Aggressive posturing and brinkmanship are now threatening the stability of the Indo-Pacific region. Speaker of US House of Representatives Nancy Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan along with the Congressional delegation has turned into a watershed moment, triggering a diplomatic storm between the US and China. Pelosi embarked on a trip to East Asia - Singapore, Malaysia, South Korea and Japan and made an unconfirmed stop at Taiwan.
Stating that
the Congressional delegation is travelling to the Indo-Pacific “to reaffirm
America’s strong and unshakeable commitment to our allies and friends in the
region”1, the statement by Pelosi deliberately avoided
any mention of Taiwan.
Pelosi who
is second in succession to the US presidency, postponed the scheduled trip to
Taiwan in April after she was affected by Covid. Her comments in July about the
need to show support for Taiwan, sparked speculations about her visit to
Taiwan. The last high-ranked visit to Taiwan was over 25 years ago made by
Republican Newt Gingrich in 1997. Against these developments, President Xi in a
telephone conversation with President Biden reiterated that China’s position on
Taiwan is consistent and resolute and warned, “those who play with fire will
perish by it” and added, “the US should honour the one-China principle
and implement the three joint communiques both in word and in deed”2.
Maintaining
that the “one-China policy of the US has not changed and will not change”,
Biden in response to the strong objection from Beijing said, “well, I think
that the military thinks it’s not a good idea right now,” about Pelosi’s
reported visit3. But President can’t force the legislative
wing to change its decision as the Executive can’t undermine the Legislative
branch in a democracy.
Beijing
deems any deviation from the One-China policy as a “red line” and
Biden fomented a nebula of suspicion with his repeated flip-flops. In a joint press
meeting with Japanese PM Kishida in Tokyo, Biden said the US is prepared to
defend Taiwan if attacked but the White House immediately walked back on his
claim. The “strategic ambiguity” of the US stems from the Taiwan
Relations Act, 1979, which offers to defend the democratic Taiwan framework
providing for a diplomatic and economic relationship and would “consider any
effort to determine the future of Taiwan by other than peaceful means,
including by boycotts or embargoes, a threat to the peace and security of the
Western Pacific area and of grave concern to the United States”4.
(Meaning any embargo or boycott of Taiwan be considered a threat to peace).
America’s
strategic ambiguity is rather intriguing, for the provisions of TRA permit the
US to supply defence equipment to Taiwan but don’t guarantee that the US will
intervene militarily if PRC attacks nor does it relinquish it. While Biden
lived up to the guidelines of the TRA, his multiple gaffes have elevated
temperatures in the region and provoked angry outbursts. Also, a recent surge
in high-profile visits to Taiwan by US officials, which included Democrat and
Republic senators, has made China jittery.
Signalling
its disapproval of these developments, China began sending warplanes into
Taiwan’s ADIZ (Air Defence Identification Zone). Indeed, China’s insecurity
deepened as Taiwan’s recent successes in the fields of health, semiconductors
and scientific technology has made it a natural magnet for productive
collaborations drawing legislators from several Western countries.
This new
global acclaim for Taiwan, together with the dire expansionist pursuits of
Beijing has indeed, prompted countries like Japan to recommend the US to shift
from a policy of strategic ambiguity to a policy of clarity. China’s recent announcement
insisting its “sovereign rights and jurisdiction over the Taiwan Straits”
and totally rejecting that these are “international waters”5
has only reinforced the concerns of countries in the region. Around one-third
of global maritime trade passes through the Taiwan Straits which connects South
China and the East Sea and China’s fresh claims over its sovereignty pose a
grave challenge to the movement of commercial vessels.
Since the
Ukraine crisis, China has been eyeing a forcible reunification of Taiwan and
waiting for an opportune time to unleash its strategy. Setting the stage for
the upcoming 20th National Congress of the Chinese Communist Party
(CCP), where Xi is expected to nullify Deng Xiaoping’s two-term Presidency rule
and claim his third term, addressing a study session of provincial and
ministerial level officials on June 26-27, Xi has asked the party “to hold
high the banner of socialism with Chinese characteristics and stay committed to
driving forward the historic process of national rejuvenation”6.
The reunification of Taiwan is the core aspect of the postulated national
rejuvenation.
Hailing the
efforts of the Central government in enacting law safeguarding national
security in the Hongkong Special administrative region, in securing firm
control over the region, Xi urged the party to “thoroughly review the
international and domestic situation to have a clear understanding of the
strategic opportunities, risks and challenges we face”. He stressed that “achieving
national rejuvenation will be no walk in the park, and it will take more than
drum beating and gong clanging to get there. We must undertake a great struggle
with many new contemporary features and be prepared to work even harder toward
this goal”.
Rightly so,
amid burgeoning domestic troubles of real estate crisis, a slowing economy, and
demographic decline, to distract the public attention, Xi is resorting to ultra-nationalist
brinkmanship. Nancy Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan provided an opportune moment for
China to intensify its reunification agenda. Taiwan besides being a prized
economic and strategic asset is now being used by both the US and China as
leverage.
After rather
symbolic responses to China’s expansionist moves for over a decade, the US
which lost its credibility is now using Taiwan to resurrect its position in
this part of the world. Taiwan is a bridge that separates the two spheres of
influence of the US and China and is strategically very important for both
countries given Taiwan’s geographic location and its supremacy in
semiconductors.
By ceding
the island, the US would completely lose its influence in the region. It would
pose a grave threat to US allies in the region. Also, considering the aggravating
Sino-US strategic competition, the changing international scenario, the US need
to prove its ability to control China’s strategic design toward Taiwan,
Washington wanted to use Taiwan question as a tool.
Moreover, China’s
remonstrance of “the US will bear the responsibility and pay the price for
undermining China’s sovereign security interests”6 and
PLA “will not sit idly by” if Pelosi makes a pitstop at Taiwan and
strengthened the resolve of Speaker Pelosi, a supporter of Tibet and vocal
critic of China’s human rights violation to go ahead with the visit. With the
US heading for a midterm election, Pelosi who is almost on the fag end of her
career, cognizant of the implicit domestic imperatives, couldn’t have cowered
down to Chinese threats.
Though Biden
doesn’t want an escalation, a cancellation of the visit would erode US’s
strategic messaging and would indicate that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP)
could dictate America’s Taiwan policy. While the strategic community and the
policy wonks in the US are deeply divided over the visit with some outrightly
arguing that the visit isn’t worth the risk, Pelosi landed in Taiwan. She held
talks with Taiwanese President Tsai Ing-Wen and said, “America has made a
bedrock promise to always stand with Taiwan. On this strong foundation, we have
a thriving partnership grounded in self-government and self-determination
focused on mutual security in the region and world committed to economic
prosperity”8.
Slamming
Pelosi’s visit as “extremely dangerous”, China stated, “the Taiwan
question is purely an internal affair of China and no other country is entitled
to act as a judge on the Taiwan question” and urged the US to stop playing the
“Taiwan card” to contain China9. Ahead of Pelosi’s
visit, China held live-fire exercises and military drills dangerously close to Taiwan.
Shortly, after Pelosi’s arrival, Eastern Theatre Command announced long-range
live-fire drills near Taiwanese islands, sent 21 fighter jets and fifth-generation
J-20 planes into Taiwan’s air defence zone and threatened targeted military
operations.
In response
to Pelosi’s visit, China’s military and propaganda fronts went on an overdrive.
In addition to the export ban on 100 Taiwanese products announced earlier,
China has now suspended imports of citrus fruits, white scallop and mackerel
and banned the export of natural sand used for producing silicon wafers in chip
production. Ahead of the visit, the Taiwan Presidential Office website was hit
by a cyberattack.
Flexing its
military muscle, China is attempting a trade blockade on Taiwan. Beijing warned
airlines to avoid the Taiwan airspace designated as “danger zones” and
vowed disciplinary action against Taiwan Foundation for Democracy and Taiwan
Foreign Ministry’s International Cooperation and Development Fund10.
Stirring up nationalistic fervour, Beijing is now seeking refuge for its
aggressive confrontation under the pretense of “upholding sovereignty”.
While the Indo-Pacific region is aware of China’s combative belligerence, the world
at large and the US would now experience the peaceful rise proclamations of
Beijing.
Reinforcing
the sabre rattling, the Chinese embassy in India issued a 'red line' warning
over Pelosi's visit11. Russia, Iran, Pakistan, North Korea,
Belarus, Cuba, Cambodia, Myanmar junta, and Afghan Taliban reaffirmed the
"One China Policy'. G7 nations, the EU condemned China's 'aggressive'
military drills and the White House asked China not to turn Pelosi's visit into
a crisis12.
With
economic interests at stake, turning a blind eye to China’s expansionism, the
US operational strategy has been strategic competition. Ever shy of calling
China an adversary unlike its relative ease in terming Russia as one, the US is
now at crossroads. To cater to its domestic interests and geostrategic
alliances, the US has vowed not to abandon Taiwan. Will it now uphold the
rules-based order and amend its strategic ambiguity toward Taiwan?
Though the
US warned that the unilateral change in the status quo of Taiwan is
unacceptable prospects of outright military war between China and the US are
bleak thus far. But the current episode has created frictions in Sino-US
relations which might be hard to revive. Interestingly, unlike the US, the Taiwan
issue is essential fodder for Xi’s political fortunes and Beijing will perpetually
indulge in war-mongering to defend its claims. The moot point is whether Washington can deliver
on its promise to Taiwan.
@ Copyrights reserved.
No comments:
Post a Comment