PARALLEL CRISIS

Taiwan is undoubtedly the most explosive hotspot in the Indo-Pacific region, especially amid the war in Ukraine. Some draw parallels between the shells exploding on the fertile plains of Eastern and Central Europe and what might happen around the tiny island in East Asia. Many Western commentators believe that Russia's actions in Ukraine have encouraged China, which is now closely observing the situation, drawing conclusions and adjusting its own strategy.

Celestial Empire’s determination

China constantly reminds the world that it is the only legitimate government representing all of China, including Taiwan as an integral part of the People’s Republic of China. Hence, Beijing can handle the Taiwan issue as its own internal matter. The central government of China suspended official relations with Taiwan in 1949 after the Kuomintang forces led by Chiang Kai-shek were defeated by the Communist China in the civil war. Business and informal contacts between the island and mainland China resumed in the late 1980s. More recently, the Chinese authorities have intensified a multifaceted coercive campaign against Taipei, trying to damage its economy, including through cyber-attacks and disinformation. There are military threats from China as wells.

Thus, on June 15, Chinese President Xi Jinping signed a directive on the so-called ‘non-military’ use of the country's armed forces. The document immediately sparked a flurry of speculation that Beijing was thus beginning preparations for a ‘non-military’ attack on Taiwan. However, Beijing is also sending much more unambiguous signals. Chinese Defense Minister Wei Fenghe warned explicitly at the Shangri-La Dialogue Asian Security Conference in Singapore that if someone tried to separate Taiwan from China, Beijing would fight to the end no matter the cost. Chinese Defense Ministry spokesman Wu Qian echoed the minister’s statements saying that the People's Liberation Army of China (PLA) would not hesitate to start a war should Taiwan secede from China. PLA’s constant military exercises near Taiwan confirm these words too.

Principle of strategic ambiguity

Obviously, it is unrealistic to compare the military potentials of the unrecognised island state and China. According to experts, a Chinese attack can begin with missile strikes, followed by a full-scale amphibious invasion. In this situation Taipei's chances are negligible if it fights against China alone. Meanwhile, in mid-April, the US National Security Advisor to President Jake Sullivan said that Washington would take all possible measures to prevent Taiwan from reuniting with mainland China by force. Also in late May, US President Joe Biden promised military aid to Taiwan in case of Chinese invasion. This was Biden’s response to a reporter's question during his meeting with Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida in Tokyo. "This is a commitment we have made," the American leader said. He believes China is playing with fire, referring to the increasing number of instances of Chinese warplanes flying into Taiwan's air defence zone, as well as Chinese naval manoeuvres near the island. Biden later added that the US would not change its policy towards China and Taiwan. This was also acknowledged by the US Defence Secretary Lloyd Austin.

Such seemingly contradictory statements do not sound embarrassing anymore. Officially, the US does not support Taiwan’s independence, but it supports the island politically, militarily and economically. Recently in the Senate, Bob Menendez (D), chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, and Lindsey Graham (R) proposed the allocation of $4.5 billion as military aid to Taiwan in the coming four years and also giving Taipei a status of a major US ally outside NATO. Lawmakers said this would be the most significant revision of US policy on Taiwan since the 1979 Taiwan Relations Act.

According to Western media outlets, the US is preparing Taiwan for war, but they do not say how far Washington is ready to go in the event of full-scale military action. The US seems to acknowledge the leadership in Beijing as China's sole government, but immediately adds that China cannot invade Taiwan by force. This principle of ‘strategic ambiguity’ or ‘strategic uncertainty’ has long been considered very successful. On the one hand, China has nothing to hold on to and is surrounded by deterrent flags. On the other hand, the supporters of Taiwan’s independence do not completely trust their powerful ally on the other side of the ocean. But the ongoing conflict in Ukraine has changed many things. It seems that Beijing is getting increasingly dissatisfied with the existing status quo. The question is whether it will decide to take any concrete action.

Interdependence is still effective

Many Western media outlets acknowledge that the US is using Taiwan to contain China. Beijing is Washington’s only real and formidable opponent, which has all the tools necessary to undermine the US influence and dominance in the world—economic, political, military and, most importantly, ideological and technological. Therefore, the US could not help but use Taiwan as a hot button, a powerful trump card against China.

However, this does not mean that a conflict is inevitable. Firstly, both the US and China are nuclear powers. Secondly, both countries need each other badly economically: Beijing is still seriously dependent on the US dollar, and the dollar is still dependent on the Chinese economy. Thirdly, in the event of a military clash, neither side would have a clear winning position. During the rapid economic growth period, China has seriously invested in a massive military buildup, but a war, nevertheless, would still require taking into account too many risks and costs, let alone necessary tools to maintain the island and resist pressure from the US, Japan and all their allies in the region. Thus, many observers believe that Beijing will only use force if it feels cornered.

At the same time, it will not be easy for the US to join the war directly or indirectly, given the ongoing events in and around Ukraine, and the distance from the US to the theatre of war. Most importantly, it is difficult to imagine the negative consequences for the global economy in case of a military conflict, considering how badly the West suffers even from punishing Russia.

For China, the struggle with the US for global leadership is complicated because of its strong logistical ties with the West. Currently, most cargo between China and Europe is handled by sea through channels controlled by the Americans or the British. Beijing needs a lot of strategic goods, especially food and fuel. That is why China is trying hard to develop its maritime potential (including by building aircraft carriers) and, of course, continental routes. And as long as that process is under way, it is unlikely to take any military action.

Both countries are likely to wait and see. And make alliances. The Americans are active in QUAD (US, India, Japan and Australia) nicknamed the Asian NATO. China is trying to gain a foothold in the islands of Oceania (Solomon Islands, Papua New Guinea, Fiji, Tongu, Vanuatu, East Timor, etc.), as usual, through investments as well as possible deployment of military bases. China, for example, operates in a similar way in Africa, Latin America and the Middle East.

Obviously, all these steps and measures will not make the world a safer place. But at least there is nothing large-scale and critical that may be threatening our safety. China remains on a course of strategic patience with Taiwan.