed for use in construction projects.[8] Taiwan’s CGA interpreted illegal dredging to be non-political profit-seeking behavior in 2020 and agreed to cooperate with the PRC to crack down on the activity.[9] Taiwanese media and scholars were openly describing dredging activities near Taiwanese territory as “gray zone warfare tactics,” as of late 2023, however. Taiwan’s Legislative Yuan passed a law to allow Taiwan to confiscate any vessels caught illegally dredging sand in its waters.[10]
ROC National Security Bureau Director Tsai Ming-yen said the PRC’s "joint combat readiness patrols" around Taiwan are related to Taiwan’s exchanges with foreign countries. Tsai said the PRC patrols occur every 7–10 days on average and involve around 10 military aircraft and 3 to 4 naval ships. Tsai said that whenever other countries pass resolutions friendly to Taiwan, foreign vessels pass through the Taiwan Strait, or foreign dignitaries visit Taiwan, the PRC coordinates its existing regular patrols to coincide with these diplomatic events.
Tsai further said the PRC is likely to intensify its “push and pull” tactics against Taiwan before and after President-elect Lai Ching-te’s May 20 inauguration, including military and political intimidation combined with economic incentives for Taiwanese people to further the cause of “reunification.”[11] Taiwan’s Ministry of National Defense said in a report to the Legislative Yuan that the PRC has stepped up “multi-front saturated gray-zone tactics” around Taiwan, including balloons, drones, and civilian vessels, along with increased patrols of military ships and planes. The MND report said the PRC aimed to "increase burdens of [Taiwan’s] naval and air forces and to obscure the existence of the median line in the strait.[12] ISW has reported that some of “gray zone” tactics increased during Taiwan’s 2023-2024 election season in tandem with influence operations over local Taiwanese officials and businesspeople, as well as the PRC’s ongoing push for economic “cross-strait integration.”
Taiwan’s Mainland Affairs Council (MAC) denied media reports that ROC-PRC negotiations on the “Kinmen incident” broke down and said they would resume after Kinmen prosecutors finish investigating the incident. The Kinmen incident refers to the February 14 event in which a PRC fishing boat in Taiwan’s prohibited waters near Taiwan’s Kinmen Island, which is roughly 10 kilometers from the PRC city of Xiamen, capsized while fleeing from a legal Taiwanese Coast Guard pursuit. The capsizing resulted in the deaths of two of the four fishermen onboard. PRC and ROC representatives have held 15 rounds of negotiations on Kinmen to resolve disputes around the incident, including PRC demands that Taiwan’s Coast Guard Administration (CGA) apologize, reveal the truth of what happened, and return the capsized boat. Taiwanese media reported that the negotiations collapsed on March 6 because the two sides failed to reach a consensus and went home. The CGA claimed the negotiations broke down because the PRC demanded to interrogate CGA personnel and did not recognize Taiwan’s maritime boundaries or law enforcement rights.[13] The MAC denied that negotiations had “broken down,” however, and merely said the first phase of negotiations had ended. MAC officials said negotiations would resume after Taiwan’s judicial investigation into the incident concludes.[14] [15]
A PRC Taiwan Affairs official participated in the negotiations on Kinmen, which is inconsistent with the CCP policy of not holding official exchanges with Taiwan’s DPP government. Quanzhou Taiwan Affairs Office (TAO) deputy director Li Zhaohui was one of three leaders of a PRC delegation to negotiate with Taiwanese authorities about the February 14 capsizing incident.[16] The other two were Jinjiang Red Cross chairman Cao Rongshan and Director of the Coordination Department of the China Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Straits (ARATS) Xu Weiwei.[17] Quanzhou and Jinjiang are PRC cities near the Kinmen islands. Although Li is a TAO official, PRC state media CGTN, Enlightenment Daily, and other PRC media described him as an associate or advisor to the Red Cross in articles about the negotiations.[18] The ROC side of the negotiations was led by CGA officials including Deputy Director-General Hsu Ching-chih and Fleet Branch Director Liao Te-cheng.[19]
The presence of a PRC government official at the negotiations is inconsistent with the CCP policy of not directly interacting with the Taiwanese government. This has been the CCP’s policy since Tsai Ing-wen of the Democratic Progressive Party became president of Taiwan in 2016. The CCP insists that all cross-strait negotiations must be held on the mutual basis of the “1992 consensus,” which Tsai and the DPP do not recognize. The 1992 Consensus is an alleged verbal agreement between semi-official representatives of the PRC and the then KMT-ruled ROC following negotiations in 1992. It states that both sides agree there is only one China and that Taiwan is part of China. The CCP interprets this “one China” to be the People’s Republic of China, however, while the KMT interprets it to be the Republic of China.
Li’s involvement in the negotiations also undermines the CCP's effort to legitimize the KMT as a negotiating partner on behalf of Taiwan in contrast with the DPP. KMT vice chairman Andrew Hsia traveled to the PRC and met with TAO director Song Tao on February 29 to discuss the Kinmen capsizing incident concurrently with the DPP government-led negotiations on Kinmen.
Taiwan
Taiwan’s Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) and DPP-led government raised concerns that a KMT push to legalize absentee voting for overseas Taiwanese could enable CCP interference in Taiwan’s elections. Taiwanese voters are required to return to the city or county of their household registration to vote in elections.[20] Taiwan’s cabinet approved a bill in February 2024 that allows absentee voting for national referenda for Taiwanese nationals living in Taiwan. This means that voters can vote in person in the area where they live instead of having to return to their hometown. Premier Chen Chien-jen and Interior Minister Lin Yu-chang said the government has no plans to permit absentee voting for national elections, however.[21] The KMT has been pushing for legislation to legalize absentee voting in elections, including permitting mail-in ballots for Taiwanese people living overseas. DPP politicians including National Bureau Director Tsai Ming-yen raised concerns that permitting overseas absentee voting, especially for Taiwanese people living in the PRC, could create a security risk of PRC interference in Taiwan’s elections.[22] KMT politicians, including party chairman Eric Chu, pointed out that many countries, including the United States, have implemented absentee voting and accused the DPP of disenfranchising Taiwanese citizens under the pretense of national security.[23]
Taiwan’s Overseas Community Affairs Council estimates that around 2 million Taiwanese citizens live overseas, excluding the PRC.[24] Estimates of Taiwanese who live or work in the PRC range from around 160,000 according to the PRC’s 2021 census to over 1 million by other estimates.[25] The CCP frequently conducts outreach to Taiwanese businesspeople and other ROC nationals living in the PRC to influence them to vote for more PRC-friendly candidates.
Taiwan’s Kuomintang (KMT) is implementing party reforms to restrain the influence of a hardline faction and better appeal to young voters in future elections. KMT Chairman Eric Chu announced on March 6 that the party would disband its historic Huang Fuxing branch and reorganize it into a “veterans service working committee.” Huang Fuxing is a powerful conservative branch of the party that older military veterans and their dependents dominate. It supports Taiwan’s eventual reunification with China. It is organized separately from local party branches and has around 80,000 members. Chu said the reform was part of an effort to improve the efficiency of party affairs, integrate with local governments to expand services to party members, and appeal to younger generations.[26] KMT vice chairman Sean Lien said the reorganization aims to better allocate party resources. He said that Huang Fuxing’s NT$60 million of annual expenditures amounted to the KMT’s largest expense and dwarfed spending on other departments including publicity, youth, and women’s party organizations.[27] Various Huang Fuxing members and other KMT politicians strongly objected to the reform, however, and said it could cost the KMT a crucial base of support in elections. Some hardliners called on Eric Chu to resign and threatened to leave the KMT or join third parties like the Taiwan People’s Party or the New Party to show their displeasure.[28]
The KMT’s dissolution of the Huang Fuxing branch shows an effort by the party's central leadership to constrain the influence of the older and more conservative deep-Blue faction in favor of appealing to younger voters. The reform was triggered by the KMT’s loss in the 2024 presidential election and the increasing unpopularity of PRC-friendly policies promoted by the deep-Blue wing of the party.
The reforms may lead the KMT to moderate its stance on cross-strait relations to be more in line with the Taiwanese public, which overwhelmingly embraces a Taiwanese (and not Chinese) identity and opposes unification with China. The reforms risk former members of Huang Fuxing leaving the KMT or defecting to other parties, however, which would split the pan-Blue vote in future elections and decrease the KMT’s chances of victory.
China
The PRC’s Taiwan Affairs Office (TAO) spokesperson Chen Binhua stated that “peaceful reunification” with Taiwan remains the PRC’s policy despite the omission of the term “peaceful” from the Two Sessions government work report.[29] Premier Li Qiang’s work report to the National People’s Congress on March 5 omitted the word “peaceful” in the continuation of a trend of CCP officials using less restrained language about unification with Taiwan. Chen said the PRC is willing to “create a broad space for peaceful reunification” but will never renounce the right to use force or “all necessary measures” to achieve reunification. This language is consistent with the PRC’s standard messaging regarding Taiwan. The TAO is the primary agency responsible for cross-strait relations and conducting the PRC’s Taiwan policy.
The PRC’s recent measures to exert pressure on the ROC illustrate its adoption of a more aggressive approach to realizing unification, however. These measures include influence operations and the use of law enforcement to erode Taiwan’s territorial control. The PRC recently expanded its efforts to conceal its pressure campaigns. Deputy leader of the Central Leading Group for Taiwan Affairs Wang Huning led an interagency meeting in December to coordinate and camouflage the CCP’s efforts to influence Taiwan’s elections, according to a Taiwanese intelligence leak of the top-secret meeting. Wang allegedly urged officials at the meeting to step up effectiveness to influence Taiwan’s public opinion and reduce the detectability of its tactics by “external parties.”[30] The PRC’s opportunistic exploitation of the Kinmen capsizing incident to increase pressure on Taiwan further illustrates its growing pressure on Taiwan. The Chinese Coast Guard (CCG) pledged in February to strengthen law enforcement and conduct regular inspections in the waters around Kinmen, resulting in an unprecedented boarding of a Taiwanese civilian vessel in Kinmen’s waters.[31]
CCP General Secretary Xi Jinping’s address during the Twentieth Party Congress in 2022 also signals the impetus for more intense efforts to pressure Taiwan. Xi called for cracking down on Taiwanese separatism and foreign interference in Taiwan and urged stronger efforts to realize unification.[32] Xi’s call to action serves to galvanize a more aggressive attitude in CCP policymakers, indicating the trend of escalation against Taiwan will continue.
Russia and Iran
The PRC, Russia, and Iran held the joint Maritime Security Belt – 2024 naval exercise in the Gulf of Oman from March 11 to 15.[33] Kremlin-affiliated outlet Izvestia reported on March 11 that a detachment of ships of Russia’s Pacific Fleet, including the Varyag Slava-class cruiser, arrived at Iran’s Chabahar Port to participate in Maritime Security Belt-2024 alongside Iranian and Chinese naval detachments.[34] The annual exercise began in 2019.[35] The Russian Marshal Shaposhnikov Udaloy-class destroyer; the Chinese Ürümqi destroyer, Linyi frigate, Dongpinghu replenishment ship; and 10 unnamed Iranian ships, boats, and supply vessels and three naval helicopters are taking part in the exercise.[36] Representatives of Pakistan, Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, Oman, India, and South Africa will observe the exercise.[37]
Northeast Asia
Japan
The People’s Liberation Army increased the number of military aircraft flights through the Miyako Strait in March, likely as part of an effort to normalize flights outside of the first island chain. The PLA flew a Y-9 medium transport aircraft in the Miyako Strait on March 9 and 10.[38] It then flew a Y-9 and two H-6 bombers through the Miyako Strait on March 12.[39] Japan’s Joint Staff noted in January 2024 that it scrambled fighters 555 times in the last nine months of 2023.[40] 98 percent of the scrambles responded to Chinese and Russian aircraft and more than 50 percent occurred near Japan’s southwest airspace, which encompasses the Miyako Strait. [41] The concentration of the PLA component of these intrusions in the southwest indicates the PLA’s intent to operate outside the first island chain.
Southeast Asia
Philippines
The PRC portrayed the Philippines as a provocateur rather than a partner for managing disputes in the South China Sea while the Chinese Coast Guard drives heightened tensions in the South China Sea. The PRC sent 11 proposals for “managing the situation at sea and carrying our maritime cooperation” to the Philippines in April 2023.[42] PRC MFA Spokesman Wang Wenbing claimed on March 12, 2024, that “the Philippines has not yet responded to most of the proposals and made frequent infringements and provocations at sea.” [43] Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr stated on March 11, 2024 that “we have not rejected any proposals that China has made to us but the premise is something that we questioned…that premise that China has made is that their territory follows what is now described as a 10 dash line.”[44] The 10 dash line is the expansive PRC territorial claim over the South China Sea and Taiwan. The PRC’s nine-dash line precursor claimed the same territory but with one less dash around Taiwan.
Wang’s comments aim to deflect blame from the PRC to the Philippines for heightened tensions over the Scarborough Shoal and Second Thomas Shoal. Scarborough Shoal is a contested atoll that the PRC and the Philippines claim and that has been under de facto PRC control since 2012. The Chinese Coast Guard (CCG) erected a floating barrier and intercepted Philippine Coast Guard vessels in February to deny the Philippines access to the shoal. The CCG has also disrupted Philippine Coast Guard missions near the shoal to ensure the security of Filipino fishermen in the area. The Second Thomas Shoal is a submerged reef in the Spratly Islands in the South China Sea which the Philippines and the PRC both claim. The Philippines controls the shoal with troops based on the grounded warship BRP Sierra Madre. A CCG vessel attempted to block and collided with a Philippine Coast Guard (PCG) vessel escorting a supply mission to Second Thomas Shoal on March 5, causing minor damage to the Philippine ship. Two CCG ships also fired water cannons at a separate Philippine supply ship, injuring four Philippine personnel, and later collided with it.
The CCG actions in the South China Sea support PRC claims of sovereignty over nearly the entirety of the South China Sea, including the Spratly Islands, through the “nine dash line” maritime boundary. The PRC rejects a 2016 Permanent Court of Arbitration ruling that found the nine dash line claims are unlawful. The PRC has constructed, seized, and attempted to seize many islands in the South China Sea so it can build a military presence throughout the critical waterway. The PRC has built military infrastructure on islands that it has seized control of or artificially constructed to expand its power projection capability, strengthen domain awareness, and increase its ability to block critical Sea Lines of Communication (SLOCs) through the South China Sea. Developing the capability to monitor or restrict ships through the South China Sea would support a future PRC effort to implement a blockade of Taiwan or block US and allied reinforcements from reaching the Taiwan Strait in wartime.
The PRC and Philippines' bilateral diplomatic forums for managing tensions in the South China Sea are unlikely to change PRC behavior in the region. The CCP has a track record of engaging in dialogue while driving crises to achieve its political objective. In 2012 the party engaged in negotiations with the Philippines to end a standoff at the Scarborough Shoal, which Manilla administered at the time, while steadily increasing the number of Chinese Coast Guard ships near the shoal.[45] This resulted in the Philippines withdrawing its ships from the shoal in mid-June 2012 under a now-disputed agreement that the PRC would do the same.[46] The CCP subsequently kept its ships near the shoal and achieved its political objective of gaining de facto control of the Scarborough Shoal by July 2012.[47] In 2016 the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) Arbitration Tribunal unanimously ruled in favor of the Philippines by rejecting the legitimacy of PRC claims to territory inside of the nine dash line and land reclamation activities.[48] The CCP has ignored the ruling by continuing land reclamation efforts and maritime coercion in the South China Sea over the last eight years.
These PRC efforts continue despite PRC Assistant Foreign Minister Nong Rong and Philippine Foreign Ministry Undersecretary Theresa Lazaro co-chairing the eighth meeting of the China-Philippines Bilateral Consultation Mechanism (BCM) on the South China Sea in January 2024.[49] The PRC has continued its coercive behavior over the past decade in the South China Sea while not honoring prior diplomatic or international legal agreements.
Vietnam
The PRC defined its coastal baseline that extends its territorial waters and claims of sovereignty in the Gulf of Tonkin. The baseline is not in line with the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Seas, to which the PRC is a signatory. [50]A baseline is a conceptual line that a state uses to define its territorial waters, contiguous zone, exclusive economic zone (EEZ), and continental shelf. The PRC last issued a baseline in 1996 with the announcement of 49 points that stretch eastward from the island of Hainan to the Shandong peninsula on its eastern seaboard.[51] The 1996 baseline excluded the Gulf of Tonkin. The PRC and Vietnam signed the landmark Maritime Boundary Delimitation Agreement in 2000 that defined each country’s territorial waters and EEZs in the Gulf of Tonkin.[52] The new PRC baseline in the Gulf of Tonkin extends 24 nautical miles beyond where normal basepoints would be under the framework of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.[53]
Vietnam’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesperson Pham Thu Hang urged that the PRC adhere to the UNCLOS when determining the baseline to measure territorial waters and “respect and comply with” the 2000 delimitation agreement. [54] The PRC claimed that the baseline is in accordance with its domestic laws, however.[55] The PRC’s Department of Boundary and Ocean Affairs posted on WeChat that the new baseline in the Gulf of Tonkin “fills the gap of the westernmost part of the Chinese mainland’s territorial sea.”[56] The WeChat announcement framed the baseline necessary to exercise national sovereignty and jurisdiction in the territorial sea.
The PRC’s rationale for the new baseline is unclear. The baseline is consistent with PRC efforts to solidify its legal claims over maritime areas and features, however. The PRC has taken incremental steps over decades to consolidate control over its ambitious maritime territorial claims, which encompass the entirety of the South China Sea. This is evident in the PRC’s seizure of the Paracel Islands from Vietnam in 1974, its excessive baseline assertions around them in 1996, and subsequent militarization across the Paracels. The PRC’s gradual assertion of sovereignty over the Paracel Islands highlights a gradational strategy to increase control and legitimacy in the disputed territory over long periods. The PRC’s gradual delimitation of regional bodies of water serves to establish a basis for its territorial claims and ultimately advance its control over sensitive maritime areas.
Maritime territorial conflicts between the PRC and Vietnam stretch back decades, with each country claiming to have held sovereignty over contested areas for centuries. Past disputes include the Gulf of Tonkin, while unresolved claims over the resource-rich and strategically important areas encompassing the Paracel and Spratly Islands make for ongoing conflict.
The PRC conducts regular maritime patrols around Vietnam’s oil and gas fields, which receive less public attention than PRC engagements with other rival claimants such as the Philippines.[57]
The PRC and Vietnam have a long-standing record of maritime disputes in the South China Sea and engage in occasional high-profile confrontations over South China Sea territorial claims. The PRC instigated a tense standoff in 2014 by deploying an oil rig in disputed waters south of the Paracel Islands, which Vietnam saw as a direct territorial provocation. The PRC sent approximately 40 Coast Guard vessels, 6 warships, a military aircraft, and dozens of logistical and fishing vessels to support the rig, prompting reciprocal military deployment from Vietnam.[58] The standoff ended when the PRC withdrew the oil rig after two months, claiming early completion of its work and denying any relevance to “external factors.”[59]
Oceania
The United States approved $7.1 billion in funding for the Compacts of Free Association, which are the financial assistance commitments that govern the US relationship with Palau, Micronesia, and the Marshall Islands and grant US military access throughout their territories. Congress previously funded the COFAs for a 20-year period in 2003.[60] The United States renewed COFAs with Palau and Micronesia in May and the Marshall Islands in October and the US Congress approved them in March 2024.[61] [62] The $7.1 billion will cover the new 20-year COFAs that cover the period 2024 to 2043.[63]
China-Taiwan Weekly Update, March 7, 2024
Click here to read the full report
Authors: Nils Peterson, Matthew Sperzel, and Daniel Shats of the Institute for the Study of War
Editors: Dan Blumenthal and Frederick W. Kagan of the American Enterprise Institute
Data Cutoff: March 7 at 12:00pm ET
The China–Taiwan Weekly Update focuses on the Chinese Communist Party’s paths to controlling Taiwan and relevant cross–Taiwan Strait developments.
Key Takeaways
- Taiwan’s Coast Guard Administration (CGA) claimed that three Chinese Coast Guard ships entered Taiwan’s contiguous zone off the east coast of the main island on February 27.
- The Kuomintang (KMT) initiated a legislative inquiry into the Kinmen capsizing incident to determine the liability of Taiwan’s Coast Guard Administration. This supports the efforts of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) to vilify and undermine domestic Taiwanese support for the Democratic Progressive Party.
- PRC Premier Li Qiang’s work report to the National People’s Congress continued a trend of CCP officials using more belligerent language about “reunification” with Taiwan but did not signal a major policy change.
- Recent PRC diplomatic outreach in Europe may aim to advance the PRC’s September 2023 Proposal on the Reform and Development of Global Governance, which faults the West for the war in Ukraine.
- Chinese Coast Guard (CCG) ships fired water cannons and collided with Philippine ships while attempting to block a Philippine resupply mission to Second Thomas Shoal.
Cross-Strait Relations
Taiwan
Taiwan’s Coast Guard Administration claimed that three Chinese Coast Guard ships entered Taiwan’s contiguous zone off the east coast of the main island on February 27.[1] The contiguous zone around Taiwan and its closer islands constitutes the buffer between 12 and 24 nautical miles from the coast.[2] Taiwanese media reported that the presence of Chinese Coast Guard (CCG) vessels in the waters along Taiwan’s east coast is rare, and the three vessels in question usually operate around the contested Senkaku Islands, which Japan controls.[3] The CCG vessels left without incident after the Coast Guard Administration (CGA) deployed to the location and demanded that they depart the area.[4] This incident coincides with a consistently higher presence of PRC ships in the waters around Kinmen since the capsizing incident. The Kinmen capsizing incident refers to the February 14 event in which a PRC fishing boat in Taiwan’s waters capsized while fleeing from a legal Taiwanese Coast Guard pursuit. The capsizing resulted in the deaths of two of the four fishermen onboard. CGA Director General Chou Mei-wu reported increased PRC vessel presence near Kinmen since the incident, with up to 11 vessels per day, including law enforcement and official ships.[5]
The presence of more CCG vessels around Taiwan’s water serves to incrementally challenge and erode the Republic of China's (ROC) sovereignty in its adjacent waters. Normalizing operations around Taiwan’s waters can set conditions for the PRC to apply further pressure on Taiwan in the future. The CCP does not accept Taiwan’s sovereignty over the waters. PRC Taiwan Affairs Office (TAO) spokesperson Zhu Fenglian denied the existence of Taiwan’s so-called prohibited and restricted waters on February 28.[6] The increase in the number of the CCG vessels illustrates the PRC’s opportunism as it capitalizes on heightened cross-strait tensions and political sensitivity stemming from the Kinmen capsizing incident.
The PRC’s intensified maritime activities complement its regular violations of Taiwan’s Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ). Retired ROC Air Force Lieutenant General Chang Yen-ting pointed out on February 29 that the Ministry of National Defense (MND) detected a People’s Liberation Army (PLA) aircraft as close as 23 nautical miles from Taiwan’s northern coast.[7] Chang highlighted the proximity to Taiwan’s airspace and the challenges to the military’s operational depth and early warning time. The ROC Air Force announced on March 6 that it would resume nighttime flight training.[8] Chang stated in an interview that the measure is a necessary response to the higher frequency of PLA aircraft harassing Taiwan in recent years.[9]
The Kuomintang initiated a legislative inquiry into the Kinmen capsizing incident to determine the liability of Taiwan’s Coast Guard Administration. This supports the efforts of the Chinese Communist Party to vilify and undermine domestic Taiwanese support for the Democratic Progressive Party. KMT-aligned independent legislator May Chin convened the Legislative Yuan’s Internal Affairs Committee on March 4, summoning Coast Guard and government officials to testify regarding the law enforcement process and subsequent handling of the incident. Chin favors closer relations with the PRC and has a history of meeting with CPP officials, prompting accusations from DPP members that she is under the CCP’s influence.[10] Ocean Affairs Council Minister and DPP member Kuan Bi-ling and CGA Director General Chou Mei-wu faced fierce questioning from Chin and KMT lawmakers about the cause of the incident and the liability of the CGA. Kuan and Chou pushed back against the notion that the CGA vessel’s collision with the mainland fishing boat caused it to capsize. Kuan and other DPP cabinet members stood by the Coast Guard’s actions as lawful and denied insinuations of guilt. DPP legislators disagreed with the KMT’s framing of the incident in a report, claiming it lent itself to the TAO’s position.[11] Kuan refuted allegations that she ordered the Coast Guard to open fire or that she was a hindrance to the reconciliation process. Kuan characterized the rumors as a cognitive warfare strategy by the CCP and emphasized the role of misinformation in shaping public perception of sensitive cross-strait issues.[12]
The KMT and CCP are urging the DPP to disclose the truth about the incident. The PRC blames the DPP and CGA for the deaths and failure of the reconciliation process.[13] The PRC has responded by repeatedly deploying CCG patrols into waters around Kinmen and Matsu, two Taiwan-controlled island groups that are close to the coast of the PRC.
China
The National People’s Congress announced a 5% GDP growth target and a 7.2% defense budget increase for 2024. PRC defense spending has outpaced the GDP growth target for over a decade.[14] Both figures are identical to growth targets announced at the 2023 National People’s Congress session.[15] Premier Li Qiang’s work report to the annual session of the NPC focused primarily on the PRC’s economic goals, including maintaining target growth rates, developing “new productive forces” to drive the economy, and furthering “reform and opening up” policies. Li said the economy was improving with a growth rate of 5.2% in 2023 but acknowledged that achieving the economic growth goals would not be easy.[16] The spokesperson for the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC), the PRC’s top advisory body which is having its annual session concurrently with the NPC, also signaled that the CPPCC was chiefly concerned about the economy.[17]
The PRC has the world’s second-largest defense budget after the United States and the budget is set to increase to 1.67 trillion yuan ($232 billion) in 2024. Although PRC defense spending has doubled since 2015, annual increases in defense spending have declined to single-digit percentages as economic growth has slowed. Official spending increases in defense have hovered around 7% each year since 2016.[18] The US Department of Defense estimated in 2021 that the PRC’s true spending on defense could be 1.1 to 2 times its official budget.[19] The PRC can likely sustain its military spending despite slowing economic growth, however. The state exerts considerable control over the country’s economy and the distribution of resources to various sectors. The PRC’s official defense spending is also much smaller than US defense spending as a percentage of GDP, equaling 1.6% of GDP in 2022 compared to 3.5% for the United States.[20]
PRC Premier Li Qiang’s work report to the National People’s Congress continued a trend of CCP officials using more belligerent language about “reunification” with Taiwan but did not signal a major policy change. Li stressed that the CCP must “resolutely oppose ‘Taiwan independence’ separatism and external interference.” Li’s predecessor Li Keqiang said in the 2023 work report that the CCP should “advance the process of the peaceful reunification of the motherland,” but Li Qiang dropped the word “peaceful” and called on the CCP to “unswervingly advance the great cause of the reunification of the motherland.” Li Qiang did say the CCP should promote the “peaceful development” of cross-strait relations, however.[21] State-owned media Global Times cited PRC scholars who said that the omission of the term “peaceful reunification” does not signal that the CCP has dropped this goal but rather signals that it considers fighting Taiwanese “secessionism” will be a more urgent task in 2024.[22] The change in the language of the report is consistent with the change of tone in CPPCC Chairman Wang Huning’s speech at the Taiwan Work Conference on February 23, which emphasized the need to “fight” (rather than merely “oppose”) Taiwanese independence and foreign interference.[23]
The premier’s government work report to the NPC also omitted the term “peaceful reunification” in 2016 and 2020, the years that ROC President Tsai Ing-wen won the presidential elections. That the report again dropped the term after the DPP won the 2024 presidential elections indicates that the change in rhetoric signals disapproval of the DPP presidency.[24]
CCP Central Military Commission (CMC) Vice Chairmen Zhang Youxia and He Weidong highlighted the need to improve the military’s preparation for “major missions” at the annual National People’s Congress. Zhang and He participated in deliberations by the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) and People’s Armed Police (PAP) delegations as they reviewed the government work report at the NPC. Zhang highlighted the need to implement the CMC Chairman responsibility system, step up troop training, strengthen coordination of preparations for “major missions”, accelerate construction and implementation of network-enabled information systems, integrate military and civilian resources, and improve the military's “ability to win.” He Weidong stressed the need to strengthen training in CCP theory in the military and deepen political “rectification” and anti-corruption efforts.[25] Zhang and He’s recommendations provide insight into the PLA’s priorities in improving its readiness for “major missions” such as operations against Taiwan. These priorities include strengthening centralized CCP control over the military, strengthening personnel training and political loyalty, deepening military-civil fusion, and constructing information systems to facilitate joint operations in “informationized” warfare.
Russia
Recent PRC diplomatic outreach in Europe may aim to advance the PRC’s September 2023 Proposal on the Reform and Development of Global Governance, which faults the West for the war in Ukraine. The proposal calls the root of the “Ukraine crisis” lying “in the problem of security governance in Europe.” The “parties concerned… [must] accommodate each other’s legitimate concerns… [and] abandon the Cold War mentality.”[26] These are thinly veiled references to accommodating Russian historical grievances at the price of NATO unity and Ukrainian territorial sovereignty. The alleged “stabilizing force” of any PRC-negotiated ceasefire along these lines would normalize the principle of revisionist international aggression. This principle would provide the CCP with a precedent for the party to falsely justify aggressive coercion aimed at Taiwan, with the eventual political objective of annexing Taiwan into the PRC.
PRC Special Representative for Eurasian Affairs Li Hui traveled to Europe on March 2 for a round of visits to Russia, the EU, Poland, Ukraine, Germany, and France. PRC MFA Spokeswoman Mao Ning claimed that Li Hui would “pave the way for peace talks.”[27] Li’s comments align with Kremlin talking points, however. The South China Morning Post reported on March 6 that PRC Special Representative for Eurasian Affairs Li Hui reiterated the Kremlin talking point that the discussion of Ukrainian territorial sovereignty could only occur when violence ceases. He also implied that the EU needs to stop sending weapons to Ukraine for this to happen.[28] Li’s claims align with PRC Foreign Minister Wang Yi’s message at the Munich Security Conference in mid-February that the PRC is a “responsible major country” that would serve as a “stabilizing force” amid global turmoil. [29] Wang also repeated his claim on March 7 that the PRC “supports the timely convening of an international peace conference” during a press conference at the annual Two Sessions meeting.[30] CCP leadership delivers policy guidance for the upcoming year to the party cadre at this annual meeting.
The PRC and Russia are collaborating on the development of surveillance and energy-related space capabilities that threaten US access to space and space-based capabilities. The China National Space Administration (CNSA) stated in late February that the PRC plans to construct a surveillance system around the in-progress International Lunar Research Station. The surveillance system will use the Skynet mass surveillance system as a model.[31] Skynet is the PRC’s nationwide camera surveillance system that includes over 600 million cameras.[32] The ILRS is a multinational space station initiative that Russia and the PRC founded in 2021 that is scheduled for competition by the 2030s. CNSA did not specify how it would prioritize surveillance efforts in space. The head of Russia’s space agency, Roscosmos, Yuri Borisov also stated on March 5 that the PRC and Russia are considering cooperation to build a nuclear power plant on the moon in the early 2030s.[33] This is a competing initiative to an ongoing NASA project to design a nuclear fission reactor on the moon.[34]
Commander of United States Space Command General Stephen N. Whiting stated that these types of space-based systems compete with US interests during his February 29 testimony to the United States Senate Committee on Armed Services. He warned that the PRC “and the Russian Federation continued to field systems and engage in behavior that threaten U.S., Allied, and Partner access to space and space-based capabilities.”[35]
Southeast Asia
Chinese Coast Guard (CCG) ships fired water cannons and collided with Philippine ships while attempting to block a Philippine resupply mission to Second Thomas Shoal. A CCG vessel attempted to block and collided with a Philippine Coast Guard (PCG) vessel escorting a supply mission to Second Thomas Shoal on March 5, causing minor damage to the Philippine ship.[36] PCG spokesperson for the West Philippine Sea Commodore Jay Tarriela said that the CCG and Chinese Maritime Militia ships attempted “dangerous” blocking maneuvers against PCG vessels in an “unprovoked [act] of coercion.”[37] Two CCG ships also fired water cannons at a Philippine supply ship, injuring four Philippine personnel, and later collided with it. The supply ship returned to the Philippines under PCG escort. Another Philippine ship completed its mission of delivering supplies to personnel on the BRP Sierra Madre, a deliberately grounded derelict warship that serves as the Philippine base on Second Thomas Shoal.[38] The MFA claimed the Philippine supply mission was transporting construction materials.[39]
The CCG claimed that it took “control measures in accordance with the law” to stop the Philippines’ “illegal intrusion” and that a Philippine ship “deliberately rammed” a CCG ship.[40] A PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) spokesperson accused the Philippines of violating its commitments to China to tow the Sierra Madre and violating the PRC’s territorial sovereignty and maritime rights by “infringing, provoking and causing trouble” in the waters of Second Thomas Shoal, which the PRC calls “Ren’ai Reef” and the Philippines calls “Ayungin Shoal.”
Second Thomas Shoal is a submerged reef in the Spratly Islands in the South China Sea which the Philippines and the PRC both claim. The Philippines controls the shoal with troops based on the grounded warship BRP Sierra Madre. It maintains its presence at the shoal with regular shipments of living supplies for its personnel and construction materials for repairing the World War II-era warship, which is in poor condition. The Philippines began “superficial repairs” on the ship in October 2023 to make it more livable for the roughly dozen Philippine military personnel stationed there.[41]
The PRC opposes these shipments and claims the Philippine military presence is illegal. The PRC claims sovereignty over nearly the entirety of the South China Sea including the Spratly Islands through its “Nine Dash Line” maritime boundary. It rejects a 2016 Permanent Court of Arbitration ruling that found the Nine Dash Line claims are unlawful. The PRC has constructed, seized, and attempted to seize many islands in the South China Sea so it can build a military presence throughout the critical waterway. The PRC has built military infrastructure on islands that it has seized control of or artificially constructed to expand its power projection capability, strengthen domain awareness, and increase its ability to block critical Sea Lines of Communication (SLOCs) through the South China Sea. Developing the capability to monitor or restrict ships through the South China Sea would support a future PRC effort to implement a blockade of Taiwan or block US and allied reinforcements from reaching the Taiwan Strait in wartime.
The PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs objected to the Philippines’ passage of the “Maritime Zones Act” that codifies Philippine territorial claims in the South China Sea. The act is based on the 2016 Arbitration ruling, which found the PRC’s competing territorial claims in the region to be invalid. The Philippine Senate passed the Maritime Zones Act on February 26. The act establishes the Philippines’ archipelagic boundaries, internal waters, and exclusive economic zone (EEZ) in accordance with the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) and the 2016 Arbitral Ruling.[42] The 2016 ruling by the Permanent Court of Arbitration found that the PRC’s “Nine Dash Line” territorial claims to nearly the entire South China Sea, including many Philippine-claimed features, had no legal basis.[43] A PRC MFA spokesperson said on March 5 that the PRC “firmly opposes” the law. She reiterated the PRC stance that the PRC has sovereignty over many islands the Philippines claims, including the Spratly Islands and Scarborough Shoal. She also asserted that the treaties originally delineating Philippine territory did not include these islands, that the Philippines illegally occupied PRC territory in the South China Sea, and that the 2016 arbitration ruling is illegal under UNCLOS.[44]
The PRC’s use of legal arguments in tandem with maritime operations to assert territorial claims over most of the South China Sea serves to lay the groundwork for PRC military control over the South China Sea. PRC control over the sea could enable it to establish domain awareness or block passage through the waterway to support a blockade or military operations against Taiwan. The legal arguments about UNCLOS and the territorial boundaries of rival claimants are part of a CCP effort to legitimize PLA and CCG actions in the South China Sea. “Legal warfare” is one of the PLA’s “three warfares” strategies of non-kinetic warfare, which also include psychological and public opinion warfare.
Oceania
Compacts of Free Association
The House of Representatives voted to renew the Compacts of Free Association (COFA) on March 6.[45] The bill is now before the Senate for consideration. The COFAs govern the United States’ relationship with Palau, Micronesia, and the Marshall Islands while granting the United States military access throughout their territories. The United States renewed COFAs with Palau and Micronesia in May and the Marshall Islands in October.[46] [47] Congress previously funded the COFAs for a twenty-year period in 2003.[48] That funding has now expired. The renewal of the COFAs in 2024 would replenish this funding at a total cost for all three of the twenty-year agreements of roughly $7 billion spread over the period 2024 to 2043, according to the Congressional Research Service.[49]
China-Taiwan Weekly Update, February 29, 2024
Click here to read the full report.
Authors: Matthew Sperzel, Daniel Shats, and Joseph Su of the Institute for the Study of War
Editors: Dan Blumenthal and Frederick W. Kagan of the American Enterprise Institute
Data Cutoff: February 29 at 11am ET
The China–Taiwan Weekly Update focuses on the Chinese Communist Party’s paths to controlling Taiwan and relevant cross–Taiwan Strait developments.
Key Takeaways:
- The PRC Coast Guard patrolled prohibited and restricted waters around Taiwan-controlled Kinmen, likely as part of a PRC strategy to assert sovereignty over the island.
- The PRC has increased deployments of research vessels in Taiwan’s contiguous zone to assert its territorial claims over Taiwan.
- The Kuomintang chose defense obstructionist Ma Wen-chun to co-chair the Foreign and National Defense Committee of the Legislative Yuan. Ma proposed 135 cuts or freezes to Taiwan’s defense budget during 2023.
- CCP rhetoric regarding Taiwan signals a redoubling of efforts to exert pressure on the ROC under the DPP's renewed mandate.
- The PRC’s recent national security policy initiatives reflect the CCP’s growing threat perception of security risks to classified and sensitive information in the fraught geopolitical climate.
- The Chinese Coast Guard has continued efforts to assert control over Scarborough Shoal. It erected a floating barrier and intercepted vessels that belong to the Philippine Coast Guard and the Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources.
- The PRC is pursuing security cooperation with Kiribati to increase its security foothold in the Pacific Islands.
Cross-Strait Relations
The PRC Coast Guard entered and patrolled prohibited and restricted waters around Taiwan-controlled Kinmen, likely as part of a PRC strategy to assert sovereignty over the island. The Fujian branch of the Chinese Coast Guard (CCG) announced that it had conducted law enforcement patrols around Kinmen on February 25.[1] PRC state media Global Times cited an “anonymous professional” who claimed the CCG entered the “restricted zone” around Kinmen island.[2] Taiwan’s Coast Guard Administration (CGA) did not confirm or deny the incursion.[3] ROC Ocean Affairs Council Minister Kuan Bi-ling stated that five CCG marine surveillance ships entered Kinmen’s “restricted zone” on February 26, however, including one that crossed into Kinmen’s “prohibited zone.” The total number of CCG ships around Kinmen increased to 11 on February 27, including two that entered Kinmen’s “restricted zone.”[4]
Taiwan does not claim any territorial waters around Kinmen partly due to its proximity to the PRC, but it designates “prohibited” and “restricted” waters around Kinmen which it treats as equivalent to territorial waters and a contiguous zone. Taiwan authorizes its coast guard to search and detain foreign vessels entering its prohibited waters. PRC authorities have said they do not recognize any “restricted” or “prohibited” waters around Kinmen because they claim that Kinmen, like all of Taiwan, is the territory of the PRC.[5] Taiwan’s Mainland Affairs Council has said that the PRC has tacitly abided by Kinmen’s claimed maritime boundaries until now, however.[6]
The latest PRC incursions into waters around Kinmen are part of an ongoing dispute over an incident on February 14 in which a Taiwanese Coast Guard vessel collided with a PRC fishing boat while chasing the boat out of Kinmen’s prohibited waters, resulting in the deaths of two of the four fishermen. The PRC blamed Taiwan for the deaths and has responded by repeatedly deploying CCG patrols into waters around Kinmen and Matsu, two Taiwan-controlled island groups situated very close to the coast of the PRC.[7] The CCG detained and boarded a Taiwanese tourism vessel near Kinmen on February 19.[8] The PRC state-owned Global Times said the CCG activities signal the normalization of law enforcement patrols in the waters near Kinmen and Xiamen, the PRC city near Kinmen, and that Taiwan’s government has no right to intervene.[9]
The PRC is taking advantage of the crisis instigated by the deaths of the fishermen to assert sovereignty over Kinmen and Matsu through law enforcement activities in the adjacent waters. Its actions also represent an increased pressure campaign against Taiwan ahead of Lai Ching-te’s May 20 inauguration as president of Taiwan. The PRC’s law enforcement activities in Kinmen’s waters may embolden it to attempt such tactics around other Taiwanese offshore islands such as Matsu and Penghu.
ROC Ocean Affairs Council Minister Kuan Bi-ling said the ships on February 26 left after the CGA broadcast a warning. She called the incursion “a clearly politicized attempt to exert sovereignty claims.”[10] Kuan noted Taiwanese media speculation that the PRC intends to impose a “Diaoyu” model in the waters around Kinmen, a move that Kuan said was unacceptable.[11] The CCG regularly patrols in waters around the Japan-administered Diaoyu islands (called Senkaku in Japanese) to assert PRC sovereignty over the islands. Taiwan Minister of Defense Chiu Kuo-cheng said on the same day that Taiwan’s military would not consider CCG vessels in Kinmen’s restricted waters a threat as long as they do not approach too close to land forces.[12] The CGA said it would not adjust patrols around Kinmen and would not do anything to escalate the situation further.[13]
The PRC Taiwan Affairs Office (TAO) spokesperson condemned Taiwan’s Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) government on February 28 for allegedly lying about and concealing the facts of the incident and for not apologizing.[14] She accused Kuan Bi-ling by name of handling the incident as a “personal political performance,” concealing the truth, shifting blame, telling lies, failing to apologize, and setting up “obstacles” in the aftermath.[15]
The Kinmen fishermen incident has become increasingly politicized in Taiwan as Kuomintang officials have criticized the CGA and DPP administration’s handling of the matter. Kuomintang (KMT) lawmakers criticized the CGA for mishandling the incident on February 14, failing to record video footage of the event, and allegedly concealing the facts about the cause of the fishermen’s deaths.[16] The CGA confirmed that the capsizing of the PRC fishing boat was caused by a collision with a CGA vessel on February 22, over a week after the incident occurred, but denied that it was trying to conceal information.[17] The February 14 incident and resulting opposition criticism of the CGA promotes public perceptions that the CGA is incompetent and untrustworthy. The propagation of this narrative threatens to undermine Taiwanese confidence in Taiwan’s ability to control its waters, especially if Taiwanese people perceive that their government is unable or unwilling to repel CCG encroachment in Taiwan’s waters.
KMT Deputy Chairman Andrew Hsia’s visit to the PRC may legitimize a back channel for ROC-PRC negotiations as official negotiations on Kinmen have not reached a consensus. Taiwanese officials led by CGA deputy director-general Hsu Ching-chih conducted five days of closed-door negotiations on with a PRC delegation, including a Red Cross official and family members of the deceased fishermen. The PRC representatives demanded the CGA apologize, pay compensation, and reveal the full truth of what happened in the incident. The negotiations failed to produce results as of February 29, however.[18]
KMT Deputy Chairman Andrew Hsia began a seven-day trip to the PRC on February 26 with the stated purpose of visiting Taiwanese people living and working there. He said he would not pass up the opportunity to meet PRC officials if the opportunity arose, however. Hsia called for the DPP government to find a channel for dialogue with the PRC to deescalate tensions. He acknowledged that the KMT has its own channels for negotiation with the PRC, but said the party was not authorized to negotiate on behalf of Taiwan since it is not the ruling party.[19] Hsia met with TAO director Song Tao in Shanghai on February 29. He offered condolences for the deaths of the two fishermen and said he would urge the DPP to properly handle the issue. Song said the PRC will never tolerate the DPP’s “atrocious behavior” that ignores the safety of mainland fishermen’s lives. He said Beijing was willing to work with the KMT to “meet each other halfway,” promote cross-strait relations, oppose Taiwanese independence, and promote “national reunification.” Song and Hsia both said they were willing to maintain dialogue on the common basis of the 1992 Consensus and opposition to Taiwanese independence.[20] Hsia is a former director of Taiwan’s Mainland Affairs Council. He has repeatedly traveled to the PRC and met top PRC Taiwan Affairs officials in his capacity as the KMT’s deputy chairman, including during Taiwan’s 2024 election.[21]
Hsia’s visit to the PRC amid unsuccessful DPP-led negotiations in Kinmen may enable the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) to further legitimize the KMT in contrast with the DPP as a negotiator on Taiwan’s behalf. The CCP cut off formal contacts with Taiwan’s government when ROC President Tsai Ing-wen was elected in 2016. The party refuses to have a dialogue with the DPP directly because the DPP does not recognize the “1992 Consensus.”[22] This is why the PRC side of the Kinmen negotiation is represented by a Red Cross official. The 1992 Consensus is an alleged verbal agreement between semi-official representatives of the PRC and the then KMT-ruled ROC following negotiations in 1992. It states that both sides agree there is only one China and that Taiwan is part of China. The CCP interprets this “one China” to be the People’s Republic of China, however, while the KMT interprets it to be the Republic of China.
The PRC has increased deployments of research vessels in Taiwan’s contiguous zone to assert its territorial claims over Taiwan. The Financial Times published a report based on ship tracking data that the PRC has sent nine research vessels to waters within 24 nautical miles of Taiwan since September 2023. There were only two such incursions during each of the past three years. One research vessel, the unmanned drone carrier Zhu Hai Yun which the PRC began operating in January 2023, sailed the full length of Taiwan’s east coast in November 2023. The US-based think tank Center for Strategic and International Studies reported that the Zhu Hai Yun has ties to the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) and that the unmanned surface, undersea, and aerial vehicles it carries can be used to conduct military reconnaissance in addition to scientific marine surveys. The Da Yang, another PRC research vessel, operated off Taiwan’s east coast on February 15-17.[23]
The UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) grants each country the right to restrict transit within its territorial waters, which extend 12 nautical miles from its coast. It further defines a contiguous zone between 12 and 24 nm from the coast, within which each country can exert the control needed to prevent or punish the infringement of its laws and regulations within its territory or territorial sea.[24] The PRC considers Taiwan to be part of its territory and denies that Taiwan’s government has legitimate control over any adjacent waters. However, the deployment of scientific and other non-military vessels within Taiwan’s contiguous zone is a means of testing Taiwan’s response and gradually normalizing PRC presence around Taiwan. The PRC uses such tactics in tandem with near-daily air and naval violations of Taiwan’s Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ), Chinese Coast Guard patrols near Kinmen and Matsu, adjustment of civilian flight routes to fly closer to Taiwan, and balloon flights through Taiwan’s airspace to wear down Taiwan’s threat awareness and resources, forcing it to be selective in which perceived incursions it chooses to respond to. Blurring the lines between military and civilian activities also has the effect of making it more difficult for Taiwan to determine which activities are potential threats.
The CCP will add two additional flights along a sensitive civil air route over the Taiwan Strait likely to further strain Taiwan’s resources and air defense response time. The TAO spokesperson confirmed on February 28 that the PRC would add two new civilian flights connecting to route M503, which flies a few kilometers from the median line of the Taiwan Strait.[25] The PRC unilaterally adjusted route M503 on February 1 to fly closer to the median line. Taiwan at the time decried the move as unsafe and responded by canceling plans to resume Taiwanese group tours to the PRC on March 1.[26] The new flight paths will increase PRC air traffic near the median line.
The PRC has stated that it does not recognize the existence of any “median line” in the Taiwan Strait. Chieh Chung, a senior analyst at the KMT-affiliated National Policy Foundation, said that moving flight routes closer to the median line will allow PRC aircraft to more quickly change course to cross the median line, shortening Taiwan’s air defense response time. He also said military planes may fly along the same routes. Increasing the volume of both civilian and military flights in the sensitive area likewise serves to strain Taiwanese resources as Taiwan must monitor, assess, and prepare to respond to each potential incursion.[27]
CCP rhetoric regarding Taiwan signals a redoubling of efforts to exert pressure on the ROC under the DPP's renewed mandate. Top Politburo Standing Committee member Wang Huning called for the need to “fight” so-called Taiwanese independence and contain foreign interference during the annual Taiwan Work Conference on February 23.[28] Wang’s speech took on a distinctly bellicose tone compared to last year’s conference, which used relatively modest language urging “opposition” to Taiwanese separatism.[29] Wang’s speech this year also made more references to unification compared to previous years, illustrating the CCP’s hardening resolve to take possession of Taiwan. Wang is Chairman of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC), a foremost United Front work organization, as well as deputy leader of the Central Leading Group for Taiwan Affairs. These roles make him one of the top CCP officials responsible for overseeing the PRC’s policy toward Taiwan. He is also a leading CCP ideological theorist and policy architect who has accrued significant influence as a trusted advisor to CCP General Secretary Xi Jinping. Wang led an interagency meeting in December to coordinate and camouflage the PRC’s efforts to influence Taiwan’s elections, according to a Taiwanese intelligence leak of the top-secret meeting.[30] President-elect Lai Ching-te’s victory in Taiwan’s January elections represents a failure of the PRC’s influence operations. Lai’s election is a logical impetus for Wang’s stronger language, galvanizing a defiant response from CCP leadership. Wang’s rhetoric indicates the PRC will intensify efforts to erode Taiwan’s sovereignty and curb international support to help Taiwan resist pressure.
Taiwan
The Kuomintang (KMT) chose defense obstructionist Ma Wen-chun to co-chair the Foreign and National Defense Committee of the Legislative Yuan. The Foreign and National Defense Committee is the legislative standing committee responsible for legislation related to Taiwan’s policies and spending on defense and foreign affairs.[31] Standing committees have the authority to conduct budget reviews, make recommendations to the Legislative Yuan (LY) based on reviews of draft legislation, and summon officials from relevant agencies to respond to inquiries. Ma Wen-chun is a KMT legislator who has served in the LY since 2009. She is known as one of the biggest obstructionists of Taiwan’s defense spending in the LY, having proposed 135 cuts or freezes to the defense budget during 2023, including to Taiwan’s Haikun submarine program.[32] Ma is under criminal investigation due to a scandal in 2023 when several legislators publicly accused her of leaking classified information about the submarine program to South Korea and the PRC to hinder the submarine’s completion.[33]
The KMT’s selection of Ma to co-chair the legislative committee in charge of defense spending indicates its intent to obstruct what they view as “excessive” defense spending in the new legislative session. The KMT and the ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) hold divergent views on defense policy, with the former advocating for a comparatively modest approach that seeks to de-escalate tensions with the PRC. The KMT has consistently criticized President Tsai Ing-wen’s DPP administration for excessive defense spending.
DPP legislator Wang Ting-yu will serve as the other co-chair of the 13-member Foreign and National Defense Committee. The allocation of committee membership is proportional based on each party’s overall representation in the LY. The KMT and DPP are nearly tied in the LY with 52 and 51 seats, respectively. KMT Speaker of the LY Han Kuo-yu and Deputy Speaker Johnny Chiang will also be part of the Foreign and National Defense Committee. The minority Taiwan People’s Party, which holds eight seats in the legislature, voted for Ma and the KMT’s other candidates for co-chair in all eight standing committees.[34]
China
The PRC’s recent national security policy initiatives reflect the CCP’s growing threat perception of security risks to classified and sensitive information in the fraught geopolitical climate. The Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress (NPC) adopted a revised State Secrets Law on February 27 that broadens the scope of information that will be treated as confidential.[35] The law strengthens the confidentiality of so-called “work secrets,” privileged information that is not explicitly designated as a state secret but could undermine national security if leaked, especially information related to sensitive technology.[36] The law also restricts government employees with access to classified information from traveling overseas without prior approval. The unnamed head of the PRC’s National Administration of State Secret Protection spoke to reporters on February 28 about the revised law. The official stressed the importance of the CCP’s leadership in governing “confidentiality work,” and stated the revised law will help the CCP leverage its political and organizational advantages in managing confidential information.[37]
The PRC’s Ministry of Industry and Information Technology (MIIT) separately unveiled a three-year plan to strengthen the industrial sector’s data security on February 26. The plan will apply protective measures to over 45,000 companies, including enhanced risk assessment, ransomware simulations, and integration of data security products and services.[38] Both policies are designed to strengthen national security by safeguarding political integrity and maintaining tight control over sensitive information. The PRC’s new policy actions are the CCP’s response to a perceived hostile external environment, which Xi Jinping characterized as demanding defiance against foreign containment at the 20th Party Congress in 2022.[39] These measures are rooted in Xi’s comprehensive national security doctrine, which encourages heightened vigilance and robust safeguarding against anything that could threaten the CCP’s legitimacy. This approach entails a strategic application of the doctrine across various segments of society, aiming to fortify ideological, economic, and military security in the face of Western resistance to the PRC’s ascent.
Southeast Asia
Philippines
The Chinese Coast Guard (CCG) has continued efforts to assert control over Scarborough Shoal by erecting a floating barrier and intercepting vessels that belong to the Philippine Coast Guard (PCG) and the Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources (BFAR). On February 22, the PCG reported that the CCG placed a floating barrier at the entrance to the Scarborough Shoal lagoon to prevent Philippine fishing vessels from entering.[40] The PRC first erected a similar barrier on September 20, 2023, which the PCG removed on September 25, 2023, following strong condemnation from the PCG and BFAR.[41] On February 26, a spokesperson for the PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs stated that the Philippines has taken a “series of actions infringing on China’s sovereignty in the waters off Scarborough Shoal” and affirmed that the PRC would take necessary measures to guard its sovereignty, maritime rights, and interests.[42]
From February 22-23, the PCG and BFAR vessel BRP Datu Sanday conducted a resupply mission of 44 fishing vessels in the waters near Scarborough Shoal.[43] The PRC accused the Philippines of “illegally intruding” into Chinese territory. PCG Spokesperson Commodore Jay Tarriela refuted the accusation by saying that the Philippine vessels are “actively ensuring the security of Filipino fishermen” in the area.[44] A CCG ship positioned itself horizontally in front of the bow of the BRP Datu Sanday during the resupply mission in an attempt to deny access to waters adjacent to the Shoal. The CCG also conducted electronic jamming of the BRP Datu Sanday’s Automatic Identification System (AIS) to prevent the transmission of positional information that may conflict with the CCP narrative.[45] The PCG Spokesperson reported three PRC Navy vessels shadowed the BRP Datu Sanday 25 nautical miles outside of the Shoal and deployed a helicopter to observe the Philippine vessels.[46] [47]
Scarborough Shoal is a contested atoll that the PRC and the Philippines claim and that has been under de facto PRC control since 2012. The atoll falls within the Philippines’ exclusive economic zone, which gives the Philippines sovereignty over Scarborough Shoal per the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. The PRC claims the shoal under its nine-dash line, which the Permanent Court of Arbitration rejected in a 2016 ruling. The PRC rejected the court’s ruling.[48] The PRC has sought to control Scarborough Shoal, most of the Spratly Islands, the Paracel Islands, and many other islands and features in the South China Sea that are disputed with other regional states. The CCP has built military infrastructure on islands it has seized control of or artificially constructed to expand its power projection capability, strengthen domain awareness, and increase its ability to block critical Sea Lines of Communication (SLOCs) through the South China Sea. The PRC has built military infrastructure on islands it has seized control of or artificially constructed to expand its power projection capability, strengthen domain awareness, and increase its ability to block critical Sea Lines of Communication (SLOCs) through the South China Sea. Developing the capability to monitor or restrict ships through the South China Sea can support a future PRC effort to implement a blockade of Taiwan or block US and allied reinforcements from reaching the Taiwan Strait in wartime. The PRC has not built any infrastructure on Scarborough Shoal, however, because Philippine vessels continue to actively contest its control of the territory.
Oceania
Kiribati
The PRC is pursuing security cooperation with Kiribati to increase its security foothold in the Pacific Islands. Kiribati's acting police commissioner Eeri Aritiera told Reuters on February 23 that uniformed PRC police officers are operating in the country to assist local law enforcement with a community policing program and managing a crime database program.[49] Kiribati has not publicly announced a security agreement with the PRC. The PRC’s policing cooperation efforts with Kiribati serve to enhance its security influence in the Pacific. Expanding the agreement to military cooperation could provide the PRC with access to strategic locations for potential military use in exchange for assisting island nations with internal security. The significance of these agreements lies in their contribution to the PRC’s broader geopolitical ambitions, including countering Western influence and establishing a more favorable balance of power in the region.
The PRC’s ambassador to Australia Xiao Qian denied that the PRC harbors military-related ambitions as part of its cooperation with the Pacific Islands. Xiao stated on January 17 that security is a component of the PRC’s relationship with Pacific Island countries, and the purpose of security partnerships is to help maintain “social stability and basic order.”[50] Xiao’s comments came days after the PRC won formal diplomatic recognition from Nauru at Taiwan’s expense. Kiribati cut diplomatic ties with Taiwan in favor of the PRC in 2019.
The PRC has pursued similar security cooperation with other Pacific Island nations. Former Solomon Islands provincial leader Daniel Suidani leaked a draft security agreement between the PRC and Solomon Islands in March 2022. Suidani was an outspoken critic of the government’s decision to switch recognition from Taiwan to the PRC in 2019.[51] The leaked document included language granting the PRC access and replenishment rights to Solomon Islands ports, as well as the right to use its armed forces to protect Chinese projects and personnel in the Solomon Islands. Australian state media verified the authenticity of the document.[52] A former Solomon Islands prime minister and confidante of the incumbent stated that the final agreement, which was signed a month later, is “very close” to the leaked draft.[53] The PRC began supplying the Solomon Islands with police training and riot control equipment later that year. [54] The PRC’s Ministry of Defense denied rumors that the PRC is pursuing a naval base on the Solomon Islands.[55] The two countries upgraded their security cooperation again in July 2023 with a pact that recommitted the PRC’s provision of law enforcement support to the Solomon Islands as a part of their “comprehensive strategic partnership.”[56]
Tuvalu
Tuvalu’s newly elected prime minister assuaged fears that Tuvalu would cut diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Tuvalu’s parliament unanimously elected Feleti Teo as its new prime minister on February 26. Teo is Tuvalu’s former attorney general and a former regional fisheries official. His victory thwarted the prime ministerial ambitions of former finance minister and newly elected legislator Seve Paeniu, who said he would review Tuvalu’s diplomatic ties with Taiwan if he became prime minister.[57] Taiwan’s ambassador to Tuvalu Andrew Lin said he had received assurances from Teo and other Tuvaluan members of parliament that the Tuvalu-Taiwan relationship was “rock solid” and “everlasting.”[58] Tuvalu's new government formally released a Statement of Priorities on February 28 reaffirming its relationship with Taiwan.[59] Tuvalu is one of 12 countries that maintains diplomatic relations with the Republic of China (Taiwan) rather than the PRC. The PRC’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs urged Taiwan’s diplomatic allies to “stand on the right side of history” by recognizing the “one-China principle.”[60]
Compacts of Free Association
The loss of Compacts of Free Association (COFA) funding for Palau, Micronesia, and the Marshall Islands risks United States control of key sea lines of communication (SLOC) in East Asia. These COFAs govern the United States’ relationship with Palau, Micronesia, and the Marshall Islands while granting the United States extensive military access throughout their territories. The United States renewed COFAs with Palau and Micronesia in May.[61] It then did so with the Marshall Islands in October.[62] Congress previously funded the COFAs for a twenty-year period in 2003.[63] That funding has now expired. The newly re-signed COFA agreements are now before Congress for funding consideration in the form of H.J.Res.96 and S.J.Res.48.[64] The total cost for all three of the twenty-year agreements would be roughly $7 billion spread over the period 2024 to 2043, according to the Congressional Research Service.[65]
The loss of funding also threatens the continuation of the Ronald Reagan Ballistic Missile Defense Test Site in Micronesia, the Department of Defense high-frequency radar system under construction in Palau, as well as the opportunity for the United States Air Force Agile Combat Employment operations to take place in Micronesia.[66]
The loss of COFA funding also threatens the security of key SLOCs for the United States that provide a secure route connecting American allies and partners, such as the Philippines and Taiwan, to the US territory of Guam and the state of Hawaii. The United States Indo-Pacific Command (USINDOPACOM) defines SLOCs as “the principal maritime routes between ports, as used for trade, military, or other purposes.”[67]
The loss of Compact of Free Association (COFA) funding for Palau, Micronesia, and the Marshall Islands presents opportunities for the People’s Republic of China to fill the gap in funding to threaten the SLOCs. COFA funding accounts for $36.9 million of Palau’s annual $124.2 million revenue as of fiscal year 2023 and $35.2 million of the Marshall Islands’ annual $173.9 million revenue as of fiscal year 2023.[68],[69] The Presidents of Palau, Micronesia, and the Marshall Islands sent a letter to the leaders of the United States Senate on February 6 stating that they “cannot overstate the importance to all of our nations of final approval [of COFA funding] by the U.S. Congress” and that its delay “has resulted in undesirable opportunities for economic exploitation by competitive political actors active in the Pacific.”[70] “Competitive political actors” is a veiled reference to the Chinese Communist Party.
China-Taiwan Weekly Update, February 23, 2024
click here to read the full report with maps
Authors: Nils Peterson, Matthew Sperzel, and Daniel Shats of the Institute for the Study of War
Editors: Dan Blumenthal and Frederick W. Kagan of the American Enterprise Institute
Data Cutoff: February 21 at 5pm ET
Key Takeaways
- The Chinese Coast Guard (CCG) pledged to begin conducting regular maritime inspections around Taiwan-controlled Kinmen Island. Normalizing PRC maritime enforcement around the island will erode Taiwan’s control over its territorial waters and risk confrontations between the PRC and Taiwan’s maritime law enforcement.
- The CCP is engaging in global cyberattacks to degrade regional countries’ capacity to engage in military action against the PRC during a crisis. The cyberattacks could also facilitate actions against individuals who oppose the CCP.
- CCP International Department Head Liu Jianchao and PRC Foreign Minister Wang Yi gave conflicting stances on global governance and the Russia-Ukraine War at the “For Freedom of Nations” forum in Russia and the Munich Security Conference in Germany.
- Three of the PRC’s “Big Four” state banks stopped accepting payments from Western-sanctioned Russian financial institutions.
- The PRC deployed a People’s Liberation Army detachment to monitor a joint US-Philippines air force patrol over the South China Sea.
Cross-Strait Relations
Taiwan
The Chinese Coast Guard (CCG) pledged to begin conducting regular maritime inspections around Taiwan-controlled Kinmen Island. Normalizing PRC maritime enforcement around the island will erode Taiwan’s control over its territorial waters and risk confrontations between the PRC and Taiwan’s maritime law enforcement. Kinmen is a Taiwan-controlled island with a large military garrison roughly 3 kilometers from the coast of the PRC. The Taiwan Coast Guard Administration (CGA) enforces maritime laws around Kinmen and its lesser islands. An incident on February 14 that resulted in the death of two PRC nationals prompted the CCG to defy Taiwan’s sovereignty in the waters around its outer islands. A four-man PRC fishing boat intruded almost a mile into Taiwan’s territorial waters around Kinmen and capsized after colliding with a CGA ship while fleeing from a CGA inspection.[1][2] The CGA was able to rescue only two of the fishermen, who returned to the PRC on February 20. CCG Spokesperson Gan Yu stated on February 18 that the CCG will strengthen law enforcement and conduct regular inspections in the waters around Kinmen and Xiamen, the nearby PRC city.[3] PRC Taiwan Affairs Office Spokesperson Zhu Fenglian refuted the existence of Taiwan’s territorial or restricted waters and stated that the PRC has the right to take “further measures,” and that Taiwan will “bear the consequences.”[4] Zhu also condemned Taiwan for its “brutal treatment of mainland fishermen” and disregard for human life.[5]
The CCG conducted its first maritime inspection in the Taiwan-controlled waters around Kinmen Island on February 19. CCG personnel boarded a Taiwanese sightseeing ship off the coast of the island. The personnel remained onboard for about 30 minutes, during which they inspected the ship’s voyage plan and registration. The CGA commented that this was the first CCG boarding of a Taiwanese vessel in Taiwan-controlled waters.[6] A CCG maritime surveillance ship entered Taiwan’s territorial waters south of Kinmen on February 20 and left an hour later.[7]
The CCG’s assertive behavior also extends to Taiwan’s other outer islands near the mainland. Three CCG ships entered the territorial waters around the Taiwan-controlled Matsu Islands on February 21.[8] The Matsu Islands are 10 kilometers off the mainland coast at their closest point and roughly 240 kilometers northeast of Kinmen Island.
A ROC official warned that the CCG may expand its operations into other Taiwan-controlled waters as well. KMT legislator Alex Tsai Cheng-yuan speculated on February 21 whether the Penghu Islands would be the next target for the CCG.[9] The Penghu Islands are located on the east side of the median line in the strait between the PRC and Taiwan, roughly 140 kilometers southeast of Kinmen Island. The islands hold strategic significance due to Taiwan’s robust military presence there and their ability to enable early detection and response to PRC military activities. The location of the islands in the Taiwan Strait makes them a valuable potential staging ground for the PRC to launch a future invasion of Taiwan.
The Kuomintang appointed two key legislators to oversee foreign and defense policy, which signals its determination to oppose the Democratic Progressive Party’s political agenda in these areas. Kuomintang (KMT) Caucus Whip Fu Kun-chi announced the party’s designation of Legislative Yuan Speaker Han Kuo-yu and Deputy Speaker Johnny Chiang Chi-chen to serve on the Foreign and National Defense Committee on February 21.[10] The Foreign and National Defense Committee is a legislative committee with the authority to conduct budget reviews, make recommendations to the Legislative Yuan (LY) based on its review of draft legislation, and summon officials from relevant agencies to respond to inquiries. The KMT and the ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) hold divergent views on defense policy, with the former advocating for a comparatively modest approach that seeks to de-escalate tensions with Beijing. The KMT has consistently criticized President Tsai Ing-wen’s DPP administration for excessive defense spending.[11] The KMT’s appointment of its leading legislators to the committee suggests the party will focus considerable resources on shaping foreign and defense policy, making it one of the primary areas of competition in the LY. The KMT likely seeks to wield its influence in the committee to obstruct the DPP’s defense agenda, such as freezing budget appropriations and shaping policy proposals.
Fu declared in his announcement that there is nothing more important than imposing checks and balances on the DPP and stated that “Taiwan would not be well until the DPP falls.”[12] The KMT’s adversarial approach carries negative implications for President-elect Lai Ching-te, whose policy platform emphasizes stronger international relationships and national defense. The KMT's determination to block the DPP’s political agenda is favorable to Chinese Communist Party (CCP) interests, especially if it hinders the government’s ability to implement its foreign and defense policy.
The Kuomintang and Taiwan People’s Party are pursuing political reforms that threaten to undermine the Democratic Progressive Party’s governance by entangling the party in defensive struggles. KMT and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) party leaders discussed a joint proposal for “legislative and judicial reforms” in the Legislative Yuan on February 22.[13] TPP Caucus Whip Huang Kuo-chang stated that the two opposition parties maintain a close consensus on the issue.[14] The TPP and KMT have consistently stated that establishing a legislative investigative task force to strengthen oversight of the executive branch is at the top of their agenda.[15] KMT caucus Secretary-General Lin Tzu-ming earlier referred to the proposed mechanism as a “great weapon” that the Legislative Yuan must use to supervise the government.[16] Collaboration between the KMT and the TPP to introduce the proposals suggests the reforms will pass with a majority in the LY, as the TPP’s eight seats constitute a crucial swing vote. The opposition’s plan to impose checks and balances on the DPP could significantly hamper the government’s ability to pass policy by miring it in defensive actions against accusations of overstepping authority or corruption.
China
The CCP is engaging in global cyberattacks to degrade regional countries’ capacity to engage in military action against the PRC during a crisis. The cyberattacks could also facilitate actions against individuals who oppose the CCP. US and foreign partner cybersecurity and intelligence agencies confirmed in a joint advisory on February 7 that a PRC state-sponsored cyber threat actor known as Volt Typhoon infiltrated critical infrastructure organizations in the continental United States and US territories.[17] The authoring agencies assessed with high confidence that Volt Typhoon’s goal was to develop the capability to disrupt key operational technology functions in the event of a conflict with the United States by leveraging its access to informational technology environments. The cyber company I-Soon, which has contracts with the PRC Ministry of Public Security, Ministry of State Security, and People’s Liberation Army, subsequently leaked documents in late February that revealed additional CCP cyber operations. The targets of the operations include NATO, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, Taiwan, South Korea, Vietnam, and India.[18] I-Soon also hacks X (formerly Twitter) accounts to uncover user identities.[19]
A February 13 report from the US security firm Trellix also shows a significant increase in cyberattacks against Taiwan during the 24 hours before its January 13 presidential election.[20] The report stated that the cyberattacks targeted a myriad of institutions such as governmental offices, police departments, and finance entities.[21] Trellix is reviewing the data but posited that PRC threat actors may have been responsible.[22]
The CCP refuted that it is responsible for the cyberattacks. The PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs Spokeswoman Mao Ning refuted US FBI Director Christopher Wray’s statement that Chinese offensive malware is at an unprecedented high. Mao falsely claimed on February 22 that “China firmly opposes and combats all forms of cyberattacks.”[23]
United States and Europe
CCP International Department Head Liu Jianchao and PRC Foreign Minister Wang Yi gave conflicting stances on global governance and the Russia-Ukraine War at the “For Freedom of Nations” forum in Russia and the Munich Security Conference in Germany. “For Freedom of Nations” is a Russian forum of international political parties against “neo-colonialism” that Russia’s United Russia ruling party organized for the first time on February 15–16. It overlapped with the Munich Security Conference, which ran from February 16–18. Liu told the primarily Russian and Global South participants including former Russian president Dmitry Medvedev that the PRC advocated “reforming the global governance system,” among other things. [24] A joint statement claiming to represent the forum’s over 400 participants denounced “modern practices of neo-colonialism,” “selective application” of international law and a “rules-based world order,” and interference in other countries’ internal affairs.[25] These were thinly veiled attacks on the Western-led international order, which has been highly critical of both Russia and the PRC. Wang Yi presented an opposing view of PRC policies to the Western audience in Munich. He stated that the PRC is a “responsible major country” that would serve as a “stabilizing force” amid global turmoil. He said the PRC wished to “strengthen” global governance by upholding the authority of the United Nations and enhancing the voice of the Global South. Wang also portrayed the PRC as a stabilizing force in promoting cooperation between major world powers and in dealing with “hot issues” such as the “Ukraine crisis.” [26] Wang’s core message to European powers is part of a broader “charm offensive” toward Europe as the PRC seeks to boost Western trade and investment to revitalize its troubled economy.
Liu’s endorsement of “reforming” global governance to a primarily non-Western audience contrasts with Wang’s claim to European leaders that the PRC supports “strengthening” global governance. The PRC aims to use existing organs of global governance and new international mechanisms to promote an alternative PRC-led world order that advances PRC interests. It is simultaneously trying to reassure Western powers that it is not a threat and is a reliable partner, however. Liu did not comment on Ukraine in publicly available statements, but his attendance at a Russia-hosted “anti-neocolonialist” forum concurrent with the Munich Security Conference undermines Wang Yi’s message that the PRC can be relied upon as an impartial interlocutor and promoter of peace in Ukraine.
The CCP also issued conflicting perspectives on ending the Russian war in Ukraine. Wang claimed to European leaders and in a meeting with Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba that the PRC did not “sit back and watch” the “Ukraine crisis” but instead has stayed committed to promoting peace talks. He did not call the Russia-Ukraine war a war. He stressed that “the earlier peace talks resume, the less damage for all sides.”[27] Bloomberg reported that Wang rejected Ukraine’s proposal for high-level peace talks in March, however, claiming that conditions were not ripe for parties to go back to the negotiating table. This comment was absent from the official PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) readout of his statements and contradicts Wang’s statement that peace talks should resume as early as possible.[28]
The PRC’s conflicting messaging about the Russia-Ukraine War reflects a strategy to balance support for Russia with attracting Western investment while avoiding Western sanctions. Wang Yi falsely stated about the “Ukraine crisis” that the PRC “did not sit back and watch, let alone take advantage of the opportunity to make profits.”[29] This is exactly what the PRC has done by selling military or dual-use products to Russia and buying Russian fuel at cheap prices during the war.[30] Wang warned world leaders that “de-Sinicizing” in the name of economic “de-risking” would be a “historic mistake.”[31] His economic messaging to incentivize Western investment in the PRC plays on his inaccurate security message to the West that the PRC is a necessary “responsible major country” that implicitly has leverage over the Russians it would willingly use. The PRC MFA readouts of Wang’s meetings with US Secretary of State Antony Blinken, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, as well as subsequent visits to Spain and France after the conference all align with this message by portraying the PRC as desiring economic exchanges with each of these countries.[32] The PRC has lifted travel barriers with several European countries and urged Western countries to stop sanctions and “de-risking” measures against PRC companies.[33]
Three of the PRC’s “Big Four” state banks stopped accepting payments from Western-sanctioned Russian financial institutions. The Industrial and Commercial Bank of China (ICBC), China Construction Bank (CCB), and Bank of China have rejected payments from sanctioned Russian banks since the start of 2024. Russian newspaper Izvestia reported that the PRC banks began introducing restrictions in December 2023 after the European Union imposed its 12th sanctions package against Russia and the United States authorized secondary sanctions on financial institutions that helped Russia evade sanctions. An unnamed Russian source told Izvestia that ICBC and CCB were rejecting the payments regardless of which system they went through: Europe’s SWIFT, Russia’s SPFS, or the PRC’s CIPS. Other PRC banks have also tightened compliance checks.[34] Zhejiang Chouzhou Commercial Bank, the main PRC bank used by Russian importers, suspended all business with Russian and Belarusian clients including those not under sanctions. The Russian business newspaper Vedomosti reported that Russian businesses feared a “logistics collapse.”[35]
Southeast Asia
The PRC deployed a People’s Liberation Army (PLA) detachment to monitor a joint US-Philippines air force patrol over the South China Sea. The PRC’s Southern Theater Command accused the Philippines of “enlisting foreign countries” to create trouble in the South China Sea and stated that it sent air and naval forces to “closely monitor the situation.”[36] The Philippines Air Force stated that the patrol occurred within the Philippines’ exclusive economic zone (EEZ), 90 nautical miles west of its largest island Luzon.[37] The PRC’s actions belong to a trend of increasingly confrontational posture in the South China Sea to undermine the Philippines’ sovereignty over the waters immediately west of its territory.
The CCG twice claimed that it expelled Philippines Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources (BFAR) vessels from the waters around Scarborough Shoal on February 15 and 22.[38] The Philippines denied both claims, stating that the ships in question continued to patrol the area to ensure the security of Filipino fishermen.[39] The Philippines regularly deploys BFAR vessels alongside the Philippines Coast Guard to deliver food and supplies to Filipino fishermen around contested features in the South China Sea’s Spratly Islands. The PRC’s claims resemble earlier CCG statements that it “allowed” the Philippines to airdrop supplies to Filipino troops on Second Thomas Shoal on January 21. The Philippines denied that it required anyone’s permission to conduct its activities on the shoal.[40] The PRC regularly attempts to intercept and prevent the Philippines’ resupply missions to the Second Thomas Shoal.
Oceania
Compacts of Free Association
The loss of Compacts of Free Association (COFA) funding for Palau, Micronesia, and the Marshall Islands risks United States control of key sea lines of communication (SLOC) in East Asia. These COFAs govern the United States’ relationship with Palau, Micronesia, and the Marshall Islands while granting the United States extensive military access throughout their territories. The United States renewed COFAs with Palau and Micronesia in May.[41] It then did so with the Marshall Islands in October.[42] Congress previously funded the COFAs for a twenty-year period in 2003.[43] That funding has now expired. The newly re-signed COFA agreements are now before Congress for funding consideration in the form of H.J.Res.96 and S.J.Res.48.[44] The total cost for all three of the twenty-year agreements would be roughly $7 billion spread over the period 2024 to 2043, according to the Congressional Research Service.[45]
The loss of funding also threatens the continuation of the Ronald Reagan Ballistic Missile Defense Test Site in Micronesia, the Department of Defense high-frequency radar system under construction in Palau, as well as the opportunity for the United States Air Force Agile Combat Employment operations to take place in Micronesia.[46]
The loss of COFA funding also threatens the security of key SLOCs for the United States that provide a secure route connecting American allies and partners, such as the Philippines and Taiwan, to the US territory of Guam and the state of Hawaii. The United States Indo-Pacific Command (USINDOPACOM) defines SLOCs as “the principal maritime routes between ports, as used for trade, military, or other purposes.”[47]
The loss of Compact of Free Association (COFA) funding for Palau, Micronesia, and the Marshall Islands presents opportunities for the People’s Republic of China to fill the gap in funding to threaten the SLOCs. COFA funding accounts for $36.9 million of Palau’s annual $124.2 million revenue as of fiscal year 2023 and $35.2 million of the Marshall Islands’ annual $173.9 million revenue as of fiscal year 2023.[48],[49] The Presidents of Palau, Micronesia, and the Marshall Islands sent a letter to the leaders of the United States Senate on February 6 stating that they “cannot overstate the importance to all of our nations of final approval [of COFA funding] by the U.S. Congress” and that its delay “has resulted in undesirable opportunities for economic exploitation by competitive political actors active in the Pacific.”[50] “Competitive political actors” is a veiled reference to the Chinese Communist Party.
Tuvalu
Tuvalu is considering reviewing its diplomatic ties with Taiwan after electing its new prime minister.[52] The sixteen representatives elected on January 26, 2024, who comprise the Parliament of Tuvalu, planned to choose a prime minister the week of February 5. Poor weather conditions continue to delay the vote, however, by preventing four elected members of parliament from reaching the capital Funafuti.[53] Tuvalu has not set a new date for the election of the new prime minister.
China-Taiwan Weekly Update, February 15, 2024
Click here to read the full report
Authors: Nils Peterson, Matthew Sperzel, and Daniel Shats of the Institute for the Study of War
Editors: Dan Blumenthal and Frederick W. Kagan of the American Enterprise Institute
Data Cutoff: February 13 at 5pm EST
Key Takeaways
- Taiwan’s Tourism Administration canceled plans to resume group tours to the PRC on March 1 in response to the CCP changing a commercial flight route over the Taiwan Strait.
- Eight PRC high-altitude balloons that crossed the median line in the Taiwan Strait two days in a row on February 9 and 10 are likely part of a campaign to test and erode Taiwan’s military readiness.
- US and foreign partner cybersecurity and intelligence agencies confirmed in a joint advisory on February 7 that a PRC state-sponsored cyber threat actor infiltrated critical infrastructure organizations in the continental United States and US territories.
- Philippines Defense Secretary Gilberto Teodoro Jr. called for a stronger Philippines military presence in the northern Batanes Islands on February 6. The People’s Liberation Army routinely sends naval ships through the Bashi channel between the Batanes and Taiwan.
- The loss of Compact of Free Association (COFA) funding for Palau, Micronesia, and the Marshall Islands presents opportunities for the People’s Republic of China to fill the gap in funding.
- The PRC and Russia held “interagency consultations” on February 1 to discuss military applications of artificial intelligence (AI).
Cross-Strait Relations
Taiwan
Taiwan’s Tourism Administration canceled plans to resume group tours to the PRC on March 1 in response to the CCP changing a commercial flight route over the Taiwan Strait. The PRC’s Civil Aviation Administration unilaterally changed the M503 domestic north-south flight route to fly within 7.8 kilometers of the median line in the Taiwan Strait. The median line serves as a de facto boundary between the PRC and Taiwan. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) does not recognize the median line and denies its existence.[1] The change took effect on February 1 without consulting Taiwan’s government.[2] The CCP’s Taiwan Affairs Office (TAO) claimed that the move will alleviate air traffic congestion. Taiwan’s Mainland Affairs Council (MAC) said that the move posed safety risks and accused the CCP of using commercial air travel to change the status quo in the Taiwan Strait, however.[3] Taiwan’s Tourism Administration responded on February 7 by telling travel agencies to stop organizing group tours to the PRC. The Tourism Administration had planned to resume group tours from Taiwan to the PRC on March 1 for the first time since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic in January 2020. Taiwan’s government will permit tours already organized from March 1 to May 31 to proceed, however.[4] Taiwan Vice President and President-elect Lai Ching-te said that the PRC had not shown the requisite goodwill necessary to conduct friendly tourism exchanges.[5]
Taiwanese tour operator associations visited the Kuomintang (KMT) headquarters on February 8 to express their opposition to the cancellation of group tours because it harms their business. The tour operators said they may stage protests at Lai Ching-te’s inauguration on May 20 if the government does not change the policy. About one-third of the annual 17 million overseas trips by Taiwanese nationals were to the PRC before the pandemic. Group tours accounted for approximately half of those trips.[6]
The KMT and CCP have seized on this policy to criticize the DPP. Former KMT vice presidential candidate Jaw Shaw-kong accused Lai and the DPP of breaking pre-election promises to reopen group travel to the PRC and of unfairly harming the local travel sector.[7] TAO spokesperson Zhu Fenglian said that the resumption of the ban on group tours was an instance of the DPP’s “political manipulation of tourism,” would harm the economic interests of both sides of the strait, and would lead to popular dissatisfaction with the DPP in Taiwan.[8]
Eight PRC high-altitude balloons that crossed the median line in the Taiwan Strait two days in a row on February 9 and 10 are likely part of a campaign to test and erode Taiwan’s military readiness. At least two of the eight balloons on February 9 and at least six of the eight balloons on February 10 flew directly over the island of Taiwan.[9] Eight balloons crossing the median line in the Taiwan Strait in one day is a record high since Taiwan’s Ministry of National Defense (MND) started publicly tracking such balloons in December 2023. Six balloons flying directly over Taiwan in one day is also a record high. The balloons flew at altitudes ranging from 12,000 to 38,000 feet.[10]
The spike in the number of balloons passing over the median line on February 9 and 10 coincided with the beginning of the Lunar New Year celebrations in Taiwan and the PRC. The CCP may be using increased balloon incursions during the holiday to further strain Taiwan’s resources. The balloon activities are consistent with ISW’s assessment that the CCP is trying to normalize using balloons in tandem with other aerial and naval violations of Taiwan’s Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) as part of a broader effort to wear down Taiwan’s resources and threat awareness.[11]
The CCP’s Taiwan Affairs Office claimed on January 31 that such balloons were “mostly” launched by private enterprises and “mostly” for “livelihood purposes such as meteorological monitoring.”[12] Retired Taiwanese Air Force General Chang Yen-ting warned that even standard meteorological balloons could provide useful data about conditions around Taiwan to help plan air and naval operations against Taiwan, however.[13]
China
US and foreign partner cybersecurity and intelligence agencies confirmed in a joint advisory on February 7 that a PRC state-sponsored cyber threat actor infiltrated critical infrastructure organizations in the continental United States and US territories.[14] The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), National Security Agency (NSA), and Five Eyes cybersecurity agencies co-authored the report, which detailed the PRC state-sponsered cyber threat actor known as Volt Typhoon's extensive penetration of critical infrastructure organizations. The authoring agencies assessed with high confidence that Volt Typhoon’s goal was to develop the capability to disrupt key operational technology (OT) functions in the event of a conflict with the United States by leveraging its access to informational technology (IT) environments. OT systems are made up of software and hardware that control physical equipment and processes. The advisory did not specify the compromised targets but stated that CISA, FBI, and NSA observed compromises in the IT networks of organizations spanning sectors such as communications, energy, transportation, and water management systems. The advisory highlighted Volt Typhoon’s focus on gathering intelligence to facilitate access to OT assets, which can be leveraged to conduct follow-on offensive operations with physical impacts. The advisory revealed that Volt Typhoon potentially gained access to files that interact with critical infrastructure facilities, including an electrical substation and water treatment plants. The advisory divulged that Volt Typhoon may have maintained access to some targets for at least five years.
Microsoft also released a report in May 2023, in which it assessed Volt Typhoon was pursuing the capability to disrupt “critical communications infrastructure” between the US and the Asia region in a potential crisis.[15] Volt Typhoon’s infiltration of networks in Guam supports the notion that sabotage is a primary motive for the PRC’s hacking. Guam is strategically positioned between the continental US and Southeast Asia and is home to several military bases whose forces would play a significant role in a potential conflict with the PRC. A disruption of communication would significantly degrade the US military’s ability to respond to a crisis in Asia and deploy its forces to the region.
Southeast Asia
Philippines
Philippines Defense Secretary Gilberto Teodoro Jr. called for a stronger Philippines military presence in the northern Batanes Islands on February 6. The Batanes are the northernmost Philippines islands and are less than 125 miles from Taiwan. The Bashi Channel between the Batanes and Taiwan is a strategically important bottleneck that funnels maritime traffic between the South China Sea and the Western Pacific. The People’s Liberation Army (PLA) routinely sends naval ships through the channel and aircraft over it to exert military pressure on Taiwan. The PLA’s Shandong aircraft carrier strike group sailed through the Bashi Channel at least four times in the last 12 months during deployments to and from the Western Pacific, for example.[16] Teodoro called for the development of more structures on the Batanes, calling the islands the “spearhead” of the Philippines’ northern baseline.[17] He also announced that the “operational tempo” for the AFP (Armed Forces of the Philippines) will be higher in 2024. Teodoro made the comments while visiting the Batanes’ naval detachment, where he also observed the ongoing construction of the Naval Forward Operating Base Mahatao.
Teodoro’s comments sparked criticism from the PRC. PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) spokesperson Wang Wenbin stated on February 8 that the Philippines needs to understand that the “Taiwan question… is a red line that must not be crossed,” and urged the Philippines to “tread carefully and not play with fire.”[18] The PRC’s response underscores that the CCP views the Philippines' military presence on the island as a provocation that threatens its military’s operability around Taiwan. The Philippines Department of National Defense responded to Wang’s statements, declaring that “China should refrain from engaging in provocative rhetoric and activities if it truly wants to earn widespread trust and respect that it is trying so hard to gain but has, so far, been unable to.”[19]
The PRC’s China Coast Guard (CCG) spokesperson Gan Yu stated that a Philippines Coast Guard (PCG) vessel “intruded” into the waters around Scarborough Shoal from February 2–9.[20] Gan stated that the CCG intercepted and forcibly expelled the PCG vessel from the waters around the shoal. Gan claimed that the CCG’s actions were a lawful and justified response to uphold the PRC’s maritime rights and sovereignty. The Scarborough Shoal is a maritime feature in the South China Sea that the Philippines, the PRC, and Taiwan separately claim. The PRC has controlled the Scarborough Shoal since 2012 when it stationed a persistent Coast Guard presence there after instigating a maritime standoff with the Philippines.[21] The PCG published a statement saying that it monitored the presence of CCG and four Chinese Maritime Militia (CMM) vessels near Scarborough Shoal during a nine-day patrol to deliver food to Filipino fishermen.[22] The statement claimed the CCG vessels shadowed the PCG vessel on more than 40 occasions and performed blocking maneuvers by crossing the bow of the PCG vessel. PCG commander and spokesperson Jay Tarriela posted videos of the CCG blocking maneuvers on X.[23] Tarriela reiterated the Philippines’ sovereignty over the shoal and its surrounding waters per the 2016 arbitration by the Permanent Court of Arbitration in the Hague.
A contingent of the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) Southern Theater Command is participating in the multinational “Cobra Gold 2024” military exercise from February 10 to March 8 in Thailand. Cobra Gold is the world’s longest-running international military training program and one of the Indo-Pacific region’s largest combined military exercises. Troops from the seven main participants — the United States, Thailand, Malaysia, Singapore, Indonesia, South Korea, and Japan — will join combat rehearsals at five locations, including amphibious landings, strategic parachute jumps, ground and air live-fire drills, and cyber warfare. 2024 is the 11th consecutive year that the PLA will participate in the exercise. The PLA will not take part in combat drills but will join civic action missions with India.[24] Chinese military personnel will engage in activities such as engineering assistance, humanitarian rescue, disaster relief table-top exercises, high-level forums, as well as live drills in personnel search and rescue, water and fire rescue, chemical spill handling, and medical emergency aid. The PRC’s Ministry of Defense (MoD) said its participation aims to facilitate the exchange of experiences in rescue and disaster response among the participating militaries and further promote practical cooperation in related fields.[25]
Oceania
Compacts of Free Association
The loss of Compact of Free Association (COFA) funding for Palau, Micronesia, and the Marshall Islands presents opportunities for the People’s Republic of China to fill the gap in funding. These COFAs govern the United States’ relationship with Palau, Micronesia, and the Marshall Islands while granting the United States extensive military access throughout their territories. The United States renewed COFAs with Palau and Micronesia in May.[26] It then did so with the Marshall Islands in October.[27] Congress previously funded the COFAs for a twenty-year period in 2003.[28] That funding has now expired. The newly re-signed COFA agreements are now before Congress for funding consideration in the form of H.J.Res.96 and S.J.Res.48.[29] The total cost for all three of the twenty-year agreements would be roughly $7 billion spread over the period of 2024 to 2043, according to the Congressional Research Service.[30]
The loss of COFA funding prompted political leadership from Palau, Micronesia, and the Marshall Islands to warn of PRC opportunities to gain influence in their countries. Micronesian President Wesley Simina also stated in late November that his country would be at a “fiscal cliff” without US Congressional approval of COFA funding. This would mean that “we [Micronesia] will have to find different sources of funding… and that’s not out there available immediately.”[31] Marshall Islands President Hilda Heine also stated that the PRC is targeting her country: “A proposal to develop one of our atoll municipalities – if it were granted autonomy from our national government – that I opposed generated an effort to topple my government in our parliament.”[32] Palau President Surangel Whipps Jr. stated that “every day it [COFA] is not approved plays into the hands of the CCP [Chinese Communist Party] and the leaders here (some of whom have done ‘business’ with the PRC) who want to accept its seemingly attractive economic offers – at the cost of shifting alliances, beginning with sacrificing Taiwan.”[33]
COFA funding accounts for $36.9 million of Palau’s annual $124.2 million revenue as of fiscal year 2023 and $35.2 million of the Marshall Islands’ annual $173.9 million revenue as of fiscal year 2023.[34],[35] The Presidents of Palau, Micronesia, and the Marshall Islands sent a letter to the leaders of the United States Senate on February 6 stating that they “cannot overstate the importance to all of our nations of final approval [of COFA funding] by the U.S. Congress” and that its delay “has resulted in undesirable opportunities for economic exploitation by competitive political actors active in the Pacific.”[36]
COFA Funding as Share of Government Revenue in Freely Associated States[37]
The loss of COFA funding threatens the security of a key sea line of communication for the United States that provides a secure route connecting American allies and partners, such as the Philippines and Taiwan, to the US territory of Guam and the state of Hawaii. The loss of funding also threatens the continuation of the Ronald Reagan Ballistic Missile Defense Test Site in Micronesia, the Department of Defense high-frequency radar system under construction in Palau, as well as the opportunity for the United States Air Force Agile Combat Employment operations to take place in Micronesia.[38]
The opportunity for the CCP to gain economic leverage over the COFA countries also threatens US efforts to preserve the sovereignty of the Republic of China (Taiwan). Palau and the Marshall Islands are also 2 of the 12 countries that maintain official diplomatic relations with Taiwan.[39] The maintenance of official diplomatic recognition is a key means for Taiwan to demonstrate its international sovereignty separate from the People’s Republic of China. Palau President Surangel Whipps Jr also stated that “the PRC has already offered to ‘fill every hotel room’ in our tourism-based private sector – ‘and more if more are built – and $20 million a year for two acres for a ‘call center.’”[40] The uptick in flights from the PRC to Palau and the CCP encouraging PRC nationals to vacation in the country suggests that the party seeks economic influence over Palau to coerce it into switching diplomatic recognition from the ROC to the PRC. The number of flights from the PRC to Palau increased from one to eight per month last year to almost daily as of this month.[41],[42] This change is a reversal in the CCP policy that cut tourism to Palau over the last decade to nearly zero as punishment for maintaining full diplomatic relations with Taiwan.[43]
The CCP has a history of using economic incentives to convince Pacific Island countries to switch diplomatic recognition from the ROC to the PRC. The PRC offered incentives such as a commercial aircraft to Kiribati or USD 8.5 million to the Solomon Islands, both in 2019, to successfully incentivize them to switch diplomatic recognition from the ROC to the PRC.[44] Australia evacuated the refugees that it paid Nauru to host, which led to a budget shortfall.[45] The CCP then reportedly offered Nauru USD 100 million per year in 2024 to successfully switch recognition from the PRC to the ROC, according to a Reuters report that cited an unspecified senior Taiwanese official.[46]
Tuvalu
Tuvalu is considering reviewing its diplomatic ties with Taiwan after electing its new prime minister.[47] The sixteen representatives elected on January 26, 2024, who comprise the Parliament of Tuvalu, planned to choose a prime minister the week of February 5. Poor weather conditions have delayed the vote, however, by preventing four elected members of parliament from reaching the capital Funafuti.[48] Tuvalu has not set a new date for the election of the new prime minister.
Papua New Guinea
Australia successfully countered the People’s Republic of China (PRC)’s offer of internal security assistance to Papua New Guinea. Papua New Guinea received an offer of security assistance from the PRC in September 2023. Papua New Guinea Foreign Minister Justin Tkachenko stated during the week of January 29 that the offer of internal security assistance from the PRC is still under consideration without specifying the details of the offer.[49]
Papua New Guinea Prime Minister James Marape and Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese also announced on February 8 that Australia would fund AUD 100 million to the Australia-Papua New Guinea Law and Justice Partnership, which has a focus on internal security.[50] This made the PRC offer less attractive while also buttressing Marape’s chances of political survival. This announcement of Australian security assistance is a necessary political lifeline for Marape as he is set to face a vote of no confidence in at least a week due to the deadly riots in January that occurred amidst a police strike.[51]
Europe
Russia
The PRC and Russia held “interagency consultations” on February 1 to discuss military applications of artificial intelligence (AI). The Russian Foreign Ministry stated that the meeting highlighted the alignment of Russian and Chinese approaches to the military application of AI.[52] The South China Morning Post reported that the Chinese readout from the meeting did not mention the military application of AI, only “outer space security, biosecurity, and artificial intelligence.”[53] ISW has not been able to independently verify the PRC readout.
PRC-Russian cooperation in emerging AI technology is already materializing. Russian tech company Soft-Logic signed a distribution contract with PRC AI microchip manufacturer SophGo in early February. Soft-Logic CEO Denis Loginov stated that the company plans to develop and produce Russian artificial intelligence infrastructure using Chinese processors.[54] SophGo is developing a new high-performance chip based on designs from the US company SiFive, which incorporates an open-source chip architecture known as RISC-V. US Senators Marco Rubio and Mark Warner encouraged the Biden administration in October to broaden export controls to include open-source semiconductor designs to prevent the PRC from surpassing US companies.[55]
Middle East
Iran
PRC Deputy Foreign Minister Ma Zhaoxu and Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Ali Bagheri Kani discussed the Red Sea and the Iranian nuclear issue. Their meeting occurred on February 8. Ma framed the Houthi attacks in the Red Sea as a spillover from the “Gaza conflict,” which is a narrative that absolves Iranian partners and proxy groups of blame for instigating regional tensions.[56] Ma’s comments are consistent with previous PRC rhetoric insofar as they do not condemn Houthi aggression or call on the Houthis to stop their attacks on maritime shipping.
The PRC and Iranian readouts of the meeting both emphasized the resolution of the Iranian nuclear issue through political and diplomatic channels.[57] The PRC avoided condemning or approving the increasing Iranian stockpile of 60 percent highly enriched uranium. This stockpile continues to increase even as Iran adjusts the rate of its 60 percent highly enriched uranium as tensions with the United States ebb and flow. [58]This level of highly enriched uranium can be used as fuel for a nuclear explosive device. The PRC position is consistent with CCP General Secretary Xi Jinping’s February statement after a meeting with Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi that emphasized diplomacy as a means to resolve the Iran nuclear issue.[59]
Africa
Gabon and Equatorial Guinea
The CCP seeks port access in Gabon and Equatorial Guinea for military purposes, which would enhance the People’s Liberation Army Navy's (PLAN’s) power projection capacity. The Wall Street Journal reported on February 10 that the CCP is attempting to convince leadership in Gabon and Equatorial Guinea to grant it military access to ports.[60] The CCP has targeted Equatorial Guinea as a potential military port to gain access to since at least 2021.[61] This CCP effort led then-Commander United States Africa Command Stephen Townsend to state to a House Armed Service Committee hearing in March 2022 that “the thing I think I’m most worried about is this military base on the Atlantic coast, and where they [the CCP] have the most traction for that today is in Equatorial Guinea.”[62] A PLAN port in either of these countries on the Atlantic would enhance the PLAN’s power projection capacity.
Latin America
Guatemala
Guatemala is considering trade relations with the People’s Republic of China (PRC) while attempting to maintain formal diplomatic relations with the Republic of China (Taiwan).[63] Guatemalan President Bernardo Arévalo stated on February 8 that he does not intend to switch diplomatic recognition from the ROC to the PRC.[64] PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs Spokesman Wang Wenbin’s February 6 statement that Guatemala would need to recognize the one-China principle to “conduct cooperation” between the two countries underscores the difficulty Arévalo will face holding that position.[65] The one-China principle is the People’s Republic of China’s position that it is the sole legitimate representative of China and that Taiwan is a part of China. Guatemala accepting the PRC’s one-China principle would mean breaking its relations with Taiwan.
Guatemala and Belize are the only countries in Central America that recognize the Republic of China. The other five Central American countries broke relations with the Republic of China between 2007 and 2023. Guatemala and Belize are also 2 of the 12 countries, including Vatican City, that recognize the ROC.
The CCP’s efforts to diplomatically isolate the ROC are part of a campaign to degrade the ROC’s legitimacy on the international stage. The loss of full diplomatic relations for the ROC supports the CCP’s attempts to increase pressure on Taiwan to unify with the PRC without prompting an international backlash. Undermining international recognition of the ROC buttresses the CCP’s argument that the ROC is not a state, but rather a province of the PRC.
China-Taiwan Weekly Update, February 8, 2024
Click here to read the full report
Authors: Nils Peterson, Matthew Sperzel, and Daniel Shats of the Institute for the Study of War
Editors: Dan Blumenthal and Frederick W. Kagan of the American Enterprise Institute
Data Cutoff: February 6 at 5pm ET
Key Takeaways
- The Kuomintang (KMT) will present a series of policy proposals to the Legislative Yuan on February 20 that aim to expand legislative oversight over the presidency. The proposals presage what will likely be a contentious dynamic between the KMT and the Democratic Progressive Party in the legislature.
- The CCP denied allegations that it carried out cyberattacks against the United States, Japan, the Philippines, and the Netherlands.
- The New York Times reported on February 4 that the rapid growth of the PRC’s nuclear arsenal under CCP General Secretary Xi Jinping reflects a shift in the party’s thinking on nuclear deterrence.
- The PRC is intensifying its information operations to support its claims in the South China Sea.
- The loss of Compact of Free Association funding for Palau, Micronesia, and the Marshall Islands presents opportunities for the CCP to expand its influence in each country. The CCP may leverage revenue shortfalls in Palau and the Marshall Islands to incentivize them to switch diplomatic recognition from Taiwan to the PRC.
- CCP and Russian officials held collaboration talks on the military application of artificial intelligence (AI) in early February.
- The People’s Liberation Army Navy is providing security escorts to PRC cargo ships near the Red Sea amid ongoing Houthi missile attacks on shipping in the region.
Cross-Strait Relations
Taiwan
The Kuomintang (KMT) will present a series of policy proposals to the Legislative Yuan (LY) when the new session begins on February 20. The proposals center around empowering the LY to confirm the appointment of cabinet ministers and the creation of an oversight mechanism in the LY to impose checks and balances on the executive branch. Strengthening the LY's confirmation power over political appointments risks opposition parties rejecting Lai's cabinet picks, which could degrade the Lai administration's ability to carry out policies. Using such political oversight to restrain the DPP’s power could also exacerbate polarization and erode public trust in the government.
The KMT’s proposals presage what will likely be a contentious dynamic between the KMT and the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) during Lai Ching-te’s presidency. KMT caucus members have indicated that their party will aggressively attempt to restrain the DPP’s power. KMT caucus Secretary-General Lin Tzu-ming accused the DPP of corruption during the last eight years of Tsai’s presidency and emphasized the futility of bringing cases to the Ministry of Justice or the Control Yuan, which is the Taiwanese government’s supervisory branch. Lin referred to the future oversight mechanism as a “great weapon” that the Legislative Yuan must use to supervise the government.[1] KMT Legislator Wu Tsung-hsien also stressed the importance of LY confirmation for ministerial positions and other high-level posts, potentially posing a threat to Lai’s administration before his inauguration on May 20.[2]
DPP-led restorative justice initiatives are in part responsible for the fraught KMT-DPP relationship. The DPP, under President Tsai Ing-wen, focused on rectifying misconduct and crimes during Taiwan’s KMT-imposed authoritarian rule from 1945 to 1992. The DPP-majority legislature established the temporary Transitional Justice Commission to increase public access to political archives, redress judicial injustices, and dismantle symbols of authoritarianism.[3] The commission operated from 2018 to 2022. The KMT regarded the commission as a tool of political persecution and power expansion.[4] The KMT strengthened its criticism of the commission after revelations the then-vice chairman of the commission, a DPP member, sought to use its authority to eliminate officials who held positions of power during KMT authoritarian rule, such as then-New Taipei City Mayor Hou You-ih.[5] The scandal fueled KMT accusations that the DPP weaponized government institutions against political opponents, including the Central Election Commission and the Ill-gotten Party Assets Settlement Committee.[6] The latter oversaw the confiscation of a large share of KMT assets since its inception in 2016.[7] KMT Deputy Secretary-General Lo Chih-chiang stated that the proposed investigative task force would not discriminate between parties, indicating the KMT did not intend to exact retribution against the DPP.[8]
The KMT’s apparent inclination to impose checks on the DPP aligns with the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) desire to foment disarray during Lai’s presidency and undermine the DPP. Constraints on Lai and the DPP will curb the government’s efficiency and degrade the DPP’s ability to implement its policy agenda, which centers around resisting PRC efforts to undermine Taiwan’s sovereignty.
Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) Chairman Ko Wen-je announced that he will sue DPP spokesperson Justin Wu Cheng for spreading misinformation about his proposed TPP-DPP collusion in the election of the LY speaker. Wu circulated claims on February 2 that Ko contacted a DPP affiliate the night before the election to negotiate with Lai Ching-te. He said that Ko sought the DPP’s support for TPP LY speaker candidate Vivian Huang, in exchange for the TPP’s support for the DPP’s deputy speaker candidate.[9] The TPP nominated Huang in a surprise move earlier that day, which ultimately enabled KMT candidate Han Kuo-yu to secure victory in the second round of voting for the LY speaker. Independence activist and former DPP politician Chen Yung-hsing published an open letter after Wu’s statements revealing that he received the call from Ko, which confirms that the DPP convened to discuss the proposal but ultimately rejected it.[10] Ko has persisted in his accusations of misinformation against Wu.[11]
Acrimony between the TPP and DPP risks cooperation between the TPP and KMT in the Legislative Yuan. The TPP caucus announced a series of priority bills on February 5 that similarly proposed to strengthen the LY’s oversight authority, indicating the TPP will back KMT legislation to establish a task force.[12] The TPP’s eight seats in the LY position the party to be the crucial swing vote and could further complicate the passage of DPP policies. The TPP’s eight seats will make its votes the deciding factor for some legislation. TPP-KMT cooperation against the DPP in the LY aligns with the CCP’s interest in a weaker DPP.
DPP legislators are rushing to secure influence over the Legislative Yuan’s international engagement activities by signing up for diplomatic “friendship associations.” There were 73 friendship associations during the previous LY session that conducted parliamentary relations between Taiwan and other countries.[13] Some of the associations focus on specific issues of interest between Taiwan and foreign legislators and engage with international organizations.[14] The LY dissolves the associations at the end of each legislative session and forms new ones at the start of each session. The legislators that set up the new associations develop charters, invite members to join, and hold the founding meetings before officially establishing the associations can officially be established. The legislators that first accomplish these tasks can officially conduct relations with target foreign legislators on behalf of the LY.[15]
DPP legislator Chiu Chih-wei stated that the DPP is worried by Han’s embrace of the 1992 Consensus, and the legislature must work to uphold Taiwan’s sovereignty and democracy.[16] This reflects the DPP’s fears that LY Speaker Han Kuo-yu’s preference for warmer relations with the PRC will undermine Taiwan’s progress in deepening ties with foreign countries.
China
The United States, Japan, and the Netherlands said that the CCP targeted them in separate cyberattacks. The US Department of Justice (DOJ) said on January 31 that a court-ordered operation dismantled a botnet of hundreds of US-based small office/home office (SOHO) routers hijacked by PRC state-sponsored hackers. The DOJ said the hackers had used the routers to conceal the PRC origin of additional hacking activities that targeted critical infrastructure in the United States and elsewhere. FBI Director Christopher Wray said PRC hackers were targeting US critical infrastructure to “pre-position” so they could cause harm to US citizens in the event of a conflict.[17] Japanese media citing unspecified government sources reported on February 5 that a PRC cyberattack on Japan’s foreign ministry in 2020 resulted in the leak of classified diplomatic documents.[18] The Dutch Military Intelligence and Security Service said on February 6 that it uncovered a CCP-backed attempt to use “sophisticated” malware to spy on a computer network that’s used by the country’s armed forces. The malware was found on a standalone computer used for unclassified research and development and did not result in damage to the defense network.[19]
The Philippines also claimed it had been the target of hacking from within the PRC but did not attribute the cyberattack to the CCP. The Philippines Department of Information and Communications Technology (DICT) said on February 5 that hackers operating in the PRC failed to break into several official systems in January. The systems included its email systems, the website of the National Coast Watch, and the personal website of Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos, Jr. DICT did not attribute the attacks to any state but asked the PRC to help prevent further attacks.[20]
The CCP denied allegations that it carried out cyberattacks against the United States, Japan, the Philippines, and the Netherlands. Officials from the PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) denied the allegations as “smears” and claimed that the PRC opposes and cracks down on all cyberattacks. MFA Spokesperson Wang Wenbin said the United States jumped to conclusions without valid evidence to smear the PRC. He called the United States the “origin and biggest perpetrator of cyberattacks” and accused the US Government of sponsoring long-running cyberattacks against the PRC’s critical infrastructure.[21] He did not make counter-allegations against the Japanese, Philippine, and Dutch governments but reiterated that the PRC opposes cyberattacks and groundless accusations against it.[22] The PRC embassy in Manila decried “groundless” and “irresponsible” speculation by some Philippine politicians and media that the thwarted hacking attempts were sponsored by the PRC government or related to ongoing PRC-Philippine maritime disputes.[23]
The New York Times reported on February 4 that the rapid growth of the PRC’s nuclear arsenal under CCP General Secretary Xi Jinping reflects a shift in the party’s thinking on nuclear deterrence. The article assessed that “anxiety and ambition” motivated the PRC’s rapid nuclear arsenal expansion under CCP General Secretary Xi Jinping based on internal Xi speeches, internal CCP documents, and scholarly writings. Xi asserted to generals of the Second Artillery Corps shortly after he took power in late 2012 that a first-rate nuclear force was a symbol of the PRC’s “great power” status and that the nuclear force should be prepared to counter a “powerful enemy.” Xi reorganized the Second Artillery Corps into the PLA Rocket Force in 2015 and said its mission was to enhance “a credible and reliable nuclear deterrent and nuclear counterstrike capability.” The CCP also fears “nuclear blackmail” by the United States, based on official party accounts of the Korean War and crises over Taiwan during the 1950s.
The CCP may use its nuclear arsenal to deter US intervention in a war over Taiwan. The expanding PRC arsenal of nuclear missiles, submarines, and bombers also confer more nuclear strike options to the CCP. PRC nuclear weapons threaten US cities as well as military bases in the Pacific region.[24]
A Bulletin of Atomic Scientists report on January 15 estimated that the PRC’s nuclear arsenal had doubled to 500 warheads since Xi Jinping took power. The US Department of Defense’s 2021 and 2022 China Military Power Reports predicted that the PRC could reach 1,000 warheads by 2030 and 1,500 warheads by 2035.[25]
Northeast Asia
Japan
The Japan Coast Guard found a PRC buoy floating upside down in Japan’s exclusive economic zone (EEZ), roughly 170 kilometers northwest of the disputed Senkaku Islands. Japan controls the uninhabited Senkaku Islands, but the PRC and Taiwan also claim the islands, calling them Diaoyu in Chinese. Japanese media reported that the chain holding the buoy in place likely broke, causing it to drift.[26] Director-General of the Japanese Foreign Ministry's Asian and Oceanian Affairs Bureau Hiroyuki Namazu called on the PRC to remove all of its buoys from Japan’s exclusive economic zone.[27] PRC MFA spokesperson Wang Wenbin claimed this buoy was originally placed in waters near the Yangtze River estuary but drifted on its own due to “technical failure.” Wang used the occasion to add that the Diaoyu (Senkaku) islands are PRC territory and that the PRC does not recognize Japan’s exclusive economic zone, however.[28] The PRC has not complied with Japan’s request to remove the buoy.
Japan previously discovered another PRC buoy in its EEZ about 80 kilometers northwest of the Senkaku Islands in July 2023 and demanded its removal. It judged that the earlier buoy was likely placed by a PRC research vessel operating in the nearby waters.[29] The Japan Coast Guard believes that the PRC uses such buoys to monitor ocean conditions to aid PRC Coast Guard vessels in patrolling waters around the Senkaku Islands. The PRC has not complied with Japan’s requests to remove the buoy.[30]
PRC Coast Guard vessels have sailed within the Senkaku islands’ territorial waters nearly every day since 2013, the year that the PRC declared an Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) in the East China Sea that overlaps with Japan’s ADIZ.[31] The PRC sends scientific, commercial, law enforcement, and other non-military vessels and personnel to assert PRC territorial claims in the East and South China Seas while controlling the risk of military confrontation with rival claimants. Japan’s Yomiuri Shimbun newspaper reported on January 28 that the PRC also has at least three warships deployed at all times on the borders of its claimed ADIZ, which includes the Senkaku Islands. It cited unnamed Japanese government sources, who said that the PRC is enforcing a perimeter that could be used to deny access to US and Japanese naval vessels in the event of a Taiwan contingency.[32]
Southeast Asia
Philippines
The PRC Coast Guard claimed that it allowed another Philippine shipment of supplies to the Second Thomas Shoal but drove away Philippine vessels approaching Scarborough Shoal. The Second Thomas Shoal and Scarborough Shoal are maritime features in the South China Sea that the Philippines, the PRC, and Taiwan separately claim. The PRC has controlled the Scarborough Shoal since 2012,[33] while the Philippines retains control over the Second Thomas Shoal using a derelict grounded warship as a base. The CCG claimed that it “monitored” a Philippine resupply mission to Second Thomas Shoal on February 3.[34] The Chinese Coast Guard (CCG) previously claimed that it had made “temporary special arrangements” to allow a similar resupply mission on January 21, though the Philippines denied that it needed outside permission to deliver supplies to its troops.[35] Institute of Maritime Strategy Studies of the China Institute of Contemporary International Relations (CICIR) Deputy Director Yang Xiao claimed that the PRC was exercising restraint and showing “humanitarian spirit” in allowing the Philippines to deliver subsistence supplies to its troops on Second Thomas Shoal. Yang said the Philippines must inform Beijing in advance and cannot ship construction materials, however.[36] CICIR is a research institute operated by the PRC Ministry of State Security.
The CCG actions and statements aimed to assert PRC sovereignty over the Second Thomas Shoal, which the PRC calls Ren’ai Reef or Ren’ai Jiao. The CCG did not allow Philippine vessels to reach Scarborough Shoal, however. It claimed that it drove away four Philippine nationals who tried to “illegally intrude” into Scarborough Shoal on January 28 as well as a Philippine Coast Guard ship on February 5. CCG spokesperson Gan Yu claimed the PRC had “indisputable sovereignty” over Scarborough Shoal, which Beijing calls Huangyan Island, and would always conduct law enforcement and safeguard its rights and interests in waters under PRC jurisdiction.[37]
The Second Thomas Shoal was the site of confrontations between the Philippines and PRC in recent months. The two countries held bilateral maritime consultations on January 17 to de-escalate tensions. The PRC’s choice not to block the January 21 and February 3 resupply missions may indicate the PRC’s willingness to de-escalate tensions in the near term.[38] The PRC is determined to seize control of the Second Thomas Shoal and other disputed territories but is willing to be patient until an appropriate opportunity arises. As long as the CCG continues to block the Philippines from delivering construction equipment to the shoal, Manila will be unable to construct a more permanent outpost there or maintain the crumbling warship as a viable base for its troops.[39]
The PRC is intensifying its information operations to support its claims in the South China Sea. The Hong Kong-based South China Morning Post reported that the PRC has significantly increased its use of Mandarin pinyin names in English-language references to its claimed maritime features. It noted PRC government officials and state media have dramatically increased their use of terms such as “Ren’ai Jiao” for Second Thomas Shoal or “Nansha Qundao” for the Spratly Islands in 2023. It previously called these features Ren’ai Reef and Nansha Islands. The change is likely a way for the CCP to assert PRC sovereignty over the territories in English-language discourse.
The PRC has promoted its own legal arguments to reject the Philippines’ claims over disputed territories in the South China Sea. PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesperson Wang Wenbin said on February 2 that the Philippines’ territory was defined by a series of international treaties in 1898, 1900, and 1930, which did not include Scarborough Shoal within the Philippines’ legally defined boundaries. Wang also re-iterated the PRC’s rejection of the 2016 South China Sea arbitration that dismissed the PRC’s “Nine Dash Line” territorial claims over the South China Sea. Wang called the arbitration a “political manipulation” by the Philippines to gain “illegal interests.”[40] The PRC uses such legal arguments in tandem with more forceful or coercive tactics as a way to promote acceptance of PRC territorial claims in international discourse.
Oceania
Compacts of Free Association
The loss of Compact of Free Association (COFA) funding for Palau, Micronesia, and the Marshall Islands presents opportunities for the CCP to exert influence over strategically important states in the United States security architecture in East Asia. These COFAs govern the United States’ relationship with Palau, Micronesia, and the Marshall Islands while granting the United States extensive military access throughout their territories. The United States renewed COFAs with Palau and Micronesia in May.[41] It then did so with the Marshall Islands in October.[42] Congress previously funded the COFAs for a twenty-year period in 2003.[43] That funding has now expired. The newly re-signed COFA agreements are now before Congress for funding consideration. The total cost for all three of the twenty-year agreements would be roughly $7 billion spread over the period 2024 to 2043, according to the Congressional Research Service.[44]
The COFA states are important to the United States’ strategic interests because they control key sea lanes that provide a secure route connecting American allies and partners, such as the Philippines and Taiwan, to the US territory of Guam and the state of Hawaii.
The loss of COFA funding would present the CCP with the opportunity to pressure Palau and the Marshall Islands to switch diplomatic recognition from the ROC to the PRC as part of an ongoing campaign to buttress the narrative that Taiwan is a province of the PRC. Palau and the Marshall Islands are also 2 of the 12 countries that maintain official diplomatic relations with Taiwan.[45] The maintenance of official diplomatic recognition is a key means for Taiwan to demonstrate its international sovereignty separate from the People’s Republic of China. COFA funding accounts for $36.9 million of Palau’s annual $124.2 million revenue as of fiscal year 2023 and $35.2 million of the Marshall Islands’ annual $173.9 million revenue as of fiscal year 2023.[46],[47] Micronesian President Wesley Simina also stated in late November that his country would be at a “fiscal cliff” without US Congressional approval of COFA funding. This would mean that “we [Micronesia] will have to find different sources of funding… and that’s not out there available immediately.”[48] The Presidents of Palau, Micronesia, and the Marshall Islands sent a letter to the leaders of the United States Senate on February 6 stating that they “cannot overstate the importance to all of our nations of final approval [of COFA funding] by the U.S. Congress” and that its delay “has resulted in undesirable opportunities for economic exploitation by competitive political actors active in the Pacific.”[49]
The CCP may use these revenue shortfalls to incentivize Palau and the Marshall Islands to switch diplomatic recognition from Taiwan to the PRC. The party has already taken this approach to Nauru, Kiribati, and the Solomon Islands. The PRC offered incentives, such as a commercial aircraft, to Kiribati and USD 8.5 million to the Solomon Islands in 2019.[50] The CCP also offered Nauru USD 100 million per year in 2024 to switch recognition from the PRC to the ROC, according to a Reuters report that cited an unspecified senior Taiwanese official.[51] All three of these countries switched their diplomatic recognition from the ROC to the PRC.
The uptick in flights from the PRC to Palau and the CCP encouraging PRC nationals to vacation in the country suggests that the party seeks economic influence over Palau to coerce it into switching diplomatic recognition from the ROC to the PRC. The number of flights from the PRC to Palau increased from one to eight per month last year to almost daily as of this month.[52],[53] This change is a reversal in the CCP policy that cut tourism to Palau over the last decade to nearly zero as punishment for maintaining full diplomatic relations with Taiwan.[54]
Tuvalu
Tuvalu is considering reviewing its diplomatic ties with Taiwan after electing its new prime minister.[56] The sixteen representatives elected on January 26, 2024, who comprise the Parliament of Tuvalu, were aiming to choose a prime minister the week of February 5. Bad weather prevented an unspecified number of legislators from reaching the capital Funafuti, which delayed voting for the prime minister.[57]
Papua New Guinea
Papua New Guinea is considering internal security assistance from the People’s Republic of China. Papua New Guinea Foreign Minister Justin Tkachenko stated the week of January 29 that the offer is still under consideration. Tkachenko did not elaborate on the specifics of the PRC’s offer, which it initially proposed in September 2023.[58] PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs Spokesman Wang Wenbin neither confirmed nor denied the ongoing talks on January 29.[59] US Deputy Secretary of State for Management and Resources Richard Verma urged the PNG to reject the offer via a Sydney Morning Harald article published on February 5.[60]
Europe
Russia
Unspecified CCP and Russian officials held collaboration talks on the military application of artificial intelligence (AI) in early February. The Russian Foreign Ministry said that the officials “discussed doctrinal guidelines and initiatives of Russia and China related to the application of AI technologies for military purposes.”[61] The South China Morning Post reported that the People’s Republic of China's statement did not refer to the military use of AI, but acknowledged the meeting focused on “outer space security, biosecurity and artificial intelligence.”[62] ISW cannot independently verify the PRC statement. The PRC has portrayed itself as a leader in responsible AI regulation since launching the Global AI Governance Initiative in October 2023.[63] The PRC omitting that it is collaborating with Russia on the military applications of AI aims to avoid undercutting its image as a responsible AI stakeholder via this initiative.
This meeting occurred in the aftermath of the January 31 meeting about military-to-military cooperation between PRC Defense Minister Dong Jun and Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu.[64] The timing of the early February meeting indicates that it aimed at implementing the defense minister’s intentions about military-to-military cooperation. All of these meetings fit into a trend of concerted Sino-Russian technological collaboration since at least 2019.[65]
The People’s Liberation Army (PLA) is using AI to achieve its “intelligentization” force modernization goal, which aims to complexify and enhance the speed of warfare.[66] It also conceptualizes AI as an important tool for achieving decision dominance in the battlespace.[67] Sino-Russian AI cooperation supports this goal.
Middle East
The People’s Liberation Army Navy is providing security escorts to PRC cargo ships near the Red Sea amid ongoing Houthi missile attacks on shipping in the region.[68] The PRC Ministry of National Defense confirmed on February 5 that the Type 052D guided missile destroyer Urumqi from the People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) 45th escort task force had escorted a PRC ship through the Gulf of Aden.[69] The PLAN escort task force consists of the Urumqi, Type 054A guided missile frigate Linyi, and Type 903A replenishment ship Dongpinghu.[70] Commercial PRC-affiliated ships continue to signal their affiliation to avoid Houthi missile attacks.[71] PRC-owned ships are also receiving discounted shipping insurance when transiting through the Red Sea.[72]
These escorts enable the CCP to buttress the narrative that the PRC provides regional security in comparison to the allegedly provocative United States. The CCP continues to stress that US-led counter strikes on the Houthis and not the Houthi’s attacks on maritime shipping risk a wider regional escalation. PRC Ambassador to the European Union Fu Cong stated in a late January interview with Bloomberg that the US-led strikes against the Houthis “can only escalate tension and it’ll not guarantee or maintain the safe passage of the commercial vessels.”[73] The PLAN 45th escort task force providing safe passage to PRC ships demonstrates the contrast with the United States, from the CCP perspective, that Fu’s comments aim to portray: the PRC military presence does not lead to escalated regional tensions in implicit contrast to the United States.
Iraq
PRC Ambassador to Iraq Cui Wei met with Iraqi Prime Minister Mohammad Shia al-Sudani on February 5 to discuss the Strategic Development Road Project.[74] Iraq launched the project in May 2023 to connect the still incomplete Grand Faw Port to Turkey for commercial benefit.[75] Iraq joined the Belt and Road Initiative in September 2019, which resulted in agreements with PRC companies in October 2019 to rebuild Iraqi infrastructure in exchange for oil.[76] PRC discussions around the Strategic Development Road Project, either regarding its construction or financing, would align with the CCP's geopolitical objective to further the logistical infrastructure necessary for the Belt and Road Initiative.
Iran
Islamic Republic of Iran Navy Commander Shamran Irani announced on February 4 that Iran, Russia, and China will conduct joint naval exercises before the end of the Iranian year on March 19.[77] The exercises will be the continuation of a trend in the annual trilateral Marine Security Belt exercises, which have taken place since 2019. Several countries—such as Brazil, Pakistan, Oman, India, and South Africa, will participate as observers.[78] The People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) has not yet issued a statement confirming its attendance.
The US Department of Justice (DOJ) charged four PRC nationals for exporting US-origin electronic components to Iran and Iranian-backed militias through PRC-based front companies. The four individuals are Baoxia Liu (Emily Liu), You Wa Yung (Stephen Yung), Yongxin Li (Emma Lee), and Yanlai Zhong (Sydney Chung). The DOJ stated that the four individuals “unlawfully exported and smuggled U.S. export-controlled items through China and Hong Kong ultimately for the benefit of entities affiliated with the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and Ministry of Defense and Armed Forces Logistics (MODAFL), which supervises Iran’s development and production of missiles, weapons, and military aerial equipment to include Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs).”[79]
Gaza
The CCP expressed support for funding the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA). The US State Department temporarily paused funding to UNRWA on January 26 following evidence that its staff were involved in the October 7 attack.[80] PRC MFA Spokesman Wang Wenbin said that the international community should continue funding UNRWA to avoid furthering the “collective punishment” of Gazans. He also stated that the PRC supports an investigation into claims of UNRWA employees involved in the October 7 attack.[81]
The PRC is currently pursuing a diplomatic line of effort that aims to supplant US influence with Arab states by proposing what it claims to be a more inclusive and cooperative regional security framework.[82] This involves portraying Washington as a self-interested and destabilizing influence in the region while simultaneously positioning Beijing as an altruistic and unbiased actor.[83] Wang’s comments support this effort by insinuating countries that cut off aid to UNRWA, such as the United States, are responsible for the “collective punishment” of Gazans.
Latin America
Guatemala
Guatemala is considering trade relations with the People’s Republic of China (PRC) while attempting to maintain formal diplomatic relations with the Republic of China (Taiwan).[84] Guatemala Foreign Minister Carlos Ramiro Martínez stated on February 6 that “this is not an ambush against Taiwan or the United States.”[85] PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs Spokesman Wang Wenbin then stated on February 6 then state that Guatemala would need to recognize the one-China principle to “conduct cooperation” between the two countries.[86] The one-China principle is the People’s Republic of China’s position that it is the sole legitimate representative of China and that Taiwan is a part of China. Guatemala accepting the PRC’s one-China principle would mean breaking its relations with the Republic of China (ROC).
Guatemala and Belize are the only countries in Central America that recognize the Republic of China. The other five Central American countries broke relations with the Republic of China between 2007 and 2023. Guatemala and Belize are also 2 of the 12 countries, including Vatican City, that recognize the ROC.
The CCP’s efforts to diplomatically isolate the ROC are part of a campaign to degrade the ROC’s legitimacy on the international stage. The loss of full diplomatic relations for the ROC supports the CCP’s attempts to increase pressure on Taiwan to unify with the PRC without prompting an international backlash. Undermining international recognition of the ROC buttresses the CCP’s argument that the ROC is not a state, but rather a province of the PRC.
China-Taiwan Weekly Update February 2, 2024
Click here to read the full report
Authors: Nils Peterson, Matthew Sperzel, and Daniel Shats of the Institute for the Study of War
Editors: Dan Blumenthal and Frederick W. Kagan of the American Enterprise Institute
Information Cutoff: February 1 at 9am ET
Key Takeaways
- Kuomintang legislator Han Kuo-yu was elected speaker of Taiwan’s Legislative Yuan on February 1.
- PRC Ministry of Defense and state media criticized comments from NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg about the PRC’s threat to Europe and the prospects for a PRC invasion of Taiwan.
- The PRC Ministry of Defense confirmed ongoing coordination with the US military about the next meeting under the Military Maritime Consultative Agreement.
- The PRC and Russia held several high-level minister exchanges to enhance “strategic coordination,” which support the PRC’s effort to challenge the US alliance system in the Indo-Pacific.
- The PRC Coast Guard claimed it had “allowed” the Philippines to airdrop supplies to Philippine troops on Second Thomas Shoal on January 21.
- A loss of Compacts of Free Association (COFA) funding for Palau, Micronesia, and the Marshall Islands would enable the CCP to expand its leverage points over these countries.
- The PRC is engaging diplomatically with North Korea to undermine United States-South Korea security ties for the PRC’s benefit.
- The PRC contacted Iran to restrain the Houthi’s attacks on maritime shipping in the Red Sea. The outreach did not slow or stop the Houthi attack campaign.
- CCP General Secretary Xi Jinping accepted credentials from Taliban Ambassador to China Bilal Karimi on January 30.
Taiwan
The Legislative Yuan (LY) elected Kuomintang (KMT) legislature Han Kuo-yu speaker of the legislature on February 1. Han received all 52 KMT votes and 2 others from independent legislators in the second round of voting. No candidate secured a majority during the first round.[1] The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) nominated incumbent Legislative Yuan Speaker You Si-kun, who received 51 votes from DPP legislators. You had been the speaker of the Legislative Yuan since 2020. The Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) nominated one of its eight legislators, Vivian Huang, and voted unanimously for her.[2] The TPP abstained in the second round of voting. Huang was an unexpected addition to the race, as the TPP had indicated that it would support the DPP or KMT in exchange for political concessions. The potential to secure the TPP’s backing fueled competition between the two parties to appease the TPP until the party announced Huang’s candidacy on January 31.[3] The TPP’s last-minute participation in the LY speaker race caused controversy within the DPP, which viewed the move as an ultimatum to tear DPP support away from its candidate by those who advocated preventing Han’s victory at any cost.
Han is a divisive figure in Taiwanese politics, notorious for his Beijing-friendly platform that contributed to popular dissatisfaction with his incumbency and subsequent removal from office as mayor of Kaohsiung in 2020.[4] Han held closed-door meetings with CCP officials during an unannounced trip to Shenzhen, PRC, and Hong Kong during his mayorship in 2019. Han met with then director of the Taiwan Affairs Office (TAO) Liu Jieyi and CCP Chief for Shenzhen Wang Weizhong. Han also met the director of the PRC’s liaison office, which manages relations with Hong Kong.[5] Han’s meeting with CCP officials drew public criticism for endangering national security and breaking with official protocol for engaging with PRC officials.[6] Han’s meeting preceded a turbulent period in Hong Kong society that resulted in the PRC’s erosion of Hong Kong’s political autonomy and civil liberties by the PRC. Hong Kong’s plight earned widespread sympathy in Taiwan, intensifying criticism of Han.[7]
The KMT’s victory will strengthen its influence over policymaking during Lai Ching-te’s incoming administration. The speaker is responsible for guiding legislative processes, such as setting the agenda, voting on laws, and presiding over sessions. Control over legislative proceedings enables the speaker to prioritize or delay legislation based on political alignment and adjudicate debates on policies proposed by the executive branch. The DPP led a minority government under President Chen Shui-bian from 2000 to 2008, during which the KMT-led opposition persistently blocked DPP policies, including arms procurement from the United States.[8] KMT Vice Chairman Sean Lien promised strong LY oversight of the DPP government under Han’s leadership.[9] KMT Caucus Whip Fu Kun-chi also warned that the KMT would strive to expose DPP corruption from the past eight years, portending an acrimonious relationship between the KMT and DPP during Lai’s presidency.[10]
The TPP’s eight seats in the LY position the party to be the crucial swing vote and could further complicate the passage of DPP policies. The KMT’s 52 seats plus two KMT-aligned independents and DPP’s 51 seats do not grant either a majority in the 113-member body. The TPP’s 8 seats will make its votes the deciding factor for some legislation.
Han’s position as the LY speaker also has ramifications for Taiwan’s international representation as the speaker represents Taiwan in a diplomatic capacity. Outgoing Speaker You Si-kun frequently met with foreign representatives during his tenure to advocate for Taiwan’s integration with the international community, deterrence of PRC aggression, and strengthening of democratic values. You’s diplomacy featured meetings with officials from key partners, including the United States, European Union, and Japan.[11] Han’s preference for warmer relations with Beijing and support for the 1992 Consensus suggests he will take a different diplomatic approach from You, who called attention to the PRC’s threat to cross-strait peace and highlighted Taiwan’s status as a sovereign polity. Han’s emphasis on the economy during his mayoral and presidential campaigns indicates he will use his platform to promote trade and investment opportunities, including with the PRC.[12] The Speaker of the LY also holds the chairmanship of the Taiwan Foundation for Democracy (TFD), a government-funded non-profit organization whose purpose is to promote democracy in Taiwan and abroad. DPP caucus whip Ker Chien-ming expressed his fear that PRC pressure on Han would constrain the LY’s diplomatic efforts, which he called the LY’s biggest responsibility.[13] Former Taiwanese diplomat Dale Jieh wen-chieh predicted that the DPP government would intentionally refrain from arranging for foreign guests to visit TFD under Han’s leadership to deprive him of a diplomatic platform.[14]
The PRC demonstrated its preference for Han as the LY speaker in a puff piece featured in the state media outlet CCTV on January 24. The program covered Han’s candidacy for speaker, emphasizing his support for the 1992 Consensus and his stance against being “pro-US and anti-China”.[15] The 1992 Consensus refers to a mutual understanding between the CCP and KMT of “One China”, though interpretations differ between them. CCP General Secretary Xi Jinping explicitly stipulated acceptance of the 1992 Consensus as a precondition for cross-strait dialogue in 2017.[16]
The CCP may seek to leverage its rapport with Han to shape legislative outcomes in the LY, such as curbing DPP national defense-related proposals in the LY. The KMT’s historic inclination to reject DPP proposals in the LY aligns with the CCP’s desire to stymie the efficiency of Lai’s presidency and foment political disarray. Han’s conflicting policy agenda with the DPP indicates that he will wield his authority as speaker to this end, potentially causing problems for Lai’s administration.
The PRC unilaterally changed a domestic commercial flight path closer to the median line in the Taiwan Strait. The new route came into effect on February 1 and comes within 7.8 kilometers of the median line at its closest point.[17] The Taiwan Strait median line has acted as the unofficial border between the PRC and Taiwan since a “tacit agreement” between the two sides in 1958 to observe the line, although the PRC publicly denies its existence.[18] PRC aircraft began crossing the median line with increasing frequency in 1999, under Taiwan’s first democratically elected leader Lee Teng-hui.[19] Taiwan’s Mainland Affairs Council (MAC) accused the PRC of using civil aviation to “package” political and military issues to change the status quo in the Taiwan Strait.[20] The PRC Taiwan Affairs Office (TAO) reiterated its claim that the purpose of shifting the route is to alleviate airspace congestion.[21] Chieh Chung, an analyst at the Taiwanese think tank National Policy Foundation, stated the move would significantly curtail Taiwan’s air defense early warning and reaction time.[22]
Taiwan’s Premier Chen Chien-jen labeled the PRC’s actions a ploy to undermine cross-strait stability and likened it to the PRC’s increasingly frequent flights of high-altitude balloons.[23] Taiwan’s Ministry of National Defense (MND) recorded 9 PRC balloons flying near Taiwan since January 25.[24] The PRC also flew a combined 55 military aircraft through Taiwan’s Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) from January 30 and February 1, 25 of which crossed the median line.[25] The ADIZ incursions over these two days represent a sharp increase from earlier that week and coincide with the election of the LY speaker.
Tuvalu is considering switching its diplomatic recognition from Taiwan to the PRC. Tuvalu Ambassador to the Republic of China Bikenibeu Paeniu stated in a January 19 interview with The Australian that there were rumors Tuvalu would go down the same path as Nauru and switch recognition at some point after Tuvalu’s January 26 election.[26] Tuvalu’s Finance Minister Seve Paeniu also stated that Tuvalu expects to review diplomatic ties with Taiwan after the election as his country seeks additional financial support for development.[27] The Tuvalu government said Bikenibeu Paeniu’s comments did not represent its official stance and reaffirmed its ties to Taiwan.[28] Seve Paeniu is now one of the candidates in the race to become Tuvalu’s next Prime Minister as the newly elected lawmakers aim to form a cabinet in the coming week.[29] He is open to recognizing the PRC based on support for Tuvalu’s development priorities and aspirations.[30]
The CCP reportedly offered Tuvalu unspecified financial benefits in the period 2020 to 2023 in exchange for switching diplomatic recognition from the ROC to the PRC. Then Tuvalu Minister for Justice, Communication & Foreign Affairs Simon Kofe refused the offer.[31] Tuvalu is the only country in the Asia-Pacific region that maintains relations with the ROC and does not have a Compact of Free Association (COFA) agreement with the United States.
China
PRC Ministry of Defense and state media criticized comments from NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg about the threat that the PRC poses to Europe and the prospects for a PRC invasion of Taiwan. Stoltenberg said at the World Economic Forum summit on January 16 in Davos, Switzerland, that “China is coming close to us” through its activities in Africa and the Arctic and in trying to control critical infrastructure. He stressed that NATO is a transatlantic regional alliance and does not regard the PRC as an adversary, however.[32] Stoltenberg also commented during a visit to the United States that Western support for Ukraine is “closely watched in Beijing” and that a Russian victory in Ukraine could embolden the PRC to seize Taiwan.[33] The CCP-owned China Daily claimed on January 19 that NATO, not the CCP, was responsible for global instability. It said NATO had become expansionist and that its recent shift of focus to the Asia-Pacific posed a threat to the PRC and jeopardized regional peace and stability.[34] A January 23 China Daily article also described Stoltenberg as “the hawkish head of [an] aggressively expansionist transatlantic alliance” and accused him of “scaremongering” about PRC activities in Africa and the Arctic.[35] The state-owned Global Times wrote on January 30 that Stoltenberg’s “hyping” of the China and Russia threats will not alleviate Western “fatigue” over support for Ukraine.[36]
The CCP expressed concern about the NATO Steadfast Defender military exercises and inaccurately claimed that NATO is driving instability in Europe and the Asia-Pacific. NATO began its Steadfast Defender 2024 exercises on January 24, its largest military exercise since 1988. The drills will feature around 90,000 troops from all 31 NATO member states and Sweden and will last until May 31.[37] PRC MoD spokesperson Wu Qian said at a January 25 press conference that the PRC was “highly concerned” about the exercise, as well as Stoltenberg’s comments about China, and accused NATO of approaching the Asia-Pacific and taking advantage of a “non-existent ‘China threat’” to threaten regional security. He called NATO a “walking ‘war machine’ that brings chaos wherever it goes.”[38] The state news agency Xinhua featured a news article on January 25 that argued that NATO’s Steadfast Defender exercises will only deepen hostilities between European countries and Russia.[39]
The PRC’s rhetoric about NATO aligns with Russian messaging about NATO since Russia invaded Ukraine in February 2022. PRC government bodies and state media have portrayed NATO as an expansionist and aggressive military bloc controlled by the United States that threatens Russian security and regional stability. The CCP has also portrayed the war in Ukraine as a proxy conflict between the United States and Russia, in which Ukraine is a “pawn” of the United States.[40] PRC messaging also aligned with Russia in portraying the Steadfast Defender 2024 exercises as “provocative.”[41]
The PRC Ministry of Defense (MoD) confirmed ongoing coordination with the US military about the next meeting under the Military Maritime Consultative Agreement (MMCA). MoD spokesperson Wu Qian did not announce the date of the meeting but said it was part of an ongoing effort to resume military dialogues with the United States.[42] US President Joe Biden and CCP General Secretary Xi Jinping agreed during their November 15 summit in San Francisco to resume high-level military talks, including the MMCA talks, US-China Defense Police Coordination (CDPC) talks, and telephone conversations between theater commanders.[43] The first CDPC consultation since the summit occurred on January 8-9.[44] The theater command-level talks have yet to be scheduled.
The United States views military-to-military talks as a means of escalation management to prevent and control crises. The CCP views these talks, at least in part, as a bargaining chip that it can use to influence US behavior to the party’s benefit, however. A US action that the CCP deems unfavorable would be grounds to cut off military-to-military dialogue, in the party’s view. The party previously did this by cutting off high-level military dialogue in the aftermath of then-Speaker Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan in August 2022.[45] This precedent indicates the possibility that the CCP will continue to use military-to-military dialogue opportunities to shape United States behavior in the lead-up to at least the May 20 ROC presidential inauguration.
The PRC and Russia held several high-level minister exchanges to enhance “strategic coordination,” which support the CCP’s effort to challenge the US alliance system in the Indo-Pacific. The talks took place from January 29-31 and included meetings between the two countries’ defense ministers and vice foreign ministers. The exchanges addressed a range of issues, such as BRICS cooperation, expanding military cooperation, the war in Ukraine, and developments in the Asia-Pacific, Korean peninsula, and Middle East.[46] The PRC’s defense minister readout on January 31 noted that “Russia will play a greater role in comprehensive strategic coordination and maintaining global security and stability.”[47] The meetings signify the continued growth of military and diplomatic ties between Russia and the PRC, including increased cooperation on shared strategic goals.
The Russian Pacific Fleet also conducted an anti-submarine exercise in the South China Sea on January 29.[48] PRC state media did not publicize the event. The Russian frigate Marshall Saposhnikov of the Pacific Fleet previously conducted anti-submarine warfare drills in the South China Sea on January 29.[49] The Pacific Fleet exercise is likely aimed at demonstrating that Russia is a strong Pacific power that supports China against the US alliance system in the Indo-Pacific, as the Kremlin has routinely stressed in the past.[50] The dearth of CCP media coverage on the event reflects the party’s attempt to avoid drawing international attention to the South China Sea while the party is also engaging in military aggression toward the Philippine-controlled Second Thomas Shoal.
Second Thomas Shoal
The PRC Coast Guard claimed that it “allowed” the Philippines to airdrop supplies to Philippine troops on Second Thomas Shoal on January 21. PRC Coast Guard Spokesperson Gan Yu said on the Chinese social media app WeChat that the Coast Guard had made “temporary special arrangements” to allow a small Philippine aircraft to airdrop supplies to troops stationed at the grounded warship that serves as the Philippine base on Second Thomas Shoal. Philippine National Security Council spokesperson Jonathan Malaya denied the PRC allegation that it had allowed the airdrop and said the Philippines did not need anyone’s permission to deliver supplies. He neither confirmed nor denied that the airdrop had occurred.[51]
The PRC inaccurately framed the airdrop as “provocative” amid the easing of tensions in the region. The Second Thomas Shoal is a disputed reef feature in the Spratly Islands of the South China Sea, which the Philippines controls but which the PRC and Taiwan claim. It was the site of confrontations between the Philippines and PRC in recent months. The Philippines and PRC held bilateral maritime consultations on January 17 to de-escalate tensions and the Philippines had not sent vessels to Second Thomas Shoal for over a month before the resupply mission.[52] PRC state-owned media outlet Global Times framed the airdrop as “provocative”, however. PRC Coast Guard Spokesperson Gan Yu reiterated the point in calling on the Philippines to stop its alleged “provocations” and “hyping” the dispute to mislead the international community.[53] He added that the Coast Guard will continue to defend the PRC’s sovereignty, rights, and interests on the Second Thomas Shoal and step up “law enforcement” activities around the shoal.
Compacts of Free Association
A loss of Compacts of Free Association (COFA) funding for Palau, Micronesia, and the Marshall Islands would enable the CCP to expand its leverage points over these countries. These COFAs govern the United States’ relationship with Palau, Micronesia, and the Marshall Islands while also granting the United States extensive military access throughout their territories. The United States renewed COFAs with Palau and Micronesia in May.[54] It then did so with the Marshall Islands in October.[55] The signed agreements are now before Congress for funding consideration. Congress previously funded the COFAs for a twenty-year period in 2003.[56] The total cost for all three of the twenty-year agreements would be roughly $7 billion spread over the period 2024 to 2043, according to the Congressional Research Service.[57] Deputy Secretary of State nominee Kurt Campbell stated during his Senate confirmation hearing on December 7 that “if we don’t get it [COFA funding] you can expect that literally the next day Chinese diplomats — military and other folks — will be on the plane…trying to secure a better deal for China.”[58] The US House of Representatives Select Committee on the Strategic Competition between the United States and the Chinese Communist Party also called for renewing the COFAs in a mid-December report.[59] President Biden signed the 2024 National Defense Authorization Act into law on December 22, but it did not include COFA funding.[60] Funding the COFAs is a key part of the US Pacific Partnership Strategy to “fulfill our [United States] historical commitments and strengthen our enduring relationships with the full Pacific Islands region, including our special relationship with the Republic of Palau, the Republic of the Marshall Islands, and the Federated States of Micronesia.”[61] Palau’s President Surangel Whipps Jr expressed concern in a December 27 interview with ABC Australia over the lack of Congressional-approved funding for the COFA agreement, in part because the 2010 Palau Compact Review Agreement was not funded by the US Congress until 2018.[62]
These three island countries control key sea lanes that provide a secure route connecting American allies and partners, such as the Philippines and Taiwan, to the US territory of Guam and Hawaii. Palau and the Marshall Islands are 2 of the 12 countries that maintain official diplomatic relations with Taiwan.[63]
The loss of COFA funding would present an opportunity for the CCP to expand its economic influence with these vital Pacific Island countries. For example, this funding loss would cause severe financial pressure in Palau because COFA funding accounts for $36.9 million of the national government’s annual $124.2 million revenue as of fiscal year 2023.[64] This is an economic vulnerability that the CCP could partially fill by encouraging PRC nationals to vacation in Palau. The CCP cut tourism to Palau over the last decade to nearly zero as punishment for maintaining full diplomatic relations with Taiwan.[65] The reversal of this CCP policy would provide the party with economic leverage to wield over Palau in the event of future policy disagreements. The expansion of the CCP’s economic influence in Palau would also provide the party a leverage point to coerce the countries into switching diplomatic recognition from Taiwan to the People's Republic of China (PRC). The PRC aims to coerce countries into switching diplomatic recognition to falsely argue that Taiwan is a province of the People’s Republic of China rather than a legitimate country named the Republic of China. Palau President Surangel Whipps Jr. stated that the CCP is intensely pressuring his country, including personally harassing him with angry phone calls to the point he changed his phone number, ahead of its November election to achieve this goal.[66]
The loss of COFA funding would also exacerbate the CCP narrative put forth by the propaganda outlet Global Times that the United States only cares about Palau for security reasons rather than mutually beneficial cooperation. [67] The Palau Senate passed a resolution in November rejecting the permanent deployment of a US Patriot missile defense battery.[68] This was the first instance of lawmakers challenging President Surangel Whipps Jr’s request for the United States to construct an over-the-horizon radar system in Palau.[69] In a December 27 interview with ABC Australia, Whipps tied this Palau Senate resolution to a narrative among unspecified portions of Palau that the United States actions were not in the best interests of Palau, as seen by the repeated delay in COFA funding.[70] The associated fiscal challenges that Palau faces without COFA funding buttresses the CCP’s narrative, which in turn creates hurdles for deploying mutually beneficial United States defense resources to the country.
The loss of COFA funding would also provide the CCP an opportunity to expand influence efforts targeting Micronesian political elites. The CCP has completed infrastructure projects throughout the country, such as houses for the country’s president, vice president, speakers of congress, and chief justice.[71] Axios reported that former Micronesian officials confirmed receiving gifts from the PRC, such as money, while on official state visits to the country.[72] The lack of COFA funding would exacerbate the appeal of CCP monetary gifts or infrastructure projects that target the Micronesian political elite. Micronesian President Wesley Simina also stated in late November that his country would be at a “fiscal cliff” without US Congressional approval of COFA funding. This would mean that “we [Micronesia] will have to find different sources of funding… and that’s not out there available immediately.”[73] The loss of COFA funding would also provide opportunities for external powers such as the CCP to enhance their economic influence in the country by filling these funding gaps. The loss of COFA funding would also undermine the intent of annual humanitarian missions to Micronesia, such as that by the USNS Mercy in January 2024, to bolster US-Micronesia relations.[74]
The COFA funding also makes up $35.2 million of the Marshall Islands national government's annual $173.9 million revenue as of fiscal year 2023.[75] The loss of COFA funding would expose the country to similar severe fiscal challenges as Palau and Micronesia. The powerful waves that flooded portions of US Army Garrison Kwajalein Atoll in late January 2024 highlight the Marshall Islands’ geographic vulnerabilities that the COFA funding would provide resources to address.[76]
The CCP may use these revenue shortfalls to incentivize Palau and the Marshall Islands to switch diplomatic recognition from Taiwan to the PRC. Australia evacuating refugees it paid Nauru to host led to a budget shortfall.[78] The CCP then reportedly offered Nauru USD 100 million per year in 2024 to successfully switch recognition from the PRC to the ROC, according to a Reuters report that cited an unspecified senior Taiwanese official.[79] This follows a regional trend of the PRC offering incentives such as a commercial aircraft to Kiribati or USD 8.5 million to the Solomon Islands, both in 2019, to successfully incentivize them to switch diplomatic recognition from the ROC to the PRC.[80]
North Korea
PRC Vice Foreign Minister Sun Weidong met with North Korean Vice Foreign Minister Pak Myong-ho on January 26 to discuss bilateral relations and the “international and regional situation.”[81] The PRC did not comment on North Korea’s aggressive behavior in the region, which is consistent with PRC actions since mid-December. The CCP has not publicly criticized North Korea for launching ballistic missiles, testing alleged underwater nuclear drones, or labeling South Korea as its “primary foe.” The CCP has instead called for dialogue to portray the party as a responsible regional stakeholder while avoiding steps to stop North Korea's provocations. The PRC MFA has messaged since mid-December that “trying to solve the problem [on the Korean Peninsula] through military deterrence and pressure will not work…[and] dialogue and consultation” are how to resolve the issue.[82] The CCP has also emphasized the PRC’s close relations with North Korea and plans to deepen “mutually beneficial cooperation” this year, which will be the 75th anniversary of diplomatic relations between the two countries.[83]
The PRC is engaging diplomatically with North Korea to undermine United States-South Korea security ties for the PRC’s benefit. The PRC's strategy toward the Korean Peninsula is to push South Korea into a foreign policy that balances the interests of the United States and the PRC.[84] This is based on the view that a regional balance of power shift is underway that is unfavorable to the United States as the PRC engages in a military buildup and South Korea increases its military ability to independently defend against North Korea.[85] Implicit in this view is that the PRC military buildup will force South Korea to account for PRC strategic interests in the peninsula at the expense of the United States-South Korea security relationship.
Israel-Hamas War
The PRC contacted Iran to restrain the Houthi’s attacks on maritime shipping in the Red Sea. The outreach did not slow or stop the Houthi attack campaign. The Financial Times reported on January 24 that US National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan and Secretary of State Antony Blinken asked the PRC to pressure Iran to stop Houthi attacks on commercial shipping in the Red Sea. The report also stated that unspecified US officials had seen little evidence of China acting upon these requests.[86] PRC officials asked Iran to have the Houthis show restraint regarding attacks in the Red Sea, according to a Reuters report citing unspecified Iranian officials. The unspecified Iranian officials stated that the PRC did not make specific threats toward Iran if Houthi attacks threatened PRC shipping interests.[87]
The PRC has not condemned Houthi aggression and has instead called for regional calm rather than take steps or support international efforts to stop the Houthi attacks on maritime shipping. PRC foreign affairs officials called on all parties to “play a constructive and responsible role” in keeping the Red Sea safe on January 4 and expressed concern on January 12 about the alleged ”escalation of tensions in the Red Sea” after United States-led strikes on Houthi positions.”[88],[89] A joint PRC MFA and Arab League statement on January 16 reiterated these points in calling on “all parties to cool down the situation…and effectively maintain regional peace and stability.”[90] PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs Spokesman Wang Wenbin implied that US-led strikes on Houthi positions in Yemen are illegitimate because “the [United Nations] Security Council has never authorized the use of force by any country on Yemen.”[91] The only exception to in the PRC’s rhetoric about the Houthi attacks on maritime shipping occurred on January 10, when Permanent Representative of China to the United Nations Zhang Jun “call[ed] on the Houthi armed forces to immediately stop harassing civilian ships and respect the freedom of navigation of all countries.”[92],[93]
The CCP continues to stress that US-led counter strikes on the Houthis and not the Houthi’s attacks on maritime shipping risk a wider regional escalation. PRC Ambassador to the European Union Fu Cong stated in a late January interview with Bloomberg that the US-led strikes against the Houthis “can only escalate tension and it’ll not guarantee or maintain the safe passage of the commercial vessels.”[94] A regional escalation would further threaten PRC economic interests by increasing shipping costs and disrupting oil supplies from the region.
Afghanistan
CCP General Secretary Xi Jinping accepted credentials from Taliban Ambassador to China Bilal Karimi on January 30.[95] PRC MFA Spokesperson Wang Wenbin did not confirm nor deny whether the PRC recognizes the Taliban government in Afghanistan during a press conference on January 31.[96] The PRC appointed the new ambassador Zhao Sheng to the country in September 2023.[97] The PRC did not explicitly recognize the Taliban. No country officially recognizes the Taliban regime. The event demonstrates growing PRC-Taliban ties, however, as Xi accepted Karimi’s credentials at a ceremony in which he accepted credentials from diplomats from 38 other countries.
This is the latest indication of growing ties between the CCP and the Taliban regime and builds on agricultural and economic deals that the two signed last year. The PRC signed a 6.5 billion USD mining deal and oil deals worth hundreds of millions of US dollars in 2023.[98]
China-Taiwan Weekly Update, January 25, 2024
Click here to read the full report
Editors: Dan Blumenthal and Frederick W. Kagan of the American Enterprise Institute
Data Cutoff: January 25 at 10 am ET
Key Takeaways
- The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) and Kuomintang (KMT) are preparing for the election of the speaker and deputy speaker of the Legislative Yuan. The party that secures the role will steer legislative processes in a divided legislature.
- PRC Premier Li Qiang appealed to foreign business leaders to invest in China at the World Economic Forum (WEF) summit in Davos, Switzerland. The PRC is increasingly emphasizing economic cooperation with Europe as fraying relations with the US threaten to dampen the PRC’s growth.
- The Philippines and PRC began bilateral negotiations over South China Sea disputes on January 17. The CCP's track record of engaging in dialogue while driving crises in the region to achieve its political objective indicates that the Philippine-PRC dialogue will not change the party’s behavior in the region.
- A loss of Compacts of Free Association (COFA) funding for Palau, Micronesia, and the Marshall Islands would enable the CCP to expand its leverage points over these countries.
- Tuvalu is considering switching its diplomatic recognition from the ROC to the PRC.
Taiwan
The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) and Kuomintang (KMT) are preparing for the election of the speaker and deputy speaker of the Legislative Yuan. The party that secures the role will steer legislative processes in a divided legislature. The legislative candidates who won seats in the January 13 elections will take office at the beginning of the new legislative session on February 1. The members will vote on a new speaker and deputy speaker.[1] The speaker is responsible for guiding legislative processes, such as setting the legislative agenda, voting on laws, and presiding over sessions. Control over legislative proceedings means the speaker can prioritize or delay legislation based on political alignment and steer debates on policies proposed by the executive branch.[2]
Han Kuo-yu and Johnny Chiang Chi-chen announced their candidacies for speaker and deputy speaker, respectively, on January 18 and received the KMT’s nomination on January 24 after a short-lived internal challenge to Han for the speakership.[3] Han is a divisive figure in Taiwanese politics. He rose to prominence in the KMT after a surprise 2018 victory in the mayoral race in Kaohsiung, a DPP stronghold, and ran an unsuccessful presidential campaign in 2020 against President Tsai Ing-wen of the DPP. Han’s PRC-friendly platform contributed to popular dissatisfaction in Kaohsiung and his subsequent recall from the mayor’s office.[4] Chiang is a former chairman of the KMT who worked to review the party’s cross-strait policy after Han lost the 2020 presidential election. He represents a younger and more moderate wing of the party and advised the KMT’s 2024 presidential candidate Hou Yu-ih in formulating his cross-strait policy.[5]
The DPP legislative caucus said that it would support You Si-kun and Tsai Chi-chang, who are the incumbent speaker and deputy speaker. The caucus has not completed the nomination process as of January 25, however.[6]
A KMT speaker would exacerbate the obstacles that the divided legislature will pose to incoming president Lai Ching-te’s agenda. The legislature is divided, with the KMT holding the largest number of seats but without a majority party. This alone will challenge the incoming DPP administration’s ability to pass legislation. The DPP last led a minority government under President Chen Shui-bian from 2000 to 2008, during which the KMT-led opposition frequently blocked arms procurement from the United States and other policies favored by the DPP.[7] Han Kuo-yu would likely facilitate similar obstructionism if he becomes the speaker. DPP legislative caucus leader Ker Chien-ming claimed that if Han becomes speaker of the LY, “there is a high possibility he will be controlled by the CCP.”[8]
The Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) will be the crucial “swing vote” between the two major parties in the selection of the next speaker and deputy speaker. The KMT’s 52 seats (plus two KMT-aligned independents) and DPP’s 51 seats do not grant either a majority in the 113-member body. The TPP’s 8 seats will make its votes the deciding factor.[9]
The KMT has been trying to win TPP support before the new legislative session begins. Han and Chiang said that Chiang would step aside if the TPP nominates a deputy speaker candidate to run with Han.[10] Han said on January 24 that he agreed with some legislative reforms proposed recently, such as those pushed by the TPP.[11] Fu Kun-chi, the KMT legislator who briefly announced his candidacy for speaker on January 21 before dropping out, also reached out to the TPP and offered to cooperate on its preferred parliamentary reforms.[12] The TPP legislators-elect Huang Shan-shan and Huang Kuo-chang said the priority of the TPP caucus was to implement reforms to increase government transparency and give the Legislative Yuan more oversight over the Executive Yuan, Taiwan’s executive branch. They expressed appreciation for the KMT outreach and show of support. The incoming TPP legislators said on January 15 and 18 that they would support speaker candidates who could explain how they would implement their preferred reforms.[13] Han and Chiang can win without TPP support if the TPP abstains or fields its own candidates. The KMT outreach to the TPP shows that it is concerned about the possibility of the TPP endorsing the DPP candidates instead.
ISW has not noted reports of significant DPP efforts to win TPP support for its candidates, the incumbents. Huang Kuo-chang said on January 24 that he was unclear about the attitude of the DPP toward parliamentary reform.[14] DPP legislative caucus leader Ker Chien-ming criticized the eight TPP legislators-elect for using their decisive positions to “sow chaos.”[15] DPP incumbent speaker You Si-kun said that he had once proposed reforms similar to what the TPP wanted, but there was no consensus on them within the DPP. He also said that he was friends with TPP Chairman Ko Wen-je and would fight for TPP support, but did not know if he would get it.[16] You also said that “any combination is possible,” however, including a scenario in which a TPP candidate becomes the next speaker as a possible compromise.[17] The five TPP legislators of the previous legislative session voted for You in 2020.[18]
The PRC Ministry of State Security (MSS) said on January 17 that it will step up efforts to counter alleged Taiwanese infiltration of the PRC. The MSS claimed on its official WeChat account that Taiwan’s intelligence and defense agencies had been “infiltrating China since the DPP came to power in 2016.” It claimed to have dismantled multiple Taiwanese espionage networks in 2018 and 2020 and vowed to intensify counterintelligence and “anti-separatist” efforts related to Taiwan. The MSS accused Taiwan’s intelligence agencies of acting like “thugs for ‘Taiwan independence’ separatist forces,” “hyping up rumors” about the PRC interfering in Taiwan’s elections, suppressing people who oppose the DPP, and colluding with “external forces.” It echoed statements by the Taiwan Affairs Office that the DPP does not represent Taiwan’s “mainstream public opinion.”[19]
The MSS made the post in response to Lai Ching-te’s victory in the January 13 presidential election. The timing and framing suggest the announced espionage crackdown is partly meant to punish Taiwan for electing the CCP’s least favored candidate. It is also probable that the MSS claims about Taiwanese infiltration are related to the December 2023 leaks from Taiwanese intelligence about a secret top-level CCP meeting in which Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference Chairman Wang Huning, who is the fourth-ranked member of the CCP Politburo Standing Committee, discussed how to increase the effectiveness and subtlety of PRC efforts to interfere in Taiwan’s election. An unnamed senior Taiwanese official leaked the information to Western media.[20]
The PRC continued to send high-altitude balloons into Taiwan’s Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) after a four-day hiatus. Taiwan’s Ministry of National Defense (MND) reported PRC high-altitude balloons flying across the Taiwan Strait every day this month except January 16-19. The MND reported a record high of 6 PRC high-altitude balloons violating its Air Defense Identification Zone in one day on January 21. At least one flew directly over Taiwan’s territory.[21] This pattern of activity is consistent with the ISW assessment that the PRC is trying to normalize using balloons in tandem with other aerial and naval ADIZ violations as part of a broader effort to wear down Taiwan’s threat awareness. The break in balloon flights after an uninterrupted streak of daily incursions in the first half of January suggests the recent increase in balloon activities was related to Taiwan’s January 13 election.
China
PRC Premier Li Qiang appealed to foreign business leaders to invest in China at the World Economic Forum (WEF) summit in Davos, Switzerland. Li addressed an audience of global business executives and politicians, painting a rosy picture of the PRC’s economic health and urging the world to cast off skepticism over its challenging economic prospects. Li announced that the PRC met its 2023 growth target, remains committed to financial liberalization, and promised a responsible economic growth model.[22]
Li’s speech was tailored to resonate with an international business audience, highlighting the PRC’s economic potential on the merits of its size while ignoring the broader global political environment. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen’s speech, by contrast, took a distinct focus on geopolitical issues. Von der Leyen hailed freedom and democracy as the drivers of innovation and highlighted challenges posed by growing disinformation and disregard for national sovereignty.[23]
The contrast between Li and von der Leyen’s speeches captures the challenges of EU-PRC relations, which are subject to the push and pull of ideological confrontation and economic opportunities. The EU adopted an economic security package on January 24 in response to “growing geopolitical tensions and profound technological shifts.”[24] The initiatives in the package align with von der Leyen’s calls to “de-risk” the EU’s relationship with the PRC, especially in high-tech areas, a strategy she first proposed in March 2023.[25] The measure includes plans to increase screening of foreign investment into the EU, strengthen export controls, manage risks associated with outward investment in certain technologies, support research and development of dual-use technologies, and enhance research security.
The PRC, however, is increasingly emphasizing economic cooperation with Europe as fraying relations with the US threaten to dampen the PRC’s growth. Li advocated for economic cooperation with French and German officials in June 2023 during a visit to France and Germany.[26] CCP General Secretary Xi Jinping and French President Emmanuel Macron stressed the importance of strong economic ties during a meeting in April 2023.[27] Li told von der Leyen that the PRC wanted to import more EU products and urged the EU to ease high-tech export restrictions on the PRC during a meeting between the two on the sidelines of the summit in Davos.[28] Von der Leyen previously announced an investigation into electric vehicle subsidies in the PRC as part of the EU’s de-risking efforts during her September 15 State of the Union speech.[29]
A reporter from CCP-operated China Daily highlighted the contrasting sentiments expressed by Li and von der Leyen in a request for comment by the PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA), referencing von der Leyen’s de-risking strategy without mentioning her by name. MFA spokesperson Mao Ning responded that fragmentation would only weaken the global economy. Mao extolled the potential of the PRC economy and appealed to foreign companies to heed Premier Li’s calls to invest. [30]Li’s attendance at the WEF summit provided the PRC with an opportunity to directly lobby the business community where diplomatic efforts have yielded limited progress in strengthening inward investment. Li participated in a luncheon with the heads of 14 multinational companies, including Siemens, Volkswagen, and JPMorgan Chase. The PRC MFA described the meeting as a productive discussion about the benefits of investing in China, noting Li’s promises of strong returns.[31]
The Philippines and PRC began bilateral negotiations over South China Sea disputes on January 17. PRC Assistant Foreign Minister Nong Rong and Philippine Foreign Ministry Undersecretary Theresa Lazaro co-chaired the eighth meeting of the China-Philippines Bilateral Consultation Mechanism (BCM) on the South China Sea.[32] The PRC MFA stated that the two sides agreed to “continue to properly manage sea-related conflicts and differences through friendly consultations.”[33] The CCP-controlled English language outlet Global Times reported on January 18 that the Philippines has not sent vessels near Second Thomas Shoal in over a month, the longest period without “provocations” since August 2023.[34]
The Philippine-PRC dialogue will not change the party’s behavior in the region, based on the CCP's track record of engaging in dialogue while driving crises to achieve its political objectives. In 2012 the party engaged in negotiations with the Philippines to end a standoff at the Scarborough Shoal, which Manilla administered at the time, while steadily increasing the number of Chinese Coast Guard ships near the shoal.[35] This resulted in the Philippines withdrawing its ships from the shoal in mid-June 2012 under a now-disputed agreement that the PRC would do the same.[36] The CCP subsequently kept its ships near the shoal and achieved its political objective of gaining de facto control of the Scarborough Shoal by July 2012.[37] In 2016 the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) Arbitration Tribunal unanimously ruled in favor of the Philippines by rejecting the legitimacy of PRC claims to territory inside of the nine-dash line and land reclamation activities.[38] The CCP has ignored the ruling by continuing land reclamation efforts and maritime coercion in the South China Sea over the last eight years.
The Philippines and Vietnam are expected to sign a memorandum of understanding between their coast guards when President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. visits the country in late January.[39] This would provide one mechanism for the Philippines to leverage in attempts to prevent CCP coercion in the South China Sea from increasing.
Compacts of Free Association
A loss of Compacts of Free Association (COFA) funding for Palau, Micronesia, and the Marshall Islands would enable the CCP to expand its leverage points over these countries. These COFAs govern the United States’ relationship with Palau, Micronesia, and the Marshall Islands while also granting the United States extensive military access throughout their territories. The United States renewed COFAs with Palau and Micronesia in May.[40] It then did so with the Marshall Islands in October.[41] The signed agreements are now before Congress for funding consideration. Congress previously funded the COFAs for a twenty-year period in 2003.[42] The total cost for all three of the twenty-year agreements would be roughly $7 billion spread over the period 2024 to 2043, according to the Congressional Research Service.[43] Deputy Secretary of State nominee Kurt Campbell stated during his Senate confirmation hearing on December 7 that “if we don’t get it [COFA funding] you can expect that literally the next day Chinese diplomats — military and other folks — will be on the plane…trying to secure a better deal for China.”[44] The US House of Representatives Select Committee on the Strategic Competition between the United States and the Chinese Communist Party also called for renewing the COFAs in a mid-December report.[45] President Biden signed the 2024 National Defense Authorization Act into law on December 22, but it did not include COFA funding.[46] Funding the COFAs is a key part of the US Pacific Partnership Strategy to “fulfill our [United States] historical commitments and strengthen our enduring relationships with the full Pacific Islands region, including our special relationship with the Republic of Palau, the Republic of the Marshall Islands, and the Federated States of Micronesia.”[47] Palau’s President Surangel Whipps Jr expressed concern in a December 27 interview with ABC Australia over the lack of Congressional-approved funding for the COFA agreement, in part because the 2010 Palau Compact Review Agreement was not funded by the US Congress until 2018.[48]
These three island countries control key sea lanes that provide a secure route connecting American allies and partners, such as the Philippines and Taiwan, to the US territory of Guam and Hawaii. Palau and the Marshall Islands are 2 of the 12 countries that maintain official diplomatic relations with Taiwan.[49]
The loss of COFA funding would present an opportunity for the CCP to expand its economic influence with these vital Pacific Island countries. For example, this funding loss would cause severe financial pressure in Palau because COFA funding accounts for $36.9 million of the national government’s annual $124.2 million revenue as of fiscal year 2023.[50] This is an economic vulnerability that the CCP could partially fill by encouraging PRC nationals to vacation in Palau. The CCP cut tourism to Palau over the last decade to nearly zero as punishment for maintaining full diplomatic relations with Taiwan.[51] The reversal of this CCP policy would provide the party with economic leverage to wield over Palau in the event of future policy disagreements. The expansion of the CCP’s economic influence in Palau would also provide the party a leverage point to coerce the countries into switching diplomatic recognition from Taiwan to the People's Republic of China (PRC). The PRC aims to coerce countries into switching diplomatic recognition to falsely argue that Taiwan is a province of the People’s Republic of China rather than a legitimate country named the Republic of China.
The loss of COFA funding would also exacerbate the CCP narrative put forth by the propaganda outlet Global Times that the United States only cares about Palau for security reasons rather than mutually beneficial cooperation. [52] The Palau Senate passed a resolution in November rejecting the permanent deployment of a US Patriot missile defense battery.[53] This was the first instance of lawmakers challenging President Surangel Whipps Jr’s request for the United States to construct an over-the-horizon radar system in Palau.[54] In a December 27 interview with ABC Australia, Whipps tied this Palau Senate resolution to a narrative among unspecified portions of Palau that the United States actions were not in the best interests of Palau, as seen by the repeated delay in COFA funding.[55] The associated fiscal challenges that Palau faces without COFA funding buttresses the CCP’s narrative, which in turn creates hurdles for deploying mutually beneficial United States defense resources to the country.
The loss of COFA funding would also provide the CCP an opportunity to expand influence efforts targeting Micronesian political elites. The CCP has completed infrastructure projects throughout the country, such as houses for the country’s president, vice president, speakers of congress, and chief justice.[56] Axios reported that former Micronesian officials confirmed receiving gifts from the PRC, such as money, while on official state visits to the country.[57] The lack of COFA funding would exacerbate the appeal of CCP monetary gifts or infrastructure projects that target the Micronesian political elite. Micronesian President Wesley Simina also stated in late November that his country would be at a “fiscal cliff” without US Congressional approval of COFA funding. This would mean that “we [Micronesia] will have to find different sources of funding… and that’s not out there available immediately.”[58] The loss of COFA funding would also provide opportunities for external powers such as the CCP to enhance their economic influence in the country by filling these funding gaps.
The COFA funding also makes up $35.2 million of the Marshall Islands national government's annual $173.9 million revenue as of fiscal year 2023.[59] The loss of COFA funding would expose the country to similar severe fiscal challenges as Palau and Micronesia.
The CCP may use these revenue shortfalls to incentivize Palau and the Marshall Islands to switch diplomatic recognition from Taiwan to the PRC. Australia evacuating refugees it paid Nauru to host led to a budget shortfall.[61] The CCP then reportedly offered Nauru USD 100 million per year in 2024 to successfully switch recognition from the PRC to the ROC, according to a Reuters report that cited an unspecified senior Taiwanese official.[62] This follows a regional trend of the PRC offering incentives such as a commercial aircraft to Kiribati or USD 8.5 million to the Solomon Islands, both in 2019, to successfully incentivize them to switch diplomatic recognition from the ROC to the PRC.[63]
Tuvalu
Tuvalu is considering switching its diplomatic recognition from the ROC to the PRC. The Tuvalu Ambassador to the Republic of China Bikenibeu Paeniu stated in a January 19 interview with The Australian that there were rumors Tuvalu would go down the same path as Nauru and switch recognition at some point after Tuvalu’s January 26 election.[64] Tuvalu’s Finance Minister Seve Paeniu also stated that Tuvalu expects to review diplomatic ties with Taiwan after the election as his country seeks additional financial support for development.[65] The Tuvalu government said Bikenibeu Paeniu’s comments did not represent its official stance and reaffirmed its ties to Taiwan.[66] Tuvalu is the only one in the Asia-Pacific region that maintains relations with the ROC and does not have a COFA with the United States.
Israel-Hamas War
The PRC has chosen not to engage with Iran to stop Houthi maritime shipping attacks. The Financial Times reported that US National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan and Secretary of State Antony Blinken asked the PRC to pressure Iran to stop Houthi attacks on commercial shipping in the Red Sea. The report also stated that unspecified US officials had seen little evidence of China acting upon these requests.[67] The PRC has only explicitly condemned the Houthis one time since the shipping attacks began. The PRC abstained on January 10 from UN Resolution 2722 which condemned Houthi attacks in the Red Sea.[68] In explanatory remarks, Permanent Representative of China to the United Nations Zhang Jun did however “call on the Houthi armed forces to immediately stop harassing civilian ships and respect the freedom of navigation of all countries.”[69]
The CCP has maintained rhetoric calling for regional calm instead of acting to resolve the Houthi shipping attacks. PRC Minister of Foreign Affairs Spokesman Wang Wenbin called on January 4 for all parties to “play a constructive and responsible role” in keeping the Red Sea safe.[70] The PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs Spokeswoman Mao Ning also expressed concern on January 12 about the alleged ”escalation of tensions in the Red Sea” after United States-led strikes on Houthi positions on January 11.[71] A joint PRC MFA and Arab League statement on January 16 called on “all parties to cool down the situation…and effectively maintain regional peace and stability.”[72] Wang also called on January 24 for “a stop of causing disturbance [sic] to civilian ships” in the Red Sea while also implying American-led strikes against Houthi positions in Yemen were illegitimate because “the [UN] Security Council has never authorized the use of force by any country on Yemen.”[73] The bigger problem from the CCP’s perspective is not the hostilities instigated by the Houthis, but rather the United States-led counterstrikes. The party views the willingness of the United States and allies to strike Houthi positions as risking wider regional escalation, which would threaten PRC economic interests, such as increasing shipping costs and disrupting oil supplies from the region.
North Korea
The PRC MFA has messaged since mid-December that “trying to solve the problem [on the Korean Peninsula] through military deterrence and pressure will not work…[and] dialogue and consultation” are how to resolve the issue.[74] Head of the CCP International Liaison Department Liu Jianchao reiterated these points during a January 19 meeting with the North Korean Ambassador to the PRC Ri Ryong-nam. The officials also agreed to deepen the PRC and North Korea’s “mutually beneficial cooperation” this year, which will be the 75th anniversary of diplomatic relations between the two countries.[75] The PRC MFA repeated its call on January 25 for “meaningful dialogue” over “legitimate concerns” in response to the North Korean ballistic missile test on January 24.[76] The CCP has not criticized North Korea for launching ballistic missiles, alleged underwater nuclear drones, or labeling South Korea as its “primary foe.”
China-Taiwan Weekly Update, January 19, 2024
Click here to read the full report
Authors: Nils Peterson, Matthew Sperzel, Daniel Shats of the Institute for the Study of War
Editors: Dan Blumenthal and Frederick W. Kagan of the American Enterprise Institute
Data Cutoff: January 18 at 5pm ET
The China–Taiwan Weekly Update focuses on the Chinese Communist Party’s paths to controlling Taiwan and relevant cross–Taiwan Strait developments.
Key Takeaways
- Democratic Progressive Party candidate Lai Ching-te won the Taiwanese presidential election on January 13. The DPP did not secure a majority in the Legislative Yuan and will face opposition from the KMT and Taiwan’s People’s Party in the legislative body.
- Nauru severed diplomatic ties with Taiwan and established diplomatic relations with the PRC on January 15.
- Head of the CCP International Department Liu Jianchao commented on the need for stronger “international cooperation” during an interview at the US Council on Foreign Relations on January 9.
- President Joe Biden and CCP General Secretary Xi Jinping agreed on November 15, 2023, to resume high-level military-to-military communication.
- The CCP views United States-led strikes against the Houthis as escalating regional tensions.
- A second PRC-brokered ceasefire in northern Myanmar failed to stop the fighting between the Myanmar junta and rebel groups.
Taiwan
Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) candidate Lai Ching-te won the Taiwanese presidential election on January 13. Lai won by a margin of nearly seven percentage points over the second-place Kuomintang (KMT) candidate.[1] Lai’s election signals continuity with the cross-strait policy and diplomatic strategy of the incumbent administration of Tsai Ing-wen, during which Taiwan has favored closer cooperation with the United States at the expense of relations with the PRC.
Lai’s victory is a defeat for the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). The CCP conducts constant influence operations against Taiwan to erode support for the DPP and steer perceptions of a Chinese national identity that lends legitimacy to the CCP. The CCP’s influence operations were especially intense during Taiwan’s election season, ranging from covert to overt and varied in target audience. Some of the most salient examples include the mass posting of disinformation content to social media, subsidizing trips to the PRC for local political and business leaders, and warning of armed conflict by framing the election as a choice between peace and war. The DPP’s reelection represents the failure of PRC interference in Taiwan’s democracy and highlights the prevalence of the Taiwanese identity that the DPP champions.
The PRC’s response to the results has so far been minimal compared to the political and military pressure it has exerted on Taiwan. The PRC’s Taiwan Affairs Office (TAO) issued a statement focusing on the DPP’s weaker mandate compared to previous elections, stating that “the DPP can by no means represent mainstream public opinion on the island.”[2] The PRC did not expand its military posturing immediately after the election. PLA ADIZ violations remained within the bounds of normal activity until a modest spike on January 17 and 18, when 29 PLA aircraft crossed the Taiwan Strait median line over the two days.[3] These actions are consistent with the PRC’s responses to Taiwan’s last presidential election. The TAO similarly dismissed Tsai’s 2020 reelection and declared the PRC’s absolute intolerance for so-called separatism.[4] The PRC also sailed the newly commissioned Shandong aircraft carrier through the Taiwan Strait immediately before Tsai Ing-wen’s reelection in January 2020 but did not take aggressive actions in the week after.[5]
The DPP did not secure a majority in the Legislative Yuan and will face opposition from the KMT and Taiwan’s People’s Party (TPP) in the legislative body. None of the three major parties won a majority through the legislative elections. The DPP won 51 seats, which is a 10-seat loss compared to the last election. The KMT gained 14 seats for a total of 52, putting it ahead of the DPP by 1. The Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) secured 8 seats, which positions it to play a decisive role on divided issues in legislative decision-making. Two independent candidates who are aligned with the KMT also won seats.[6] A divided legislature will pose challenges for the incoming DPP administration’s ability to pass legislation. The DPP last led a minority government under President Chen Shui-bian from 2000 to 2008, during which the KMT-led opposition frequently blocked arms procurement from the United States, for example. The KMT-led opposition also blocked other policy initiatives, such as amendments to voting laws and regulations governing party assets and state-owned property.[7]
The DPP will likely face opposition to its defense policies in the Legislative Yuan. Lai has promised to continue former President Tasi Ing-wen’s deterrence-focused national defense strategy, which entails robust defense spending, arms procurement, and military reforms.[8] The expansion of defense-related spending under the Tsai administration was often funded by special budgets, which the DPP’s political opponents deem fiscally irresponsible.[9] The KMT and TPP expressed similar views about defense spending throughout the campaign. KMT candidate Hou Yu-ih and TPP chairman candidate Ko Wen-je sharply criticized Tsai and the DPP for lack of fiscal discipline during the election campaign, despite Taiwan’s debt levels trending down over Tsai’s tenure.[10] Hou promoted a strong national defense strategy but emphasized that Taiwan should prioritize easing tensions with the PRC over reckless spending on several occasions.[11] Ko advocated for defense expenditure of up to 3% of GDP but disagreed with the DPP on the allocation of funds.[12]
Seat allocation in the Legislative Yuan
The Legislative Yuan is set to elect a speaker on February 1. Former KMT presidential hopeful Han Kuo-yu announced his candidacy on January 18 and is the top contender for the role given the KMT’s plurality.[14] Han is a divisive figure in Taiwanese politics, notorious for his pro-Beijing platform that contributed to popular dissatisfaction with his incumbency and subsequent removal from office as mayor of Kaohsiung.[15] The role of the speaker is consequential for the DPP’s relative political power. The speaker is responsible for guiding legislative processes, such as setting the legislative agenda, voting on laws, and presiding over sessions. Control over legislative proceedings means the speaker can prioritize or delay legislation based on political alignment and steer debates on policies proposed by the executive branch.
The handful of TPP legislators will play a decisive role in the election of the speaker. Cooperation between the KMT and TPP since last November to “work together to maximize their presence” in the Legislative Yuan has fueled speculation that the parties will elect Han to be the legislative speaker.[16] Lingering resentment between the TPP and KMT after bitter negotiations to form a joint presidential ticket failed also threatens to complicate the two parties’ cooperation, however.[17]
Ko may use the TPP’s political leverage in the Legislative Yuan to selectively cooperate with the DPP on some policies. Lai and Ko each presented housing policies that emphasized increasing the availability of social housing.[18] The two candidates also advocated for investment in technology and innovation to increase economic competitiveness.[19] Ko’s flexible policy position has led many to regard him as an opportunist who will act according to political interests rather than ideological alignment.[20]
Nauru severed diplomatic ties with Taiwan and established diplomatic relations with the PRC on January 15. Nauru cited the “One China Principle” and UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 as the basis for its decision.[21] UN Resolution 2758 recognized the People’s Republic of China as the only legitimate representative of “China” to the United Nations and removed the Republic of China (Taiwan) as a UN member. Nauru previously cut ties with Taiwan in favor of the PRC in 2002, then switched back to relations with Taiwan in 2005. Without Nauru, Taiwan now has 12 “diplomatic allies” with which it has formal diplomatic relations.[22]
Taiwan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) “strongly condemned” the decision and accused the PRC of manipulating Nauru with offers of financial aid. The MOFA claimed that Nauru had been asking for “a huge amount of financial aid that surpassed what Taiwan would normally provide to diplomatic allies.” It said that the switch in recognition was a means for the PRC to “suppress Taiwan” and called it “revenge against democratic values” following Taiwan’s January 13 elections.[23] The MOFA also issued a statement refuting the “fallacious” use of UN Resolution 2758, pointing out that the resolution does not mention Taiwan and does not say Taiwan is part of the PRC.[24]
Taiwan’s Central News Agency cited unnamed Taiwanese officials who claimed Nauru had asked Taiwan for 2.6 billion NTD (about 82 million USD) in financial aid, over half of Nauru’s national budget. The money was intended to cover a revenue gap primarily caused by Australia’s closure of its Nauru Regional Processing Center for asylum seekers. The unnamed sources said that the PRC took advantage of Taiwan’s inability to afford this amount and agreed to provide the requested aid in exchange for Nauru cutting ties with Taiwan and recognizing the PRC.[25] Australian Minister for International Development and the Pacific Pat Conroy said Nauru informed Australia that it would cut ties with Taiwan but did not ask Australia for financial aid to fill the hole in its budget.[26]
The PRC’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) said the PRC “welcomes and appreciates” Nauru’s decision and claimed it “fully demonstrates once again that the one-China principle is the aspiration of the people and the general trend.” It did not directly respond to Taiwan’s accusations that the diplomatic switch was related to Taiwan’s elections.[27] It denied engaging in “money diplomacy” to lure Nauru but said cooperation with the PRC promised “broad prospects and will bring unprecedented development opportunities for Nauru.”[28]
China
Head of the CCP International Department Liu Jianchao commented on the need for stronger “international cooperation” during an interview at the US Council on Foreign Relations on January 9. He stated that “for domestic circulation to function well, it does need stronger international cooperation, more foreign trade, and better use of FDI [Foreign Direct Investment].”[29] Liu’s remark about domestic circulation is a reference to “dual circulation,” which is an economic strategy that involves the creation of a self-sustaining domestic economy with links to international markets.[30] The strategy aims to reduce the PRC’s vulnerabilities to sanctions during crises by leveraging foreign investment and trade to bolster the country’s economy without becoming reliant on international markets. CCP General Secretary Xi Jinping previously explained on June 7, 2023, that the strategy will “ensure the normal operation of the national economy under extreme circumstances.”[31] The dual circulation strategy is the CCP’s response to international anti-globalization trends, supply chain challenges, and the need for China to adopt a new innovation-driven “development pattern.”[32]
Xi’s emphasis on ”institutional openness to advance high-level financial opening up” to become a financial power during a January 17 speech to the Party School of the CCP Central Committee aligns with this dual cycle strategy.[33] The emphasis on international economic engagement to buttress domestic circulation is a key tenant of creating a dual circulation economy. Other CCP policies are not consistent with the strategy, however. Chinese state security raids on foreign firms, such as the Mintz Group, Bain & Company, and Capvision Partners in early 2023 run counter to the party’s effort to gain foreign investment as part of this strategy.[34] These raids create uncertainty over whether capital invested in the PRC is safe from arbitrary state actions and whether foreign firms’ personnel can safely operate in the country.
President Joe Biden and CCP General Secretary Xi Jinping agreed on November 15, 2023, to resume high-level military-to-military communication. They agreed to restart the US-China Defense Policy Coordination (CDPC) Talks, the US-China Military Maritime Consultative Agreement (MMCA) meetings, and telephone conversations between theater commanders.[35] The CDPC Talks occurred on January 8-9 under the leadership of US Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense Michael Chase and Deputy Director of the Central Military Commission Office for International Military Cooperation Major General Song Yanchao.[36] The official PRC Ministry of National Defense readout of the CDPC urged the United States to “reduce military presence and provocation in the South China Sea…and stop manipulating and hyping-up relevant issues.”[37] The MMCA and theater command-level talks have yet to be scheduled.
The United States views military-to-military talks as a means of escalation management to prevent and control crises. The CCP views these talks as a bargaining chip to manipulate United States behavior to the party’s benefit, however. An action that the CCP deems unfavorable by the United States would be grounds, in the party’s view, to cut off military-to-military dialogue. The party previously did this by cutting off high-level military dialogue in the aftermath of then-Speaker Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan in August 2022.[38] This precedent indicates that the CCP will continue to use military-to-military dialogue opportunities to shape United States behavior in the lead up to at least the May 20 ROC presidential inauguration.
Israel-Hamas War
The CCP changed its messaging about the Houthis attacks on maritime shipping by explicitly calling on the Houthis to stop the attacks. The PRC abstained on January 10 from UN Resolution 2722 which condemned Houthi attacks in the Red Sea.[39] In explanatory remarks, Permanent Representative of China to the United Nations Zhang Jun did however “call on the Houthi armed forces to immediately stop harassing civilian ships and respect the freedom of navigation of all countries.”[40] This is a shift in PRC rhetoric to explicitly recognize the Houthis as instigators of regional instability.
The CCP views the United States-led strikes against the Houthis as escalating regional tensions, however. PRC Minister of Foreign Affairs Spokesman Wang Wenbin called on January 4 for all parties to “play a constructive and responsible role” in keeping the Red Sea safe.[41] The PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs Spokeswoman Mao Ning also expressed concern on January 12 about the alleged ”escalation of tensions in the Red Sea” after United States-led strikes on Houthi positions on January 11.[42] A joint PRC MFA and Arab League statement on January 16 called on “all parties to cool down the situation…and effectively maintain regional peace and stability.”[43] The bigger problem from the CCP’s perspective is not the hostilities instigated by the Houthis, but rather the United States-led counterstrikes. The party views the willingness of the United States and allies to strike Houthi positions as risking wider regional escalation, which would threaten PRC economic interests in the region.
Myanmar
A second PRC-brokered ceasefire in northern Myanmar failed to stop the fighting between the Myanmar junta and rebel groups. PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesperson Mao Ning announced on January 12 that the PRC had mediated a formal ceasefire agreement between the Myanmar junta government and three ethnic armed groups. Ceasefire negotiations took place in Kunming, Yunnan in the PRC on January 10 and 11. The MFA claimed that the two sides agreed to implement the ceasefire immediately, to address disputes and concerns through peaceful negotiation, and not to undermine the safety of Chinese people living in the border area and Chinese projects and personnel in Myanmar.[44] Unnamed officials who attended the negotiations told Radio Free Asia that the ceasefire applied only to Shan state in northern Myanmar and did not specify a given length of time. An “ex-military official” said the ceasefire was not sustainable and it had resulted from PRC pressure on both sides. The official said the PRC was concerned about the war negatively impacting industrial products from the PRC’s Yunnan Province, which borders Myanmar’s Shan State.[45] Myanmar’s military broke the ceasefire on January 13, however, one day after it was announced. The Ta’ang National Liberation Army rebel group reported 19 artillery strikes by the military on targets throughout Shan and northern Myanmar.[46]
The PRC previously negotiated a ceasefire on December 14, which also immediately failed to stop the fighting.[47] The PRC’s interests in the Myanmar civil war include re-opening trade disrupted by the fighting, ensuring the safety of PRC nationals and projects, protecting border security, and cracking down on telecommunications fraud centers in northern Myanmar which have defrauded and kidnapped PRC nationals. The PRC has maintained ties with both the junta and multiple rebel groups in pursuit of these goals.[48]
The CCP may also seek to negotiate a ceasefire to bolster its diplomatic reputation. The PRC has often portrayed itself as a promoter of global peace, security, and stability, for example through its Global Security Initiative and its ongoing calls for peace talks in the Russia-Ukraine and Israel-Hamas wars.[49]
China-Taiwan Weekly Update, January 11, 2024
Click here to read the full report.
Authors: Daniel Shats and Nils Peterson of the Institute for the Study of War
Editors: Dan Blumenthal and Frederick W. Kagan of the American Enterprise Institute
Data Cutoff: January 9 at 5pm ET
The China–Taiwan Weekly Update focuses on the Chinese Communist Party’s paths to controlling Taiwan and relevant cross–Taiwan Strait developments.
Key Takeaways
- PRC high-altitude balloon flights through Taiwan’s Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) have become a daily occurrence and are likely part of a CCP effort to test Taiwan’s responses and wear down its threat awareness.
- Taiwan arrested an independent legislative candidate on suspicion of accepting money from the CCP to run for office.
- The CCP threatened further economic punitive measures against Taiwan related to the cross-strait Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA).
- The People’s Liberation Army (PLA) Southern Theater Command conducted air and naval exercises in the South China Sea from January 3 to 5.
- The December purges of top PLA military and defense industry officials reflect Xi Jinping’s fears of disloyalty in the military and show that the anti-corruption campaign has not yet succeeded in rooting out endemic corruption in the military.
- A loss of Compacts of Free Association (COFA) funding for Palau, Micronesia, and the Marshall Islands would enable the CCP to expand its leverage points over these countries.
- The Times of Israel reported that Israeli Defense Forces encountered “vast quantities of weapons manufactured by China” in Gaza.
Taiwan
Taiwan’s three presidential candidates are making their last appeals for votes before the January 13 presidential election. Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) presidential candidate Lai Ching-te urged voters to “choose the right road” and not reverse eight years of progress by the Tsai Ing-wen administration. Lai and the DPP also continued past messaging of protecting Taiwan’s democracy against CCP interference. Kuomintang (KMT) candidate Hou Yu-ih and the KMT heavily promoted an appeal for all anti-DPP voters to strategically concentrate their votes on him because he is the candidate most likely to defeat Lai. The KMT also continued criticizing the DPP for alleged corruption and incompetence. Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) candidate Ko Wen-je continued to criticize both major parties and promote his economics-focused “Third Way” campaign.
DPP presidential candidate Lai Ching-te, vice-presidential candidate Hsiao Bi-khim, and President Tsai Ing-wen campaigned together and emphasized a message of not “turning back time” on progress made during the eight years of the Tsai administration. They warned of negative consequences if voters allowed the KMT to win the presidency or a legislative majority. The consequences they noted include the obstruction of defense spending, a reduction of Taiwan’s economic competitiveness, and a return to the unratified Cross-Strait Service Trade Agreement (CSSTA) that sparked mass student protests in 2014.[1]
Taiwanese media reported that many viewers commented that a recent viral DPP campaign ad resonated with them. The January 2 campaign ad, which features Lai, Tsai, and Hsiao on a road trip, received over 10 million views across social media platforms by January 5. The video showed Tsai and Lai casually chatting and joking in the car as Tsai drove around. Near the end, Tsai handed the keys to Lai and got out, telling him he was a better driver than her. The trip continued with Lai driving and his running mate Hsiao as a passenger.[2] Lai, Hsiao, and Tsai continued using the ad’s theme of “choosing the right road for Taiwan” as a motif in campaign events throughout the week.[3]
KMT presidential candidate Hou Yu-ih, vice-presidential candidate Hsiao Bi-khim, party chairman Eric Chu, and top-ranked legislator-at-large nominee Han Kuo-yu attempted to secure more backing from voters who support the opposition. The KMT officials repeatedly called on supporters of TPP candidate Ko Wen-je and former independent candidate Terry Gou to strategically concentrate their votes on Hou.[4] They argued that Hou was the candidate most likely to defeat the incumbent DPP. Hou was in second place behind Lai in most polls since the November 25 candidate registration. He consistently hovered around 29% support in a weighted average of polls, compared to Lai at around 34% and Ko at around 22%. Hou and Jaw also repeatedly said that Ko and Gou would be included in discussions of their Cabinet composition if they won the election.[5] The KMT candidates also continued to attack the DPP for allegedly corrupt and ineffective governance and for creating “panic” over PRC election interference to discredit its political opponents.[6]
Ko and Gou have not been receptive to the KMT’s appeal to consolidate the opposition, however. Ko claimed that the KMT lacks integrity and that its offer to include him in its cabinet was a “trick” to promote strategic voting.[7] Terry Gou continued not responding to calls from Hou or Jaw.[8] Ko did not call on Terry Gou to endorse him but said “true friends” did not need to force each other. The president of a Gou support organization endorsed Ko and claimed that most former Gou supporters now supported Ko despite efforts by Hou’s campaign to win over Gou supporters and Gou’s previous attempts to unite the opposition against Lai.[9]
TPP presidential candidate and chairman Ko Wen-je and vice-presidential candidate Cynthia Wu Hsin-ying continued to emphasize that economic issues as central to their “Third Way” campaign. Ko published an article in The Economist in which he argued that the two dominant parties were overly focused on the “unification or independence” debate even though he claimed 90% of Taiwanese citizens supposedly support the “status quo.” He laid out broad policy proposals for “pragmatic” and “rational” domestic and international policies, listing economic development as first among them.[10] He also criticized the DPP administration for failing to construct promised social housing units.[11]
There have not been any new polls about the Taiwan election since Taiwan’s Central Election Commission instituted a “polling blackout” beginning on January 3. The final Taiwan News Poll of Polls, released on January 2, showed Lai in first place in a weighted aggregate of polls from the previous 15 days. At the time, Lai had 35.3% support, Hou had 28.7%, and Ko had 24%.[12]
PRC high-altitude balloon flights through Taiwan’s Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) have become a daily occurrence and are likely part of a CCP effort to test Taiwan’s responses and wear down its threat awareness. Taiwan’s Ministry of National Defense (MND) reported eleven PRC high-altitude balloons that floated over or around Taiwan since January 3. This number included three balloons on January 3, one on January 4, two on January 5, one on January 6, three on January 7, four on January 8, and one on January 9. At least five of the balloons flew directly over the island of Taiwan. The MND detected the balloons at altitudes ranging from 15,000 to 33,000 feet.[13] The MND first reported a PRC balloon among its daily updates of PRC violations of Taiwan’s ADIZ on December 8 and has since reported them with high frequency throughout late December and every day of 2024 so far.[14]
An MND press statement on January 6 said the balloons posed a “serious threat” to international air routes and condemned the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) “disregard for the safety of passengers.” It assessed that the main purpose of the balloons is to carry out gray-zone harassment and “cognitive operations” to harm the morale of the Taiwanese people.[15] Retired Taiwanese Army Major General Ko Yung-sen echoed this perspective, saying that the balloons were part of PLA “gray zone” operations intended to normalize the PRC’s territorial claims over the Taiwan Strait and reduce Taiwanese people’s threat awareness.[16] Colonel Wang Chia-chun, who is the deputy head of the MND’s joint operations planning section, said that the CCP wanted Taiwan to shoot down the balloons, but MND would not waste ammunition attempting to do so.[17] MND previously assessed that the balloons were harmless weather balloons.[18]
The PRC has normalized daily air and naval activities around Taiwan, including near-daily aerial crossings of the median line in the Taiwan Strait, since 2020.[19] Taiwan does not scramble aircraft in response to all PRC ADIZ violations, but it does put military personnel on standby to respond quickly if needed. The high frequency of ADIZ violations drains Taiwan’s resources, exhausts military personnel, and degrades Taiwan’s threat awareness. The PRC’s daily balloon flights around Taiwan in 2024, including an increasing number of balloons flying directly above the island, indicate that it is trying to normalize these activities as well. Taiwan’s MND’s statements on the balloon flights and its unprecedented inclusion of the balloons in its daily maps of ADIZ violations starting in December show that Taiwan considers the balloons a part of the PRC’s broader coercion campaign.
The CCP has not issued an official explanation for the increase in balloons that have passed over Taiwan since early December. Two articles in the PRC’s state-owned Global Times on January 4 cited unnamed “experts” who claimed the PRC balloons over Taiwan were weather balloons that drifted unintentionally and said they should not be “sensationalized.”[20] ISW cannot confirm the nature of the balloons themselves, but the trend of balloons flying first near Taiwan, then directly over Taiwan in increasing numbers and frequency closer to Taiwan’s election is unlikely to be the result of natural weather patterns.
Taiwan arrested an independent legislative candidate on suspicion of accepting money from the CCP to run for office. Taiwan’s Ministry of Justice Investigation Bureau (MJIB) said on January 5 that it arrested independent legislative candidate for the city of Taoyuan Ma Chih-wei on suspicion of colluding with the CCP. Prosecutors said that Ma had received over 1 million NTD (over $32,000) in cryptocurrency and US dollars from a source in the PRC through money transfer apps, such as Tether. The money was intended to fund a run for a legislative seat in Taoyuan. Ma was formerly the spokesperson for the Taoyuan office of the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP). She failed to secure her party’s nomination for the legislative seat and continued to run as an independent, however. Ma made trips to the PRC in April, May, October, and December 2023, including a trip in May to partake in a Mazu religious pilgrimage and meet with CCP contacts together with the current chairman of the TPP’s Taoyuan Office Huang Cheng-chun.[21] Prosecutors also accused Ma of passing information about intelligence officials and classified information about her legislative race to PRC contacts.[22]
Trips to the PRC by Taiwanese politicians have been a frequent source of controversy during the last few months of the Taiwanese election. A Keelung borough warden on January 9 became the first borough warden to be indicted for allegedly leading a CCP-funded group trip to the PRC, where participants were encouraged to support certain legislative candidates in Taiwan. A borough warden is a type of local official below the municipal level. Taipei prosecutors had previously questioned 41 borough wardens in December over similar trips they made to the PRC.[23]
The CCP threatened further economic punitive measures against Taiwan related to the cross-strait Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA). The PRC’s Ministry of Commerce said on January 9 that it was “studying” additional measures to suspend tariff concessions for certain Taiwanese products under ECFA because Taiwanese authorities had “not taken any effective measures to ease trade restrictions.” Targeted industries may include agriculture, fishing, machinery, auto parts, and textiles.[24] The PRC previously announced on December 15 that Taiwan had violated its commitments under ECFA by imposing “trade barriers” on trade with the PRC.[25] On December 21 it announced it would end tariff restrictions on 12 chemical products originating in Taiwan.[26] Taiwan’s Mainland Affairs Council (MAC) said on January 9 that the PRC had ignored Taiwanese proposals to negotiate trade disputes within the framework of ECFA because it was determined to interfere in Taiwan’s election. The MAC issued its “strongest condemnation” of the CCP and said the CCP’s methods would not succeed in intimidating Taiwanese people and forcing them to submit.[27]
The CCP’s threat of additional economic punishment for Taiwan conflicts with the party’s simultaneous measures to promote cross-strait economic integration, however. On January 8, the PRC Ministry of Commerce, Taiwan Affairs Office, National Development and Reform Commission, and Ministry of Industry and Information Technology jointly released new guidelines to help the PRC’s Fujian Province deepen economic integration with Taiwan. The guidelines said Fujian would establish an institutional system and regulatory model conducive to cross-strait integrated development, including encouragement for Taiwanese businesses to explore the Chinese market.[28] The CCP Central Committee previously announced in September 2023 that Fujian would be built into a “demonstration zone” for cross-strait integrated development.[29] A January 8 Global Times article said the measures were meant to boost Taiwanese business confidence in the PRC and to demonstrate “goodwill” toward Taiwan in alleged contrast with actions by Taiwan’s DPP administration.[30] The CCP’s policies to promote economic integration with Taiwan are part of a long-term effort to increase PRC influence over Taiwan. In the short term, these measures may serve as a “carrot” to incentivize Taiwanese businessmen to support the KMT in pairing with the “stick” of threatening economic “retaliation” to punish the DPP.
China
The People’s Liberation Army Southern Theater Command conducted air and naval exercises in the South China Sea from January 3 to 5.[31] The exercises were in response to joint Philippines-United States operations in the South China Sea from January 3 to 4, which the aircraft carrier USS Carl Vinson led.[32] These operations occurred in the wake of CCP harassment of Philippine ships near Philippine-controlled territory since December. Chinese Coast Guard (CCG) vessels attempted to thwart Philippine supply missions near the Second Thomas Shoal by firing water cannons and acoustic weapons at Philippine government ships delivering supplies on December 9 and 10, for example. A CCG vessel also rammed a Philippine ship near Second Thomas Shoal.[33] The PRC MFA inaccurately framed the Philippines as the instigator on December 25 by stating that it “provocatively violated relevant waters in the South China Sea, spread false information, and colluded with external forces to undermine peace and stability in the South China Sea.”[34] The PRC MFA repeated this language on January 4 by claiming that US-Philippine naval activities “hinder the management and control of maritime situations and disputes.”[35]
The December purges of top PLA military and defense industry officials reflect Xi Jinping’s fears of disloyalty in the military and show the anti-corruption campaign has not yet succeeded in rooting out endemic corruption in the military. Bloomberg reported that United States intelligence assessments attribute the purges of top military and defense industry officials in late December to graft that resulted in missiles filled with water and missile silos with improper lids.[36] PLA Navy Lt. Col. Yao Cheng, who defected to the United States in 2016, stated that widespread misappropriation of the equipment budget for events such as dinners was common during his time in the PLA.[37] This shows that the extent of corruption before Xi’s 2015-2016 PLA reforms stretched beyond the military leadership to the officer cadre. The December 2023 purges demonstrate that those reforms did not eliminate lower-level corruption because the purged PLA leadership were burgeoning leaders a decade ago.
Compacts of Free Association
A loss of Compacts of Free Association (COFA) funding for Palau, Micronesia, and the Marshall Islands would enable the CCP to expand its leverage points over these countries. These COFAs govern the United States’ relationship with Palau, Micronesia, and the Marshall Islands while also granting the United States extensive military access throughout their territories. The United States renewed COFAs with Palau and Micronesia in May.[38] It then did so with the Marshall Islands in October.[39] The signed agreements are now before Congress for funding consideration. Congress previously funded the COFAs for a twenty-year period in 2003.[40] The total cost for all three of the twenty-year agreements would be roughly $7 billion spread over the period 2024 to 2043, according to the Congressional Research Service.[41] Deputy Secretary of State nominee Kurt Campbell stated during his Senate confirmation hearing on December 7 that “if we don’t get it [COFA funding] you can expect that literally the next day Chinese diplomats — military and other folks — will be on the plane…trying to secure a better deal for China.”[42] The US House of Representatives Select Committee on the Strategic Competition between the United States and the Chinese Communist Party also called for renewing the COFAs in a mid-December report.[43] President Biden signed the 2024 National Defense Authorization Act into law on December 22, but it did not include COFA funding.[44] Funding the COFAs is a key part of the US Pacific Partnership Strategy to “fulfill our [United States] historical commitments and strengthen our enduring relationships with the full Pacific Islands region, including our special relationship with the Republic of Palau, the Republic of the Marshall Islands, and the Federated States of Micronesia.”[45] Palau’s President, Surangel Whipps Jr, expressed concern in a December 27 interview with ABC Australia over the lack of Congressional-approved funding for the COFA agreement, in part because the 2010 Palau Compact Review Agreement was not funded by the US Congress until 2018.[46]
These three island countries control key sea lanes that provide a secure route connecting American allies and partners, such as the Philippines and Taiwan, to the US territory of Guam and the state of Hawaii. Palau and the Marshall Islands are 2 of the 13 countries that maintain official diplomatic relations with Taiwan.[47]
The loss of COFA funding would present an opportunity for the CCP to expand its economic influence with these vital Pacific Island countries. For example, this funding loss would cause severe financial pressure in Palau because COFA funding accounts for $36.9 million of the national government’s annual $124.2 million revenue as of fiscal year 2023.[48] This is an economic vulnerability that the CCP could partially fill by encouraging PRC nationals to vacation in Palau. The CCP cut tourism to Palau over the last decade to nearly zero as punishment for maintaining full diplomatic relations with Taiwan.[49] The reversal of this CCP policy would provide the party with economic leverage to wield over Palau in the event of future policy disagreements. The expansion of the CCP’s economic influence in Palau would also provide the party a leverage point to coerce the countries into switching diplomatic recognition from Taiwan to the People's Republic of China (PRC). The PRC aims to coerce countries into switching diplomatic recognition to falsely argue that Taiwan is a province of the People’s Republic of China rather than a legitimate country named the Republic of China.
The loss of COFA funding would also exacerbate the CCP narrative put forth by the propaganda outlet Global Times that the United States only cares about Palau for security reasons rather than mutually beneficial cooperation. [50] The Palau Senate passed a resolution in November rejecting the permanent deployment of a US Patriot missile defense battery.[51] This was the first instance of lawmakers challenging President Surangel Whipps Jr’s request for the United States to construct an over-the-horizon radar system in Palau.[52] In a December 27 interview with ABC Australia, Whipps tied this Palau Senate resolution to a narrative among unspecified portions of Palau that the United States actions were not in the best interests of Palau, as seen by the repeated delay in COFA funding.[53] The associated fiscal challenges that Palau faces without COFA funding buttresses the CCP’s narrative, which in turn creates hurdles for deploying mutually beneficial United States defense resources to the country.
The loss of COFA funding would also provide the CCP an opportunity to expand influence efforts targeting Micronesian political elites. The CCP has completed infrastructure projects throughout the country, such as houses for the country’s president, vice president, speakers of congress, and chief justice.[54] Axios reported that former Micronesian officials confirmed receiving gifts from the PRC, such as money, while on official state visits to the country.[55] The lack of COFA funding would exacerbate the appeal of CCP monetary gifts or infrastructure projects that target the Micronesian political elite. Micronesian President Wesley Simina also stated in late November that his country would be at a “fiscal cliff” without US Congressional approval of COFA funding. This would mean that “we [Micronesia] will have to find different sources of funding… and that’s not out there available immediately.”[56] The loss of COFA funding would also provide opportunities for external powers such as the CCP to enhance their economic influence in the country by filling these funding gaps.
The COFA funding also makes up $35.2 million of the Marshall Islands national government's annual $173.9 million revenue as of fiscal year 2023.[57] The loss of COFA funding would expose the country to similar severe fiscal challenges as Palau and Micronesia.
PRC in the Middle East
The Times of Israel reported that Israeli Defense Forces encountered “vast quantities of weapons manufactured by China” in Gaza.[59] Business Insider reported that the weapons included items, such as assault rifles and grenade launchers. An unspecified Israeli intelligence source expressed concern over the technological sophistication of the uncovered weaponry and communications technology because it is “stuff that Hamas didn’t have before, with very sophisticated explosives which have never been found before and especially on such a large scale.” [60] It remains unclear whether the PRC knowingly supplied the weapons to Hamas or if the group acquired these weapons via a third party.
The PRC is currently pursuing a diplomatic line of effort that aims to supplant US influence with Arab states by proposing what it claims to be a more inclusive and cooperative regional security framework.[61] This involves portraying Washington as a self-interested and destabilizing influence in the region while simultaneously positioning Beijing as an altruistic and unbiased actor.[62] The use of Chinese weapons by Hamas contributes to undercutting this narrative, regardless of whether Beijing knowingly supplied these items.
The CCP is balancing in Yemen by financially supporting the Republic of Yemen and avoiding condemning the Houthis. The Charge d'affaires of the Chinese Embassy in Yemen Shao Zheng held a meeting with Director of the Office of the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Yemen al-Qadir in Riyadh on January 7.[63] The meeting comes in the aftermath of a December 7 “economic and technical cooperation agreement” between the Republic of Yemen and the People’s Republic of China.[64] The Republic of Yemen is a separate political entity from the Houthi Movement, which ISW and CTP have assessed is attacking shipping in the Red Sea as part of a broader regional escalation strategy led by Iran.[65] The CCP meeting with the Republic of Yemen official allows the PRC to claim it supports stability and economic development in the region.
PRC Minister of Foreign Affairs Spokesman Wang Wenbin instead called on January 4 for all parties to “play a constructive and responsible role” in keeping the Red Sea safe.[66] The CCP avoided condemning Houthi attacks in the Red Sea. The absent condemnation of the Houthis reflects the PRC aiming to avoid antagonizing Iran.
China-Taiwan Weekly Update, January 4, 2024
Click here to read the full report.
Authors: Nils Peterson, Matthew Sperzel, and Daniel Shats of the Institute for the Study of War
Editors: Dan Blumenthal and Frederick W. Kagan of the American Enterprise Institute
Data Cutoff: January 2 at 5pm ET
The China–Taiwan Weekly Update focuses on the Chinese Communist Party’s paths to controlling Taiwan and relevant cross–Taiwan Strait developments.
Key Takeaways
- Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) presidential candidate Lai Ching-te continues to lead in the polls.
- Taiwan’s three presidential candidates participated in a televised debate on December 30.
- The PRC is continuing its intimidation tactics toward Taiwan before the election.
- The PRC’s removal of top military and defense industry officials from political bodies reflects Xi Jinping’s continuing efforts to purge corruption and strengthen the loyalty of the military.
- Xi Jinping appointed Admiral Dong Jun as the new Minister of National Defense on December 29.
- CCP General Secretary Xi Jinping reiterated his vision to forge a Sino-centric international order in statements around the new year.
- A loss of Compacts of Free Association (COFA) funding for Palau, Micronesia, and the Marshall Islands would enable the CCP to expand its leverage points over these countries.
- PRC Consul General in Jeddah Wang Qiming authored an article on the “Palestinian-Israeli conflict” in the Saudi media outlet Okaz that supports a CCP line of effort to supplant US influence in Arab states.
Taiwan
Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) presidential candidate Lai Ching-te continues to lead in the polls. Polls from all major organizations in Taiwan show that Lai maintains a lead of at least three percentage points over Kuomintang (KMT) candidate Hou Yu-ih. Lai’s lead is greater than the margin of error. Some polls, such as Formosa and Mirror News, show that Lai holds more than a ten-point lead over Hou. The Poll of Polls, which is a weighted average of public election polls over the past 15 days that Taiwan News publishes, shows slight changes in candidate support levels since last week. Lai’s support has remained mostly steady at 35.3%, while support for Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) candidate Ko Wen-je grew by three percentage points to 24%. Hou fell nearly two points to 28.7%, however.[1] The slight shift in voter support comes after three televised policy presentations from the presidential candidates on December 20, 22, and 26. These are the last polls in the run-up to the presidential election, as Taiwan entered a ten-day poll “blackout” period on January 3 ahead of the election on January 13.[2][3]
Taiwan’s three presidential candidates participated in a televised debate on December 30. This is the first time the candidates have directly faced off against each other in the election. Cross-strait issues dominated the debate and were a main source of criticism from all three candidates. The candidates also sparred over individual real estate controversies and attacked each other’s integrity for alleged improprieties. KMT candidate Hou Yu-ih and TPP candidate Ko Wen-je took an especially offensive position against DPP candidate Lai Ching-te, sharply criticizing the latter’s cross-strait policy and alleging illegal construction practices on his home in New Taipei City. The candidates did not raise any new issues or make major announcements. They mostly reiterated previously stated policy positions.
DPP candidate Lai Ching-te maintained his emphasis on cross-strait issues, consistent with his presidential platform. Lai signaled continuity with President Tsai Ing-wen in foreign and domestic policy, touting the DPP’s diplomacy as the reason for Taiwan’s deepening integration into the international community.[4] Lai advocated for giving priority to the protection of human rights, democracy, and freedom in Taiwan, and promised not to allow the Republic of China (ROC) constitution’s surviving claims to mainland China to steer cross-strait relations.[5] Lai labeled the People’s Republic of China (PRC) as the greatest threat to Taiwan’s existence, while the other two candidates refrained from doing so when prompted.[6] Lai addressed criticisms of support for Taiwan’s independence, stating that the PRC and ROC’s existence are not at odds with each other and are completely unrelated, which is the definition of independence.[7] The PRC Taiwan Affairs Office (TAO) condemned Lai’s statements during the debate. TAO spokesperson Chen Binhua threatened Lai that Taiwanese independence is incompatible with cross-strait peace.[8]
KMT candidate Hou Yu-ih called out the perceived failures of the incumbent DPP administration, ranging from the deterioration of cross-strait relations to domestic governance issues. Hou criticized President Tsai’s diplomatic strategy, pointing to Taiwan’s loss of nine diplomatic partners during her presidency.[9] Hou highlighted the lack of cross-strait communication, dialogue, and exchange under Tsai. Hou expressed disapproval at the high rate of prosecution under Taiwan’s Anti-Infiltration Act during the election process and stated the judiciary should not be used as a tool for political gain.[10] The Anti-Infiltration Act is a law passed in 2019 that aims to prevent foreign influence from undermining Taiwan’s national interests.[11] Taipei authorities launched an investigation of 41 municipal borough wardens for suspected violation of the Anti-Infiltration Act after the wardens made a series of trips to the PRC at the invitation of the Taiwan Affairs Office.[12] Hou and his running mate Jaw Shaw-kong previously downplayed wrongdoing and accused the DPP of selectively prosecuting during the election process.[13]
TPP candidate Ko Wen-je appealed to voters to seize the chance to break the cycle of DPP and KMT governments. Ko championed a new Taiwan that rejects societal division and the entrenched ideology of former administrations. He characterized the DPP government as one of shortage and waste, advocating for a government that favors rationality, pragmatism, and science. Ko sought to distance himself from the other candidates’ polarizing positions on cross-strait relations. He urged Taiwan to find balance in an international structure increasingly defined by US-China competition. Ko asserted that Taiwan should be a bridge between the US and China, not a pawn in their confrontation.[14] He distanced himself from the concept that “two sides of the strait are one family,” calling the statement a symbol of goodwill while noting the differences in values and way of life between the PRC and Taiwan.[15] “Two sides of the Strait are one family” is a political platitude pushed by the CCP to lend credence to its One-China principle and warm Taiwan to the idea of unification.[16] Ko previously expressed support for the concept in 2017 during his tenure as mayor of Taipei.[17]
The PRC is continuing its intimidation tactics toward Taiwan before the election. Revelations of numerous possible PRC gray zone activities and influence operations against Taiwan circulated throughout Taiwanese media since last week.
Reuters reported on December 28 that the PRC pressured the popular Taiwanese band Mayday to support the PRC’s claim that Taiwan is a part of China.[18] Reuters cited an anonymous source who provided access to an internal security note that details the PRC’s threats to fine the band for lip-syncing, a fraudulent offense in the PRC. A Taiwanese security official asserted that the PRC’s intimidation of Mayday was to influence Taiwan’s youth vote. Spokesperson for Lai’s campaign Chao Yi-hsiang stated the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) election interference is becoming increasingly obvious.[19] Ko Wen-je stated that he condemned the PRC’s actions if the story was true.[20] The KMT issued a press release calling on Reuters to release its source for verification.[21]
Two PRC tugboats entered within three nautical miles of Taiwan’s southern coast on December 31.[22] Taiwan’s Coast Guard Administration (CGA) dispatched a vessel to expel the boats, which were towing a barge northward. The radio operator on one of the tugboats mocked the CGA’s warnings but left Taiwan’s waters without incident.
PRC high-altitude balloons passed directly over Taiwan for the first time on January 1, 2, and 3. At least five of the nine balloons that Taiwan’s Ministry of National Defense (MND) detected within Taiwan’s Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) since January 1 flew above the island. The MND detected two balloons on January 1, one of which flew over Taiwan.[23] The MND detected four balloons on January 2, with three flying over Taiwan.[24] The MND detected 3 balloons on January 3, with at least one flying over the island.[25]
The PRC sending the balloons over Taiwan is likely part of a broader effort to wear down Taiwan’s resources and response capabilities. The PRC has normalized daily air and naval activities around Taiwan, including near-daily aerial crossings of the median line in the Taiwan Strait, since 2020. The MND publicly stated that the balloons were weather balloons but has started including them among its daily reports of PRC ADIZ incursions since December 8.[26] The frequency and number of consecutive instances is increasing since the MND started reporting the balloons. MND’s unprecedented inclusion of balloon flights in its daily updates and maps of ADIZ violations in December shows that Taiwan is increasingly concerned about these balloons and may consider them part of the PRC’s broader coercion campaign.
China
The PRC’s removal of top military and defense industry officials from political bodies reflects Xi Jinping’s continuing efforts to purge corruption and strengthen the loyalty of the military. The PRC’s National People’s Congress (NPC) abruptly removed nine high-ranking military figures as representatives to the legislative body on December 29. It did not explain the decision. The purged members included five current or former commanders of the People’s Liberation Army Rocket Force (PLARF), two members from the Equipment Development Department (EDD), one from the PLA Air Force (PLAAF), and one from the PLA Navy (PLAN). This is the first time that top air force and naval officers were implicated in the recent purges.
- Former PLARF commander Li Yuchao, who was relieved of command in July 2023 due to a corruption investigation.
- Former PLARF commander Zhou Yaning, Li Yuchao’s predecessor.
- PLARF deputy commander Li Chuanguang.
- Former PLARF deputy commander Zhang Zhenzhong. Zhang was Li Yuchao’s deputy and was placed under corruption investigations at the same time as Li.
- PLARF head of equipment development Lu Hong.
- Former deputy director of the General Armament Department (now replaced by the EDD) Zhang Yulin.
- EDD deputy director Rao Wenmin.
- Former PLAAF commander Ding Laihang.
- PLAN Southern Theater Commander Ju Xinchun.[27]
The EDD opened a corruption investigation in the summer of 2023 into hardware procurement going back to 2017, which overlaps with the period that former defense minister Li Shangfu led the procurement department. Li Shangfu was removed from his post in October 2023 following a corruption investigation.[28] Hong Kong-based South China Morning Post (SCMP) said the purged Rocket Force members represented most of the PLARF’s top leadership since the service was established in the 2015 reorganization of the PLA. SCMP also reported that removal from the NPC may be a sign of future disciplinary action, as NPC members are immune from arrest or criminal charges. The Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC) also removed three defense industry executives as representatives on December 27. The executives were Wu Yansheng, chairman of the China Aerospace Science and Technology Corporation (CASC); Liu Shiquan, chairman of the board of China North Industries Group Corporation (Norinco); and Wang Changqing, deputy manager of China Aerospace Science and Industry Corporation (CASIC). All three are top executives at major state-owned defense technology firms and do not appear to have lost their positions at their companies as of January 2.[29]
The purges from the NPC and CPPCC appear as part of a trend of intensifying anti-corruption efforts in the military in 2023, which primarily focused on the Rocket Force and equipment procurement department. They are also part of Xi Jinping’s broader Anti-Corruption Campaign that began in 2013, which has recently intensified its targeting of senior PRC officials. SCMP reported that the PRC’s Central Commission for Discipline Inspection (CCDI) investigated a record-breaking 45 senior officials in 2023, a 40% jump from 32 senior officials in 2022. 27 of the 45 officials had already retired from their roles, showing that CCDI is breaking from precedent by investigating retired officials.[30] The purges indicate Xi’s perspective that the PLA is not sufficiently loyal to the party and his willingness to risk projecting instability within the CCP to establish loyalty within the party.
Xi Jinping appointed Admiral Dong Jun as the new Minister of National Defense on December 29.[31] He is replacing former Minister of National Defense Li Shangfu, who disappeared from public view in August and formally lost his position in October.[32] The PRC has not had a Minister of National Defense since then. Dong most recently served as commander of the PLAN from September 2021 to December 2023.[33] Xi promoted Hu Zhongming to the rank of admiral to replace Dong as the PLAN commander.[34] Dong is the first PLAN officer to become Minister of National Defense. He has experience commanding theater joint operations within the PLA since 2013 and extensive international engagement with navies ranging from Chile to Sweden, including joint exercises with Russia and Pakistan.[35] His background in joint operations aligns with ongoing efforts to enhance interoperability between service branches. Dong’s experience engaging with foreign interlocutors prepares him for the international representation and communication component inherent in the position of Minister of National Defense.
CCP General Secretary Xi Jinping reiterated his vision to forge a Sino-centric international order in statements around the new year. The Central Conference on Work Relating to Foreign Affairs is a key foreign policy meeting that occurs approximately every five years. Xi’s December 28 speech at the Central Conference on Work Relating to Foreign Affairs conveyed his view that “the world has entered into a new period of turbulence and change,” but the general trend toward “a shared destiny for the international community will not change.”[36] He further stated that the PRC has “greater moral appeal” and needs to “hold the international moral high ground, and unite and rally the overwhelming majority of the world.”[37] His rhetoric on holding the international moral high ground includes taking policy positions opposing American geopolitical stances. One example of this is the PRC claiming to hold the moral high ground in the Israel-Hamas War by advocating for an immediate ceasefire in contrast to the allegedly “biased” United States.[38]
Xi framed the People’s Republic of China as pursuing a path of “peaceful development” and “win-win cooperation” while building “a community with a shared future for mankind” in his New Year’s speech.[39] Xi also reiterated the CCP’s view in his New Year’s speech that unifying with Taiwan was a “historical necessity.”[40] His rhetoric toward Taiwan in this speech is consistent with CCP policy that falsely views Taiwan as a province of the People’s Republic of China rather than the current sovereign state of the Republic of China. Xi’s rhetoric does not indicate that the CCP intends to manufacture an imminent crisis over Taiwan. Eventual unification with Taiwan is central to Xi’s objective of forging a Sino-centric international system.
Compacts of Free Association
A loss of Compacts of Free Association (COFA) funding for Palau, Micronesia, and the Marshall Islands would enable the CCP to expand its leverage points over these countries. These COFAs govern the United States’ relationship with Palau, Micronesia, and the Marshall Islands while also granting the United States extensive military access throughout their territories. The United States renewed COFAs with Palau and Micronesia in May.[41] It then did so with the Marshall Islands in October.[42] The signed agreements are now before Congress for funding consideration. Congress previously funded the COFAs for a twenty-year period in 2003.[43] The total cost for all three of the twenty-year agreements would be roughly $7 billion spread over the period 2024 to 2043, according to the Congressional Research Service.[44] Deputy Secretary of State nominee Kurt Campbell stated during his Senate confirmation hearing on December 7 that “if we don’t get it [COFA funding] you can expect that literally the next day Chinese diplomats — military and other folks — will be on the plane…trying to secure a better deal for China.”[45] The US House of Representatives Select Committee on the Strategic Competition between the United States and the Chinese Communist Party also called for renewing the COFAs in a mid-December report.[46] President Biden signed the 2024 National Defense Authorization Act into law on December 22, but it did not include COFA funding.[47] Palau’s President Surangel Whipps Jr expressed concern in a December 27 interview with ABC Australia over the lack of Congressional-approved funding for the COFA agreement, in part because the 2010 Palau Compact Review Agreement was not funded by the US Congress until 2018.[48]
These three island countries control key sea lanes that provide a secure route connecting American allies and partners, such as the Philippines and Taiwan, to the US territory of Guam and the state of Hawaii. Palau and the Marshall Islands are 2 of the 13 countries that maintain official diplomatic relations with Taiwan.[49]
The loss of COFA funding would present an opportunity for the CCP to expand its economic influence with these vital Pacific Island countries. For example, this funding loss would cause severe financial pressure in Palau because COFA funding accounts for $36.9 million of the national government’s annual $124.2 million revenue as of fiscal year 2023.[50] This is an economic vulnerability that the CCP could partially fill by encouraging PRC nationals to vacation in Palau. The CCP cut tourism to Palau over the last decade to nearly zero as punishment for maintaining full diplomatic relations with Taiwan.[51] The reversal of this CCP policy would provide the party with economic leverage to wield over Palau in the event of future policy disagreements. The expansion of the CCP’s economic influence in Palau would also provide the party a leverage point to coerce the countries into switching diplomatic recognition from Taiwan to the People's Republic of China (PRC). The PRC aims to coerce countries into switching diplomatic recognition to falsely argue that Taiwan is a province of the People’s Republic of China rather than a legitimate country named the Republic of China.
The loss of COFA funding would also exacerbate the CCP narrative put forth by the propaganda outlet Global Times that the United States only cares about Palau for security reasons rather than mutually beneficial cooperation. [52] The Palau Senate passed a resolution in November rejecting the permanent deployment of a US Patriot missile defense battery.[53] This was the first instance of lawmakers challenging President Surangel Whipps Jr’s request for the United States to construct an over-the-horizon radar system in Palau.[54] In a December 27 interview with ABC Australia, Whipps tied this Palau Senate resolution to a narrative among unspecified portions of Palau that the United States actions were not in the best interests of Palau, as seen by the repeated delay in COFA funding.[55] The associated fiscal challenges that Palau faces without COFA funding buttresses the CCP’s narrative, which in turn creates hurdles for deploying mutually beneficial United States defense resources to the country.
The loss of COFA funding would also provide the CCP an opportunity to expand influence efforts targeting Micronesian political elites. The CCP has completed infrastructure projects throughout the country, such as houses for the country’s president, vice president, speakers of congress, and chief justice.[56] Axios reported that former Micronesian officials confirmed receiving gifts from the PRC, such as money, while on official state visits to the country.[57] The lack of COFA funding would exacerbate the appeal of CCP monetary gifts or infrastructure projects that target the Micronesian political elite. Micronesian President Wesley Simina also stated in late November that his country would be at a “fiscal cliff” without US Congressional approval of COFA funding. This would mean that “we [Micronesia] will have to find different sources of funding… and that’s not out there available immediately.”[58] The loss of COFA funding would also provide opportunities for external powers such as the CCP to enhance their economic influence in the country by filling these funding gaps.
The COFA funding also makes up $35.2 million of the Marshall Islands national government's annual $173.9 million revenue as of fiscal year 2023.[59] The loss of COFA funding would expose the country to similar severe fiscal challenges as Palau and Micronesia.
Israel-Hamas War
PRC Consul General in Jeddah Wang Qiming authored an article on the “Palestinian-Israeli conflict” in the Saudi media outlet Okaz that supports a CCP line of effort to supplant US influence in Arab states. He framed the PRC as standing “on the side of peace, justice, [and] international law” by making “efforts to alleviate the humanitarian crisis in Gaza.”[61] Wang emphasized that the PRC's efforts to push for an immediate ceasefire and two-state solution as evidence for this framing. He then touted the Global Security Initiative to show that the CCP is dedicated to achieving “security and stability in the Middle East.”[62] Wang’s article aligns with the PRC’s diplomatic and information lines of effort that aim to supplant US influence with Arab states by proposing what it claims to be a more inclusive and cooperative regional security framework.[63] This involves portraying Washington as a self-interested and destabilizing influence in the region while simultaneously positioning Beijing as an altruistic and unbiased actor.[64]