China–Taiwan Weekly Updates

 

 

China-Taiwan Weekly Update, December 20, 2024

click here to read the full report

Authors: Matthew Sperzel, Daniel Shats, Alison O’Neil, Karina Wugang, and Grant Morgan 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: December 17

Key Takeaways  

• The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) uses exchanges with Kuomintang (KMT) leaders to legitimize the party while maintaining coercive pressure against President Lai Ching-te’s administration and the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP). This dual approach is likely intended to cause the Taiwanese public to associate the DPP with military escalation and the KMT with peaceful cross-Strait relations. Former Taiwanese President Ma Ying-jeou led a delegation of nearly 1,000 young Taiwanese people to the PRC and met with TAO Director Song Tao in another high-profile instance of CCP-KMT engagement. A PRC national used a modified drone to photograph the United States Vandenberg Space Force Base on November 30. Frequent infiltrations by PRC nationals into US military installations represent likely PRC efforts to spy on US military facilities, especially missile launch sites.
• Guam police apprehended seven PRC nationals attempting to enter the island illegally on December 10 and 11 during a US missile interceptor test off the island.
• The European Union (EU) sanctioned six PRC-based companies and one PRC citizen on December 16 for supporting Russia’s war in Ukraine.

Cross-Strait Relations

Taiwan

The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) uses exchanges with Kuomintang (KMT) leaders to legitimize the party while maintaining coercive pressure against President Lai Ching-te’s administration and the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP). This dual approach is likely intended to cause the Taiwanese public to associate the DPP with military escalation and the KMT with peaceful cross-Strait relations. The PRC staged unannounced large-scale exercises around Taiwan from December 9-11, shortly after Taiwan President Lai Ching-te of the DPP transited through the United States. Taiwan’s Ministry of National Defense (MND) said the exercise was the PRC’s largest maritime operation since the 1996 Taiwan Strait Crisis. PRC officials participated in the Shanghai-Taipei Twin City Forum in Taipei the following week, on December 17. Taiwan’s Mainland Affairs Council (MAC) granted conditional approval for the forum to take place but threatened to cancel the event if the PRC continued its threatening military exercises against Taiwan.[1] The KMT, which favors closer cooperation and engagement with the PRC, advocated for holding the event despite the PRC’s aggression toward Taiwan amid the military exercises.

The MAC blocked Shanghai Taiwan Affairs Office (TAO) Director Jin Mei from entering Taiwan to participate in the forum, however. The MAC stated that the Shanghai TAO refused to communicate with the DPP government regarding Jin’s travel to Taiwan.[2] The MAC cited the PRC’s military intimidation and recent threats toward Taiwan, such as a list of legal guidelines that threaten severe punishment for Taiwanese “separatists,” which the PRC released in June.[3] The MAC also denied entry to PRC media personnel due to national security concerns and stated that all PRC media outlets are propaganda units of the CCP.[4] The KMT criticized President Lai Ching-te’s administration for limiting the PRC delegation and framed it as an obstruction of the freedom of press.[5]

 The CCP severed official contact with the DPP in 2016 for its alleged “separatist” policies and interacts only with the KMT, on the basis of the KMT’s recognition of the 1992 Consensus. The 1992 Consensus is an alleged verbal agreement between representatives of the CCP and KMT that there is only one China and Taiwan is part of China, though the two sides disagree over which government rightfully represents “China.” The CCP conducts direct negotiations with KMT figures to legitimize it as the party that can effectively conduct cross-strait relations, in contrast to the DPP.

The People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) uncharacteristic restraint in publicizing the military exercises minimized negative public attention that would have damaged its image amid cross-strait exchanges. The Lai administration’s acquiescence to allow the Twin City Forum to proceed benefits the PRC, which masqueraded a friendly disposition to the Taiwanese public without reducing pressure on the DPP. The PRC did not officially announce or name the military exercises, unlike past drills that aimed to publicly warn the DPP government against policies that support Taiwan’s sovereignty. The deployment began after ROC President Lai Ching-te returned from a tour to visit Taiwan’s Pacific Island allies, which included stopovers in Hawaii and Guam. The PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) and Ministry of National Defense (MOD) spokespersons did not directly answer whether the PRC was conducting military exercises when asked.[6] TAO Spokesperson Zhu Fenglian stated on December 11 that the PRC must punish “provocations” such as Lai’s transit through the United States in response to a reporter’s question about the military exercises, but did not directly mention them.[7] The PRC’s unusual silence during the exercises insulates it from wider domestic and international scrutiny, which hinders the DPP’s credibility in justifying restrictions. Canceling the event would have exposed the Lai administration to greater criticism by the KMT for being closed off. The PRC's restraint in discussing the exercises thus likely reflects in part the importance to Beijing of increasing KMT-led cross-strait engagement.

Former Taiwanese President Ma Ying-jeou led a delegation of nearly 1,000 Taiwanese young people to the PRC and met with TAO Director Song Tao in another high-profile instance of CCP-KMT engagement. Ma is leading the delegation to the PRC provinces of Heilongjiang and Sichuan from December 18-26 to promote people-to-people exchanges between the two sides of the Taiwan Strait. The trip began a day after the Taipei-Shanghai Twin City Forum and just over a week after an educational exchange that Ma’s foundation organized to bring PRC visitors to Taiwan.[8] Ma met with Song Tao on December 18 at the Cross-Strait Youth Ice and Snow Festival in Harbin, Heilongjiang. Song said that “compatriots on both sides of the Taiwan Strait are all Chinese” and should “put the country's future and national interests first, adhere to the one-China principle and the 1992 Consensus, resolutely oppose ‘Taiwan independence’ secession and foreign interference, actively promote cross-strait exchanges and cooperation,” “work together to promote the development of cross-strait relations,” and maintain peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait. Ma said that people on both sides of the strait “belong to the same Chinese nation” and agreed that they should adhere to the 1992 Consensus, oppose Taiwanese independence, expand exchanges, and promote peaceful cross-strait development.[9] It is unclear whether the meeting led to any agreements, as Ma is no longer an official of the ROC or the KMT.

This trip to the PRC was is Ma’s third trip to the PRC in two years. The PRC TAO announced the trip on December 11, days after Taiwan’s MAC threatened to ban the Ma Ying-jeou Foundation from hosting cross-strait exchanges for six months to five years. An unspecified governhat tment source said the foundation may have illegally permitted political campaigning for “one China” during the exchange, when a PRC student on the trip called Taiwan’s national baseball team the “Taipei, China team.”[10]

The PRC’s repeated hosting of Ma helps to maintain his image as an important figure in cross-Strait relations, as well as within the KMT and ROC politics, and to amplify PRC-aligned messaging within Taiwan. Ma’s faction within the KMT is strongly in favor of cross-strait exchanges and integration but may be losing influence somewhat as the KMT seeks to increase its appeal to younger voters. The CCP has an interest in maintaining Ma’s influence because the model of cross-strait relations he promotes, rooted in the 1992 Consensus, is closely aligned with the PRC’s preferred model. The TAO has explicitly referenced the period of Ma’s presidency from 2008-2016 as the ideal state of cross-strait relations that Taiwan should emulate if it wants peace.[11] Ma’s concept of “one China” refers to the ROC and not the PRC, however.

Ma’s visits to the PRC have added significance because they all occurred during periods of high cross-strait tensions and included meetings with high-level PRC officials. Ma traveled to the PRC in March 2023 for the stated purpose of ancestor worship and met with TAO Director Song Tao while he was there. That trip coincided with then-president Tsai Ing-wen’s transit through the United States, where she met then-House Speaker Kevin McCarthy.[12] Ma met CCP Secretary-General Xi Jinping in April of the following year while leading Taiwanese students on a cultural and historical exchange trip in the PRC. The trip occurred a month before Lai’s presidential inauguration.[13] Ma’s current trip and meeting with Song came soon after President Lai transited through the United States. The PRC responded to all three aforementioned events – the Tsai and Lai transits and Lai’s inauguration – with major military exercises around Taiwan.

Cooperative actions between KMT leaders and the CCP are significant despite the fact that the KMT is not being the ruling party in Taiwan. The DPP has been in control of the executive branch since 2016, but lost its control of the legislature in the 2024 election.[14] The KMT is therefore in a stronger political position than it has been in years. The current Legislative Yuan has no majority party, but the 2024 election resulted in the KMT becoming the largest party in the legislature, with 52 seats to the DPP’s 51.[15] The KMT’s electoral victories in 2024 suggest that it is gaining support with the Taiwanese populace. The CCP may hope that rewarding the KMT with high-profile cross-strait engagements may further raise its popularity and weaken the DPP’s ability to effectively respond to CCP coercion in the future.

The United States delivered its first shipment of M1A2T Abrams tanks to Taiwan on December 16. The Taiwanese military received 38 tanks out of a total of 108 tanks purchased in a 2019 order.[16] The rest of the tanks are scheduled to be delivered in 2025 and 2026.[17]

The new tanks will strengthen coastal defense capabilities and help to further modernize Taiwan’s aging tank fleet.[18] The tanks will also help to expand interoperability with the United States and several partners.[19] The Abrams tanks’ defense capabilities will be particularly effective against China’s emerging Type 05 amphibious fighting vehicles because of their upgraded armor capacities and speed, especially when compared to Taiwan’s aging M60A3 and CM11 tanks.[20] The United States has, in contrast, delivered 31 Abrams tanks to Ukraine since Russia’s invasion in 2022.[21]

The PRC MFA responded to the delivery by denying that Taiwan had its own Ministry of National Defense and urging the United States to abide to the one-China principle, which states that Taiwan is an inalienable part of China and the PRC is the sole legitimate government of that China. The United States does not recognize the one-China principle but instead maintains a “one-China policy” of maintaining diplomatic relations only with the PRC and not with Taiwan. MFA Spokesperson Lin Jian highlighted the US-PRC 1982 Joint Communique during the normalization of relations, which the PRC claims precludes the US from selling arms to Taiwan. The US and PRC did not settle the question of arms sales to Taiwan in the course of negotiations regarding the normalization of relations, and the United States’ policy dictates that its arm sales to Taiwan depend on the PRC’s commitment to a peaceful resolution of its differences with Taiwan.[22]  The PRC’s response is consistent with its past condemnations of US weapon shipments to Taiwan, such as the approval of a $2 billion weapons agreement in late October.[23] Such statements aim to delegitimize both the ROC government and US support for the ROC.

 

China

A PRC national used a modified drone to photograph the United States’ Vandenberg Space Force Base on November 30.[24] Frequent infiltrations by PRC nationals into US military installations represent likely PRC efforts to spy on US military facilities, especially missile launch sites. The Department of Justice (DOJ) announced on December 11 that US authorities arrested PRC national Zhou Yinpiao on federal charges after he flew a modified drone over Vandenberg Space Force Base in California and took pictures of the base from above.[25] The base’s security personnel detected the drone flying nearly a mile overhead and apprehended Zhou, who was piloting the drone from a nearby park.[26] US authorities found the drone on Zhou’s person and later discovered the photographs of the military base from an aerial viewpoint on the drone. US authorities arrested Zhou at San Francisco International Airport on December 11 before he boarded a flight to the PRC.[27] The DOJ stated that the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) is investigating the case.

The criminal complaint affidavit by the Central District Court of California stated that Zhou told a contact on PRC-based messaging app WeChat that he “hacked” the drone so that it could fly higher than its intended range, which he told investigators he achieved by using software that he purchased online.[28] Zhou sent the unnamed person photographs that he took with the drone.[29] The affidavit stated that Zhou told investigators that he previously “got into trouble” for flying an unrestricted drone in the People’s Square in Shanghai, which the PRC designated as a restricted zone.[30]

Frequent attempts by PRC nationals to gain access to US military bases indicate the PRC’s possible interest in gathering intelligence related the United States’ missile launch capabilities. The Wall Street Journal cited unnamed US officials who stated in September 2023 that PRC nationals had accessed US military bases and other sensitive sites up to “100 times in recent years,” including PRC nationals who crossed into a US missile range in New Mexico and scuba divers swimming near a US government rocket-launch site in Florida.[31] Vandenberg Space Force Base frequently launches military and commercial spacecraft, including Starlink satellites.[32] The National Reconnaissance Office, SpaceX and the Space Force launched a Falcon 9 rocket containing satellites bound for orbit on the same day that the base detected Zhou’s drone flying overhead.[33]

Guam police apprehended seven PRC nationals attempting to enter the island illegally on December 10 and 11 during a US missile interceptor test off the island. The PRC nationals arrived by the same boat from Saipan in the Northern Mariana Islands, which have a 90-day visa-exemption policy.[34] The Guam Customs and Quarantine Agency stated in a press release that one of the three detainees arrested on December 10 had a standing warrant for her arrest and was found illegally entering the vicinity of a US military installation.[35] Police also discovered four other detainees on Tanguisson Beach and near a US military installation on December 11.[36] The press release noted that it did not discover any contraband in the detainees’ baggage. The arrests all occurred in northern Guam near Andersen Air Force Base. The US conducted its first Guam-based ballistic missile intercept off the coast of Andersen Air Force Base on December 10.[37] The Guam Customs and Quarantine Agency stated that there were 152 instances of PRC nationals illegally attempting to enter Guam since 2022.[38] The December 10 infiltrations are the latest known instance of suspicious activity by PRC nationals near US missile launch sites. Conducting espionage against US military facilities, especially those with missile launch capabilities, could provide the PRC with potentially valuable intelligence that would benefit it in a conflict with the US. Guam is the closest US territory to the PRC and a significant strategic location for both countries. Guam lies within the second island chain and within the range of PRC DF-26 intermediate-range ballistic missiles nicknamed the “Guam Express.”[39] The PRC’s application of an anti-access aerial denial (A2/AD) strategy to prevent access to Taiwan is dependent on neutralizing threats from the first and second island chains.[40] The US Department of Defense’s 2023 Report on the Military and Security Developments Involving the PRC states that Guam military bases are within PRC ballistic and cruise missile range and added that “in the future, PLA LACMs will also likely be deployable on surface platforms like the RENHAI-class guided-missile cruisers. H-6K bomber flights into the Philippine Sea demonstrate the PRC’s ability to range Guam with air-launched LACMs.”[41] The US Missile Defense Agency said that the December 10 missile interceptor test “marks a pivotal step taken in defense of Guam initiatives and partnerships.”[42]

 

A UK court accused a PRC businessman close to Prince Andrew on December 12 of being a spy and upheld a decision to bar him from the United Kingdom. The court stated that Christopher Yang Tengbo developed an “unusual degree of trust” with Prince Andrew, who authorized him to act on the prince’s behalf in business meetings with potential Chinese investors.  Yang is listed as a director of five companies including the Hampton Group, a business consultancy he founded in 2005 that describes itself as "a bridge between companies in China and the rest of the world.”[43] The UK’s then-Home Secretary Suella Braverman canceled Yang’s UK residency rights in 2023, believing him to be carrying out “covert and deceptive activity for the CCP” on behalf of the United Front Work Department (UFWD). UK authorities said data they found on Yang’s devices when he was stopped in 2021 included documents that indicated a link with the UFWD and other Beijing-linked groups. They argued that the documents showed Yang’s frequent contacts with “officials connected with the Chinese state, that he had "sometimes deliberately obscured" his links to the CCP, and that he may have “proactively engaged in UFWD objectives” even though he hadn’t received direct orders.[44] A court ruling on December 12 upheld the ban.[45]

The PRC MFA called the spy allegations “absurd” without elaborating.[46] Yang denied any wrongdoing, saying that he had never been a CCP member, that contact with the UFWD is inevitable for those doing business in the PRC, and that he was a victim of the “political climate” of rising UK-PRC tensions. He asked the court to disclose his identity to quell speculation. Prince Andrew’s office said that the prince ceased his relationship with Yang after the government advised him to, without specifying when this happened. It said Andrew had only met with Yang through official channels and never discussed sensitive matters with him.[47]

Southeast Asia

Philippines

The Philippines ratified its Reciprocal Access Agreement with Japan on December 16 in the latest act of military cooperation between the two states amid increasing pressure from the PRC.[48] The Reciprocal Access Agreement (RAA) provides the legal framework and official guidance for defense cooperation between the Philippines and Japan. One of the RAA’s provisions enables the Philippines and Japan to deploy troops within the other state, creating the opportunity for larger-scale military exercises and maritime patrols.[49]  Philippine military spokesperson Colonel Francel Margareth Padilla stated that “this agreement provides substantial benefits, particularly in enhancing training opportunities, joint exercises, and interoperability” to the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP).[50] The AFP has been seeking to improve its military capabilities, particularly in the maritime domain, amid ongoing aggression from the PRC in the South China Sea. Both states have identified aggression in the South China Sea and East China Sea as a key reason for their efforts for greater military cooperation in multilateral dialogues between the Philippines, Japan, and their Indo-Pacific partners and allies..[51] Tensions between the Philippines and the PRC have been on the rise following a spate of PRC coercive actions in disputed maritime territory, most recently when China Coast Guard (CCG) vessels employed water cannons and sideswiped a Philippine Coast Guard Vessel (PCG) near Scarborough Shoal on December 4.[52]

Japanese Ambassador to the Philippines Endo Kazuya praised the RAA on December 16 as an important step towards greater cooperation between Indo-Pacific allies.[53] Japan has increasingly sought a greater role in Indo-Pacific security through the establishment of its Official Security Assistance grant program, which will provide $10.6 million in military aid to the Philippines’ capabilities in the South China Sea and Luzon Strait.[54] Japan’s provision of military assistance and signing of defense agreements with the Philippines indicates the importance of South China Sea security and cooperation with alliance members to its overall defense strategy.

PRC officials have not yet commented on the RAA’s ratification but criticized its initial signing in July 2024 and stated that the bilateral cooperation was “targeted” at third parties.[55] In the PRC media outlet Global Times, PRC military experts criticized the deal as an effort by the United States and Japan to reduce Philippine sovereignty and incite further violence in the South China Sea.[56] The PRC often places the blame for South China Sea tensions on United States interference as a way to suggest that conflict with the PRC over maritime territory is not in the best interest of the Philippines and instead serves the United States’ strategic interests.[57]

The PRC announced that it “allowed” a Philippine resupply mission to the Sierra Madre in Second Thomas Shoal. The PRC’s rhetoric likely aims to bolster the credibility of its claims to sovereignty over the territory. The AFP released a statement confirming that a Philippines civilian vessel successfully carried out a resupply mission to the BRP Sierra Madre in the Second Thomas Shoal on December 12.[58] The PRC and the Philippines negotiated a provisional agreement on July 21 to avoid confrontations during the latter’s resupply missions to the BRP Sierra Madre, which has resulted in a cessation of PRC harassment up to the present.[59] This marks the fourth resupply mission to the BRP Sierra Madre since the signing of the provisional agreement between the PRC and the Philippines.[60] The AFP released a statement confirming that a Philippines civilian vessel successfully carried out a resupply mission to the BRP Sierra Madre in the Second Thomas Shoal on December 12.[61] The PRC has harassed Philippine vessels attempting to access Second Thomas Shoal over a dozen times in the past year in an effort to prevent resupply missions to the BRP Sierra Madre, often employing violent methods that harm Filipino personnel and damage their ships. The BRP Sierra Madre is a grounded warship that has served as an AFP military outpost in the Second Thomas Shoal since 1999. The CCG released a statement saying that the Philippines' resupply mission to the “illegally grounded” BRP Sierra Madre was carried out “with China’s permission.”[62] The PRC has previously framed its non-interference as “allowing” the Philippines' resupply missions to occur. This framing aims to give the impression that the PRC has legal jurisdiction over the Second Thomas Shoal, which the Philippines rejects.

 

Europe

Russia

The European Union (EU) sanctioned six PRC-based companies and one PRC citizen on December 16 for supporting Russia’s war in Ukraine.[63] The European Commission (EC) stated the reasons for the sanctions include the PRC national and two entities’ support in facilitating the circumvention of EU sanctions and four entities supplying sensitive drone components and microelectronic components to the Russian military industry that supports its war in Ukraine. The measures are part of the EU’s 15th round of sanctions and mark the first instance of EU sanctions against PRC entities for supporting Russia.[64] The specific measures include a travel ban against the individual and freezing the EU-based assets of the six companies.[65] The EU previously blacklisted PRC firms for supporting Russia’s military in order to prevent them from purchasing sensitive goods from the EU.[66] The PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs Spokesperson Lin Jian stated that China is committed to promoting peace talks and considers the “unilateral sanctions” baseless. Lin claims the PRC has never provided weapons to Russia and strictly controls the export of dual-use materials.[67]

The sanctioned individual is a businesswoman named Sophia Li Xiaocui, whom the EU accused of assisting Russian computer numerical control (CNC) machine manufacturer Unimatik. Li facilitated Unimatik’s acquisition of goods that are subject to restrictions under the EU’s export controls. Li “controls and represents” two other sanctioned firms ARCLM International Trading Co and Shijiazhuang Hanqiang Technology.[68] The EU’s Official Journal stated that Li “facilitated [ARCLM International Trading Co and Shijiazhuang Hanqiang Technology’s] infringements” that “significantly frustrated existing Union restrictive measures provisions.”[69] ARCLM International Trading Co. and Shijiazhuang Hanqiang Technology machinery manufacturers that the EU stated exported “products of European origin to Russian companies in violation of export restrictions.”[70]

The EU sanctioned four other companies for supplying components used for drones: Juhang Aviation Technology Shenzhen Co., Redlepus TSK Vektor Industrial (Shenzhen), Xiamen Limbach Aviation Engine Co, and Asia Pacific Links. Juhang Aviation and Redlepus TSK Vektor are both “involved in a procurement and manufacturing network for the Russian military industrial complex.” [71] Both Juhang Aviation and Redlepus TSK Vektor have sent export-controlled dual-use components to IEMZ Kupol, a subsidiary of Russian arms company Almaz-Antey, through the Russian intermediary OOO TSK Vektor. The United States sanctioned Juhang and Aviation and Redlepus TSK Vektor in May and October, respectively.[72] The companies’ components were used in the Garpiya-3 (G3) drones, which the Russian military uses in Ukraine. Both companies act as intermediaries for Russian companies and Xiamen Limbach, a drone engine producer that the EU sanctioned for selling to IEMZ Kupol.[73] The EU lists Xiamen Limbach as suspected of sharing the L550 drone engine design with drone manufacturers of the Shahed-136 UAV, which the Russian military has used against Ukraine.[74] The EU sanctioned Asia Pacific Links for supplying dual use components. The Official Journal of the EU’s sanctions records stated that Asia Pacific Links is the largest supplier of microelectronic components to Russian companies since the Ukrainian invasion.[75] Asia Pacific Links is Russian-owned and is also sanctioned by the US, Switzerland, UK, and Ukraine.[76]

 

CCP General Secretary Xi Jinping advocated for greater cooperation between the PRC and Russia to shape global governance during a meeting with Deputy Chairman of Russia’s Security Council Dmitry Medvedev in Beijing on December 12.[78]  Xi urged greater cooperation between the PRC and Russia in multilateral institutions such as BRICS and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO).[79] The PRC and Russia are pursuing the expansion of multilateral organizations that they lead to increase international support for alternative institutions and strengthen their influence over global governance. Xi stated that the PRC has repeatedly emphasized three principles regarding the Ukraine crisis: “no expansion of the battlefield, no escalation of fighting and no provocation by any party.” [80] The PRC MFA readout described Russia’s positive reception of the “Friends of Peace” initiative, a PRC and Brazil-led forum that has the stated purpose of expanding dialogue and giving Global South countries a voice to advance a “political settlement of the Ukraine issue.”[81] Medvedev stated in an interview with Russian state media on December 12 that Russia is ready to negotiate “only if Ukraine understands the realities that have developed... on the ground,” and that Xi “set out the Chinese version of the possibility of a settlement.”[82] Russia's terms call for Ukraine to surrender nearly 20% of its territory and its millions of occupants under Russian occupation.[83] The PRC’s lack of reproach for Russian aggression accommodates Russia’s uncompromising demands on Ukrainian sovereignty.

Middle East

The PRC called for counterterrorism cooperation against the East Turkestan Islamic Movement (ETIM) amid Turkestan Islamic Party (TIP) calls for jihad against the PRC in Syria. PRC Embassy to the United States spokesperson Liu Pengyu stated on December 13 that the PRC is prepared to work with international actors to “firmly strike down on” ETIM.[84] TIP is a militant group that is affiliated and allied with Hayat Tahrir al Sham (HTS), which overthrew Bashar al-Assad’s regime and seized the capital of Damascus on December 7. TIP Emir Sheikh Abdul Haq al-Turkestani reportedly stated that “With the permission of God, his power and strength, the Chinese infidels will soon taste the same torment that the infidels in the Levant tasted.”[85] TIP released a video featuring footage of armed fighters and overlaid with anti-PRC messaging calling upon a “mujahid” to “liberate [Uyghurs] from the Chinese oppressors” and “save them from the merciless oppression of the Chinese [government].”[86]

Some observers, including the United Nations, have described ETIM and TIP as the same group.[87] Others frame TIP as ETIM’s “successor” or differ on the extent to which ETIM and TIP are connected.[88] The extent to which TIP might hold power in the new Syrian government under HTS remains unclear, but the TIP has been active in Syria for several years. Liu’s statement is consistent with past PRC actions against ETIM and Uyghur separatism more broadly. The PRC attributed over 200 attacks to ETIM as early as 2010 and blamed ETIM and Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) for a 2021 suicide attack against PRC citizens in Pakistan.[89] The PRC cites the threat of Uyghur militancy and counterterrorism efforts as the impetus for policy toward Uyghurs in Xinjiang, which the US Department of State stated in 2021 constituted genocide.[90] The United States classified ETIM as a terrorist organization in 2002 but removed this designation in 2020, citing a lack of evidence of the group’s existence.[91] Liu denounced the United States’ removal of the designation in his December 13 statement and accused the United States of having “politicized and weaponized” a counterterrorism issue.[92]

The PRC has relied on the Assad regime to monitor and curtail ETIM’s activities in Syria. The PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) stated in 2016 that it was aware of ETIM activity in Syria and that it would maintain transnational efforts to address ETIM’s movements in the Middle East and Central Asia.[93] The MFA expressed a similar interest in transnational cooperation against ETIM in 2017 following reports of ETIM militants crossing from Turkey into Syria.[94] The Associated Press reported in 2017 that the PRC and Syria were engaged in intelligence cooperation to support counterterrorism efforts against Uyghur militants.[95] AP pointed out that the PRC was one of Syria’s major economic backers at the time and had helped protect it against international sanctions.[96] CCP General Secretary Xi Jinping met with Assad in 2023 and upgraded relations between the PRC and Syria to a strategic partnership.[97] The meeting highlighted the two leaders’ focus on counterterrorism cooperation.

The overthrow of the Assad regime and installation of Hayat Tahrir al Sham (HTS) in December 2024 represents a loss of the longstanding counterterrorism cooperation aimed at ETIM. The PRC has pushed for stability in Syria following the rebel takeover of Damascus; PRC Foreign Ministry spokeswoman called for a “political solution” in a regular press conference on December 9, which is consistent with the PRC’s disinclination to take sides in intrastate conflict.[98] The PRC will likely continue to publicly advocate for stability, refrain from supporting potential contributors to the spread of ETIM influence, and shape its new Syria policy around the containment of ETIM and TIP.

Iran

US sanctions on Iranian oil tankers have disrupted Iranian crude exports to the PRC. The US Department of Treasury imposed sanctions on October 11 and December 2 targeting Iran’s “shadow fleet” of tankers used to export Iranian petroleum. Most of the ships in this “shadow fleet” are registered under different countries and frequently change their names and the country of registration to avoid detection.[99] Bloomberg reported that the new US sanctions have disrupted shipments of Iranian oil to the PRC, which purchases around 92% of Iran’s crude oil exports at discounted prices.[100] Bloomberg cited energy market intelligence firm Vortexa, Ltd., which stated that Iran did not deliver some of its oil exports to the PRC in November because PRC buyers require cargo to be delivered on non-sanctioned ships. Vortexa stated that there is a slowdown in Iranian vessels calling at ports in Shandong Province.[101] The sanctions will likely reduce the amount of Iranian oil that the PRC buys and increase the cost of its energy procurement. The PRC imports over 70% of its crude oil, most of it from Russia and Saudi Arabia.[102] Vortexa estimated that the PRC imported an average 1.05 million barrels per day of Iranian oil in the first 10 months of 2023. The PRC usually relabels these imports as originating from Malaysia or a Middle Eastern country to obscure their origin, however.[103] a

Latin America

Vice Chairman of top PRC decision-making body Central Military Commission (CMC) He Weidong met with Cuban President Miguel Díaz-Canel days after the PRC denied reports of signals intelligence (SIGINT) facilities in Cuba. The two leaders met in Havana on December 11 and affirmed strong bilateral ties. The PRC Ministry of Defense reported that “the two sides will firmly support each other on issues involving each other’s core interests” and that they would “promote the relationship between the two militaries to a new level.” He Weidong also visited former Cuban President Raúl Modesto Castro Ruz and Cuban Revolutionary Armed Forces Minister Álvaro López Miera during his trip.[104] The meeting between He and Díaz-Canel aligns with past PRC efforts to maintain a strong PRC-Cuba relationship. PRC President Xi Jinping met with Cuba’s president in both 2022 and 2023 and affirmed strong ties between the two countries.

He’s Cuba trip follows the republication of a Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) report listing four possible PRC SIGINT facilities in Cuba on December 6. The PRC Embassy in Cuba called these reports “fake news” with “no factual basis” in a December 8 statement.[105] The PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs echoed this statement on December 11 and responded to a reporters’ question about the report with criticisms of US policy in Latin America and the Caribbean.[106] The US has stated its intent to take action against possible PRC spying efforts in Cuba. US Senate Select Committee on Intelligence Vice Chair and Secretary of State nominee Marco Rubio released a joint statement with Intelligence Committee Chair Mark R. Warner expressing concern over PRC-Cuba intelligence collaboration in 2023.[107] US Department of Defense spokesman Pat Ryder stated that the US is aware of PRC presence in Cuba and “will continue to keep working to disrupt [it]” when CSIS released its original report of the SIGINT facilities. [108]

 

China-Taiwan Weekly Update, December 12, 2024

Click here to read the full report

Authors: Matthew Sperzel, Daniel Shats, Alison O’Neil, Karina Wugang, and William Pickering 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: December 11, 2024

Key Takeaways  

• ROC President William Lai completed his tour of Taiwan’s diplomatic allies in the Pacific, which included transits through Hawaii and Guam. The PRC strongly condemned the transits and launched a military exercise after Lai returned.
• The PRC deployed its largest naval fleet in decades in waters near Taiwan following Lai’s Pacific trip and conducted unannounced air and naval drills. The exercise covered a significantly larger geographic area than previous exercises and simulated blocking foreign intervention throughout the First Island Chain and east of Taiwan. Beijing is very likely escalating its “punishment” of Lai to intimidate his administration and cause the Taiwanese public to associate “separatist” behavior with military escalation.
• A PRC educational delegation visited Taiwan on a rare trip organized by the Ma Ying-jeou Foundation. The trip caused controversy and a negative backlash in Taiwan that could hamper future cross-strait exchanges.
• Paraguay, one of the ROC’s formal diplomatic allies, expelled the PRC’s envoy to Latin America Xu Wei after he approached its congress and called for Paraguay to cut ties with Taiwan.
• The China Coast Guard (CCG) used water cannons and sideswiped a Philippine Coast Guard (PCG) vessel sailing near the Scarborough Shoal, the latest action in a period of renewed tensions between the two states.

Cross-Strait Relations

Taiwan

ROC President William Lai completed his tour of Taiwan’s diplomatic allies in the Pacific, which included transits through Hawaii and Guam. The PRC strongly condemned the transits and launched a military exercise after Lai returned. ROC President William Lai concluded his tour of the Pacific and affirmed ROC ties with its Pacific Island diplomatic allies: the Marshall Islands, Tuvalu, and Palau. Lai stopped over in Guam, a US territory, on December 4 after visiting Tuvalu the same day.[1] Lai reported on his X account that he had calls with US House Speaker Mike Johnson, US House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, and US Senator Roger Wicker while in Guam.[2] Lai stated during his tour that “Taiwan is confident that we can continue to deepen cooperation with the new US government and resist the expansion of authoritarianism.”[3] Lai made the final stop of his tour in Palau on December 5 and stayed for two days before returning to Taiwan.[4]

Lai and Palauan President Surangel Whipps Jr. observed a joint coast guard exercise during Lai’s stay. ISW research has noted recently-reelected president Whipps’ support for both Taiwan and United States military involvement in the region.[5] ISW research has also tracked longstanding tensions between Palau, one of the three Pacific island states that recognize the ROC, and the PRC.[6] The PRC seeks to expand its own influence and access in the Pacific and curtail diplomatic recognition of Taiwan among Pacific islands. Whipps accused the PRC of “weaponizing tourism” over Palau’s support for Taiwan in August 2024 and accused PRC vessels of trespassing in Palau’s Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) in November 2024.[7]

The PRC condemned Lai’s transits through US territory, including Hawaii and Guam, and launched a large-scale military exercise near Taiwan after Lai returned. TAO spokesman Zhu Fenglian denounced Lai’s visit to US territory on December 6 and called on the United States to halt official exchanges with Taiwan in accordance with the one-China principle, which portrays the PRC as the one legitimate Chinese state and Taiwan as part of the PRC. She framed Lai’s transits as an excuse to “rely on the United States to seek independence.”[8] Zhu’s condemnation is consistent with past PRC attempts to delegitimize US interactions with Taiwan, assert control over Taiwan rhetorically, and isolate Taiwan diplomatically. The PRC launched unannounced large-scale maritime exercises near Taiwan after Lai returned, following weeks of speculation by Taiwanese officials that it would do so. Lai called on the PRC to maintain peace on the final day of his tour in Palau. He told reporters, “It is better to open your hands than to clench your fists. Only by doing so can China win respect from the international community.” Lai also stated, “No matter how many military drills China stages and how many ships and aircraft they dispatch to intimidate regional countries, China will not win the respect from any country.”[9]

The PRC deployed its largest naval fleet in decades in waters near Taiwan following Lai’s Pacific trip and conducted unannounced air and naval drills. The exercise covered a significantly larger geographic area than previous exercises and simulated blocking foreign intervention throughout the First Island Chain and east of Taiwan. ROC Ministry of National Defense (MND) spokesperson Sun Li-fang and other officials said on December 10 that the PRC has deployed approximately 90 navy and coast guard vessels near Taiwan and southern Japanese islands in the East and South China Sea. About two-thirds of these vessels were PLA Navy (PLAN) warships. The deployment is the PRC’s largest maritime operation since the 1996 Taiwan Strait Crisis, surpassing the scale of this year’s Joint Sword-2024A and Joint Sword-2024B exercises and the unnamed military exercise around Taiwan in August 2022 launched in response to then-US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan. The deployment covers a much larger geographic area than past PLA exercises near Taiwan.[10] The ROC MND said it is tracking military ship formations from the PLA's Eastern, Northern, and Southern Theater Commands and coast guard vessels, which have entered the Taiwan Strait and the Western Pacific Ocean for long-range offshore operations.[11] It reported 12 PLAN ships, nine “official” (likely coast guard) ships, and 47 PLA aircraft around Taiwan on December 9, then 11 PLAN vessels, 8 “official” ships and 53 PLA aircraft on December 10. None of them entered the waters or airspace of Taiwan’s contiguous zone or territorial waters.[12] The PLA designated seven restricted airspace zones east of the PRC coastal provinces of Zhejiang and Fujian from December 9 to December 11 in preparation for the exercises. The PRC did not announce any PLA exercise during this period, however, and PRC media has not reported on the deployments. PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) spokesperson Mao Ning deflected reporters’ questions about the deployment.[13] TAO spokesperson Zhu Fenglian obliquely addressed a similar question without mentioning the military operations directly, saying “we are highly vigilant against the trend of ‘Taiwan independence’ separatist forces colluding with external forces to seek ‘independence’ provocations, and we will never let it go.”[14]

Senior Taiwanese MND intelligence officer Hsieh Jih-sheng said on December 10 that the PLA has not carried out any live drills, but did significantly increase activities in the restricted air zones north of Taiwan. An unnamed senior Taiwanese security source told Reuters that the PLA aircraft operating off the PRC coast simulated attacks on foreign naval ships and practiced driving away foreign aircraft as part of a “blockade exercise.” Hsieh further said PLAN ships were forming two “walls” east of Taiwan to practice blocking foreign intervention, one on the eastern periphery of Taiwan’s Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) and another farther out in the Pacific.[15]

The scale, scope, and geographic focal points of the operation are all significantly different from the Joint Sword series of exercises. The Joint Sword exercises and their 2022 precursor all focused on encircling Taiwan, simulating a blockade. Only a minority (up to 21) of the nearly 90 ships involved in the December 2024 operation came close enough to Taiwan each day to be included in the ROC MND’s daily announcement of ADIZ incursions, however. The operation involved three of the PLA’s Theater Commands, while most Taiwan-targeted operations are directed by the Eastern Theater Command. The MND also did not report PLA or China Coast Guard (CCG) activities around outlying Taiwanese islands like Kinmen and Matsu, which was a feature of most previous exercises. The December 2024 operation was similar to previous exercises in that it drilled anti-access/area denial (A2/AD) around Taiwan, but differed in that it focused on blocking foreign entry within a much larger area. An unnamed Taiwanese official said that the PRC appears to be targeting the entire First Island Chain, including Japan, Taiwan, and the Philippines. The official said the operation is intended as "total military intimidation" and an effort to control waters within the “inner part of the island chain.”[16]

The operation also differed from previous Taiwan-targeted operations in that the PRC did not announce it or comment on it. The PRC was very clear during previous large-scale exercises such as the Joint Sword series that the exercises were meant to punish and send a stern message to what it calls Taiwanese “separatists” and their foreign allies. It published maps of most of these exercises and explained their purpose in state media. The lack of announcement for the December operation makes the operation’s intended message and audience less clear, though the timing shortly after Lai’s Pacific tour is very likely a warning to Taiwan. A scholar at the MND-funded Institute for National Defense and Security Research (INDSR), Su Tzu-yun, said the PLA’s decision not to announce its operation was an attempt to play “mind games” to pressure Taiwan.[17]

The CCG played a significant role in the operation, as it has in other recent exercises around Taiwan. Taiwan’s Coast Guard Administration (CGA) dispatched patrol vessels on December 9 to shadow CCG ships that had been sailing “unusually” near Taiwan since December 6, the day Lai returned from his trip. Three CCG vessels including the 12,000-ton CCG 2901, one of the CCG’s largest ships, sailed to an area east of Taiwan and 50 to 60 nautical miles east-northeast of Taiwan’s Green Island and loitered there for several days. Four other CCG cutters sailed in a group to an area southwest of Taiwan.[18]

Senior Taiwanese officials speculated in November that the PRC may launch a major military exercise around Taiwan in response to President Lai’s transits through Hawaii and Guam during his state visit to Taiwan’s diplomatic allies in the Pacific. The officials suggested that the PRC may brand this exercise Joint Sword-2024C, making it the third exercise in the Joint Sword series this year.[19] The MND carried out an air defense drill on November 28 in preparation for the anticipated exercise.[20]

The PLA exercise is part of a pattern of increasingly strong PRC reactions to what it considers “provocations” by the Lai administration. Beijing is very likely escalating its “punishment” of Lai to intimidate his administration and cause the Taiwanese public to associate what Beijing calls “separatist” behavior with military escalation. Beijing launched the Joint Sword-2024A exercise days after Lai’s inauguration on May 20 and the 2024B exercise shortly after Lai’s speech on Taiwan’s National Day on October 10. The CCP considers Lai a dangerous separatist. The name “2024A” indicates that the PRC was planning more than one such exercise in 2024 regardless of Lai’s actions. The PRC portrayed Joint Sword 2024B as a deliberate escalation commensurate with Lai’s supposedly “separatist” rhetoric, even though the content of Lai’s National Day speech was notably less critical of the PRC than his inaugural speech. PRC spokespeople and authoritative media commentaries warned at the time that the more Taiwanese “secessionists” “provoke, the faster they will perish.”[21] ISW assessed that the PRC likely planned a strong military response to Lai’s National Day speech in October regardless of the substance of the speech, then retroactively reframed his speech to justify its strong reaction.[22] An unspecified senior Taiwanese official said the PRC’s sea operations in December took almost 70 days to plan and deploy, meaning planning started well before Taiwan announced that Lai would transit through US territory.[23]  Beijing is thus not truly reacting to Taiwanese statements and actions but rather implementing a deliberate plan of military escalation that uses “provocations” as a pretext. The PRC is attempting to create a strong correlation between any significant Lai government action it deems a “provocation” and military escalation likely to intimidate the Taiwanese people into politically opposing Lai.

The PRC’s military response to Lai’s Pacific transits is much stronger than its reaction to similar transits by past Taiwanese presidents. The PRC initiated the Third Taiwan Strait Crisis in 1995–1996 after the United States allowed Taiwan’s then-President Lee Teng-hui to visit and speak at Cornell University. It launched a major exercise around Taiwan in August 2022 after then-US House speaker Nancy Pelosi visited Taiwan and met with Lai’s predecessor Tsai Ing-wen, who is also a member of the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP). It launched the first Joint Sword-series exercise in April 2023 after Tsai transited through the United States and met then-US House Speaker Kevin McCarthy. Lai’s transits in Hawaii and Guam did not involve meetings with high-level US officials, however, and resemble past “stopovers” by Tsai and other presidents that did not trigger a PRC military response.[24]

A PRC balloon flew directly over Taipei as balloon incursions into Taiwan’s ADIZ continued to escalate. Taiwan’s MND reported a PRC balloon in Taiwan’s ADIZ on December 6 and four more on December 7. At least two of the balloons on December 7 entered Taiwan’s territorial airspace, and one flew directly over Taipei.[25] The overflights are part of a pattern of intermittent balloon flights into Taiwan’s ADIZ that began on November 24. The PRC previously sent balloons into Taiwan’s ADIZ and territorial airspace from early December 2023 to April 2024. The balloon overflights gradually escalated in frequency and proximity to Taiwan, hitting a peak immediately before Taiwan’s election on January 13 and gradually tapering off in subsequent weeks. The first balloon that passed directly over Taiwan in that period did so on January 1. Taiwan initially called them weather balloons and later accused the PRC of using the balloons in “cognitive warfare.”[26] The PRC Taiwan Affairs Office (PRC TAO) claimed in January 2024 that the balloons were “mostly” meteorological and “mostly” launched by private enterprises.[27] The balloons flew much lower than most meteorological balloons, however, mostly at altitudes near or below the average cruising altitude of commercial aircraft. The balloons’ true purpose and intelligence gathering potential is unclear, but even collecting standard meteorological data over Taiwan can be useful for planning missile strikes.[28] The timing and increasing frequency of balloon overflights in this “round” of incursions resemble the pattern such incursions followed last winter however it is unclear whether the timing is tied to a particular event.

ISW assessed that the balloon overflights last year likely took place as part of a broader effort to wear down Taiwan’s resources and response capabilities, consistent with the effect of normalizing ADIZ incursions more generally.[29] Balloon incursions are yet another possible threat that Taiwan must devote time and resources to track in case they pose a national security threat. Balloons can intrude upon Taiwan’s national airspace without provoking a military crisis because they are not piloted, can drift accidentally, and often float at much higher altitudes than aircraft can fly.

A PRC educational delegation visited Taiwan on a rare trip organized by the Ma Ying-jeou Foundation. The trip caused controversy and a negative backlash in Taiwan that could hamper future cross-strait exchanges. The Ma Ying-jeou Foundation, a Taiwanese non-governmental organization founded by former Taiwan President Ma Ying-jeou of the Nationalist Party (KMT), organized an educational exchange that brought 40 PRC teachers and students to Taiwan from November 28 to December 6.[30] The PRC group consisted of professors and students from seven elite PRC universities, including two Olympic gold medalists, nearly all of whom were affiliated with the CCP or Communist Youth League.[31] The students caused a public controversy when congratulating Taiwan’s national baseball team, which had recently won the WBSC Premier12 international championship competing under the name “Chinese Taipei.” The ROC is not allowed to use the name “Taiwan” or “Republic of China” when participating in many international organizations including sports events, so in such settings, it instead uses the name “Chinese Taipei” (中華臺北), which leaves ambiguous whether Taiwan belongs to the PRC or the ROC. One of the PRC students incorrectly referred to the team in Mandarin as the “China Taipei” or “Taipei, China” (中國臺北) team, a similar but more politically charged name that carries connotations of affiliation with the PRC.[32] Taiwanese university students staged protests, waving ROC flags and chanting slogans such as “This is not China Taipei” as the PRC students visited their campuses.[33]

Educational exchanges between the PRC and ROC may get rarer in the aftermath of this trip. The ROC Mainland Affairs Council (MAC) urged the PRC on November 28 to lift its ban on PRC nationals studying in Taiwan, which Beijing implemented at the beginning of the Covid-19 pandemic. MAC Spokesperson Liang Wen-chieh noted that the 40-member delegation had been “carefully selected” and urged Beijing to allow free exchanges “free from a United Front agenda.”[34] The “United Front” is a CCP political strategy to unite disparate elements of PRC society in support of CCP rule and to build influence networks abroad in service of CCP goals. The controversy caused by the trip prompted the MAC to threaten punishment against the Ma Ying-jeou Foundation, however, arguing that campaigns for “one China” during cross-strait exchanges in Taiwan may violate Taiwanese law.[35] Unnamed Taiwanese sources said the MAC would likely ban the Foundation from hosting cross-strait exchanges for a period from six months to five years.[36] Ma Ying-jeou Foundation CEO Hsiao Hsu-Tsen argued that such a penalty would have a chilling effect on all cross-strait exchanges, as other organizations would also fear punishment for even relatively innocuous comments made by their PRC guests.[37] MAC Minister Chiu Chui-cheng expressed regret that a cross-strait exchange intended to promote mutual goodwill was marred by political statements that “undermined Taiwan.”[38] The MAC also expressed disappointment that the PRC did not reduce coercive military activities around Taiwan during the academic exchange. It said the CCP’s “exchanges on one hand and intimidation on the other” are a form of “political manipulation” that demonstrates a lack of respect for the Taiwanese interlocutors.[39]

PRC TAO spokesperson Zhu Fenglian accused Taiwan’s ruling DPP of “cyberbullying” students who participated in the exchange and carrying out a “Green Terror” against the trip’s organizers. She said that the administration “maliciously obstructing” cross-strait exchanges shows that it is afraid of “compatriots on both sides of the strait getting closer.”[40] “Green Terror” is a reference to the DPP’s official color, green, and the 40-year period of martial law in Taiwan called the “White Terror,” which was perpetrated by the then-dictatorial KMT government. The CCP uses the term to suggest that the DPP is tyrannically suppressing proponents of cross-strait engagement and unification.

The PRC sanctioned 13 US defense companies and six senior executives on December 5 in a move consistent with past PRC sanctions policy. The United States announced that it had approved a $385 million sale of spare parts for F-16s and radars on November 29. Reuters reported that the State Department had also approved the possible sale of “improved mobile subscriber equipment and support for an estimated $65 million” and listed the principal contractor for this sale as General Dynamics.[41]

The PRC announced sanctions in response to this arms sale on December 5. The PRC Foreign Ministry listed Trida Brown Engineering, Synix, Rapid Flight, Red Six Systems, Firestorm Labs, BRINC UAV, Cyberlux, Nyros Technologies, Group W, Domo Tactical Communications, Kratos UAV Systems, Catastrophic AI, and Shield AI as the sanctioned firms. Sanctioned individuals included executives of Raytheon, Bayee Land and Weapon Systems, United Technologies Systems Operations, BRINC Drone, and Data Link Solutions. The PRC Foreign Ministry announced that these entities’ assets would be frozen and that “organizations and individuals within the territory of [the PRC] shall be prohibited from engaging in relevant transactions, cooperation and other activities with them.”[42] ISW research has noted that the PRC frequently uses sanctions as a means of punishing and delegitimizing the United States’ relationship with Taiwan. The PRC sanctioned three US defense contractors in May 2024, including General Dynamics, following US arms sales to the ROC.[43] These are also not the PRC’s first sanctions against Raytheon, which the PRC also sanctioned in 2023 over arms sales to Taiwan.[44] 

Many of the sanctions announced on December 5 seemingly target US drone production. The sanctions against Raytheon senior executives notably target individuals involved in the company’s Strategic Naval Forces Business Unit. The PRC may perceive US drone firms as a threat to its naval security and may be using these sanctions to block US companies’ access to PRC drone technology. ISW research has noted that drones could play a key role in the defense of Taiwan if drone operators used islands belonging to Japan, the Philippines, and Taiwan to pilot swarms of drones with limited ranges.[45]

A new online documentary exposed the extent of the CCP’s United Front efforts to infiltrate and influence Taiwanese celebrities. Internet celebrity Pa Chiung released an online documentary on December 6 in which Taiwanese rapper Chen Po-yuan (Minnan Wolf PYC) recounted his experience with CCP United Front influence over his career to shape Taiwanese public opinion.[46] The United Front is a whole-of-government and society effort to advance the CCP’s ideology and interests by co-opting non-government segments of Chinese society. United Front activities against Taiwan aim to inculcate in the Taiwanese public CCP notions that the PRC is the only legitimate government of China and that Taiwan is a part of that China. [47]

The multi-part documentary focuses on Chen’s cooperation with United Front efforts to advance CCP narratives of cross-strait relations and shared nationality, including asking him to recite scripts that profess a Chinese identity and write songs that are critical of Taiwan’s governing Democratic Progressive Party (DPP).[48] Chen revealed the nature of the PRC’s United Front influence over his career in live phone conversations and text messages with unwitting CCP officials and other co-opted Taiwanese celebrities on the documentary. Chen stated on December 7 that his Douyin (TikTok) account was shut down following the release of the documentary.[49]

Targeting Taiwanese pop culture figures likely aims to shape the younger generation’s perceptions of Taiwan’s political status and Chinese identity to conform to CCP cross-strait narratives. President of the Taiwan Professors Association Chen Li-fu warned that the focus of the PRC’s United Front work against Taiwan has shifted to young people after the Sunflower Movement in 2014, referring to a primarily student-led wave of political activism that rejected integration policies with the PRC and championed Taiwanese identity. Taiwanese internet celebrities called attention to CCP efforts to recruit them to facilitate United Front work in June.[50] Pa Chiung revealed in June that the CCP sent him a contract that discussed a plan to establish a “Taiwan Support Party,” which artists would join as honorary members to shape the future of PRC-Taiwan relations.[51] 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. 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.

Paraguay, one of the ROC’s formal diplomatic allies, expelled the PRC’s envoy to Latin America, Xu Wei, after he approached its congress and called for Paraguay to cut ties with Taiwan. Xu had been in the Paraguayan capital of Asuncion for an annual UNESCO meeting, but skipped the meeting in favor of making a visit to Paraguay’s seat of government.[52] Xu announced at the Paraguayan Congress the PRC’s interest in establishing diplomatic ties with Paraguay but insisted that Paraguay must cut diplomatic ties with Taiwan as soon as possible.[53] Xu offered the possibility of increased trade and a myriad of other benefits in exchange for a shift in Paraguay’s diplomatic recognition. Some Paraguayan politicians, pointing to the challenges farmers face in exporting soybeans and beef to China have advocated for the switch.[54] Nevertheless, Paraguay’s foreign ministry subsequently accused Xu of meddling in Paraguay’s internal affairs, revoked his visa, and declared him persona non grata—ordering him to leave the country within 24 hours.[55]

PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs Spokesman Lin Jian stated that Paraguay’s accusations were unfounded and violated international practices. He reiterated China’s longstanding position that Taiwan is an inalienable part of Chinese territory and invoked UNGA resolution 2758. The resolution, passed in 1971, names the PRC the sole representative of China to the UN. Lin inaccurately claimed that the PRC’s interpretation, which forbids any Taiwanese representation, is the “universal consensus.”[56] Taiwan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, on the other hand, praised Paraguay’s decision to evict Xu as a statement upholding Paraguayan sovereignty and safeguarding the Taiwanese-Paraguayan friendship.[57] Taiwan’s embassy in Paraguay criticized China and called Xu an infiltrator.[58]

This incident is part of a broader trend in PRC-Latin American policy. Since 2017, four countries in the region—Honduras, Panama, Dominican Republic, and El Salvador, have flipped their recognition from Taiwan to the PRC. The value of trade between Latin America and the Caribbean with China has also skyrocketed in the last two decades, adding a material incentive for states to align themselves with the PRC.[59]

China

The US Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) jointly announced that the “Salt Typhoon” breach that infiltrated several telecom providers as well as both the Republican and Democratic presidential campaigns remains unresolved and was greater in scope than officials had previously known. President Biden’s Deputy National Security Adviser for Cyber and Emerging Technology Anne Neuberger said at least eight US telecom providers had been breached, four more than previously known.[60] Moreover, investigators now understand that Salt Typhoon has exploited vulnerabilities and penetrated systems in at least a “couple dozen” countries.[61] The agencies stated that although they had not announced the breach until September this year, Microsoft first detected it in late spring or early summer and likely tipped off the relevant telecom providers.[62]  ISW has previously reported that Salt Typhoon could be a campaign by APT40, a highly sophisticated group associated with the Hainan branch of the PRC Ministry of State Security (MSS).[63]

Although officials from the respective agencies have not observed new activity by Salt Typhoon since they last put out an announcement about it on November 13th, they maintained the possibility that the threat group has decided to lie low with the intention to reemerge after the investigation passes.[64]  Officials identified three main target types: an unspecified number of victims in the Washington DC area whose call records were taken from telecom companies, a limited group of individuals with political or government connections—each of whom the FBI has notified, and Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement (CALEA) statute program court orders that could contain Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) investigation sources.[65]  The official neither confirmed nor denied that Salt Typhoon hackers had uncovered FISA sources, which would pose a dire risk for the latter while helping PRC informants avoid detection.[66] CISA’s Executive Assistant Director Jeff Greene also noted that the extent and method in which each victim was compromised varies significantly, making expulsion of Salt Typhoon all the more complicated.[67]  U.S. Senator Mark Warner (D-Virginia) cautioned that eliminating PRC hackers from US networks could necessitate physically replacing thousands of obsolete routers and switches.[68]

CISA and several partnering Five Eyes agencies jointly released an alert warning that PRC threat actors had infiltrated the networks of major telecom providers and a set of guidelines for hardening their infrastructure. Notably, they did not include British agencies, which Greene said operated on “different considerations and timelines.”[69]  Greene also recommended that Americans use encrypted messaging apps over SMS to reduce Salt Typhoon’s ability to intercept data in transit.[70]

Telecom providers are among the most valuable targets for a nation state actor interested in espionage to hack. They offer unparalleled visibility into who the providers work with and their customers’ data and metadata, especially where messages are unencrypted.[71] Salt Typhoon has managed to exploit a vast array of outdated network of routers and switches built decades ago by many companies that no longer exist.[72]

The PRC’s export controls on critical minerals will inhibit the United States’ access to materials that are essential to economic and national security. The PRC prohibited exports to the United States of gallium, germanium, antimony, and superhard materials on December 3.[73] The PRC also implemented stricter controls on exports of graphite to the United States.

The US Department of Interior designated antimony, gallium, germanium, and graphite as critical minerals to the economy and national security in 2018.[74] Antimony has a variety of military applications, including night vision goggles, strengthening shielding materials, explosives, flares, nuclear weapons, and infrared sensors.[75] 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.[76] Graphite has extensive industrial and military applications, including the manufacture of missile guidance systems, artillery components, firearms, and military aircraft.[77] Superhard materials, such as diamond, are used for their hardness and durability for precision manufacturing of goods such as semiconductors and electronics.[78]

The PRC is a top producer and source of imports for all of the critical minerals that are subject to new restrictions. The United States has not mined gallium since 1987, antimony since 2001, graphite since the 1950s, and produces minimal germanium.[79] The United States’ annual demand for some of the minerals, such as antimony, exceeds any other single country’s mine production.[80]

The United States’ stockpile of antimony amounted to 1,100 tons in 2023, compared to its consumption of 23,000 tons, according to the Center for Strategic and International Studies.[81] A Department of Defense spokesperson stated in July 2023 that the United States has a strategic stockpile of germanium but did not specify the size. The spokesperson stated that the United States does not have a stockpile of gallium.[82] The United States also does not have a stockpile of graphite.[83]

The export restrictions follow a pattern of the PRC’s increasing securitization of critical minerals. The PRC previously implemented export controls for gallium and germanium in August 2023, high-grade graphite in December 2023, and antimony in September 2024.[84] A PRC Ministry of Commerce (MOFCOM) spokesperson accused the United States on December 3 of “politicizing and weaponizing economic, trade, and technological issues, abusing export control measures, and arbitrarily restricting the export of relevant products to China.”[85] The PRC announced the measures a day after the United States Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) implemented new export control measures to restrict the PRC’s ability to produce semiconductors.[86]

Northeast Asia

Japan

Japan will give $10.6 million, small boats, and radars to the Philippines to strengthen the Philippines’ capabilities in the South China Sea and the Luzon Strait. This is the second instance of Japanese defense aid to the Philippines being provided under the recently created Official Security Assistance grant program, an initiative focused on defense-related cooperation and aid provision from Tokyo to its partners and allies in the Indo-Pacific.[88] In the December 5 agreement Japan promised to increase funding for maritime domain awareness radars from $4 million to $10.6 million and will provide coastal radar systems and rigid-hulled inflatable boats to the Philippine Navy and air defense radars to the Philippine Air Force.[89]

The Philippines has been working to improve its maritime domain awareness capabilities, particularly in the South China Sea.[90] Japan has been one of the primary providers of military assistance and equipment transfers to the Philippines, particularly the Philippines Coast Guard (PCG). The PCG has received 12 Multi-Role Response Vehicles (MRRV) since 2016 and will receive five more by the end of the year.[91] The PCG frequently deploys MMRVs to the South China Sea, and has used them during previous altercations with the PRC.[92] Japan’s recent increases in military assistance to the Philippines suggest the importance of South China Sea security and working with alliance members for Tokyo’s overall national security strategy.

Southeast Asia

Philippines

The China Coast Guard (CCG) used water cannons and sideswiped a Philippine Coast Guard (PCG) vessel sailing near the Scarborough Shoal, the latest action in a period of renewed tensions between the two states. Vessels from the PCG and the Philippine Bureau of Fisheries were carrying out a routine patrol near Scarborough Shoal on December 4 when CCG and PLA Navy (PLAN) ships approached them.[93] The PCG accused the CCG and PLAN vessels of carrying out “aggressive actions,” specifically using water cannons and sideswiping one of the Philippines’ patrol vessels.[94] The CCG released a statement accusing the Philippines of infringing on its sovereign territory and conducting illegal fishing activities. CCG Spokesperson Liu Dejun released a statement saying that the PRC’s actions were appropriate and necessary to enforce laws surrounding its maritime territory.[95] The CCG also accused the PCG of deliberately ramming into the CCG vessel and distorting the facts in order to manipulate international perceptions of the event.[96]

United States Ambassador to Manila MaryKay Carlson condemned PRC actions that disrupted Philippine maritime operations and “put lives at risk.”[97] The United States, Japan, and the Philippines carried out a joint patrol about 40 nm from Scarborough Shoal on December 6.[98] This joint patrol, one of many held between the Philippines and its allies in recent months, was not in response to the confrontation between the CCG and PCG according to Philippine officials. Symmetrical PRC military responses typically follow joint exercises between the Philippines and its allies, seen most recently on November 28^th, but so far there has been no reaction by the PLA to these joint exercises. [99]

This is the second reported instance of PLA and CCG harassment of the Philippines after three months of relative inactivity. The PCG reported on November 28 that PLAN helicopters harassed two Philippine fishing boats near Iroquois Reef.[100] This second instance of harassment in as many weeks suggests a renewal of tensions between the Philippines and PRC within the South China Sea.

The PRC submitted baselines of territorial waters around Scarborough Shoal to the United Nations (UN) in order to legitimize its claims over the disputed territory. PRC Deputy Permanent Representative to the UN Geng Shuang submitted a statement on the baselines of the Shoal’s territorial waters on December 2.[101] The Permanent Mission of the PRC to the UN released a statement saying that the submission’s purpose is to “strengthen maritime administration in accordance with the law,” and added that this action was in accordance with the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).

The PRC published the geographic coordinates for its territorial claims around Scarborough Shoal in November 2024 in response to Manila’s approval of the Philippine Maritime Zones Bill.[102] This bill defined the Philippines’ maritime territorial claims and the legal powers that it can exercise within those boundaries.[103] Manila issued a protest following Beijing’s publication, saying that the baselines established by the PRC were an attempt to legitimate the 2012 occupation of Scarborough Shoal, which the Philippines sees as a violation of its territorial sovereignty.

The 2016 Arbitral ruling determined that Scarborough Shoal qualified as a rock, and therefore only entitled to a territorial sea, not an EEZ or continental shelf. A baseline according to UNCLOS is “a line that runs along the coast of a country or an island, from which the extent of the territorial sea and other maritime zones such as the exclusive economic zone and extended continental shelf can be measured.”[104] The PRC’s submission does not reflect a change in UN policy towards PRC’s claims. Article 16 of UNCLOS requests coastal states to publish lists of geographic coordinates for their territorial baselines and submit a copy to the UN.[105] The PRC’s actions do not reflect a change in UN policy, but are rather part of a broader PRC strategy of using lawfare to achieve its national objectives.

Iran

PRC Vice Premier Zhang Guoqing visited Tehran to strengthen Sino-Iranian ties and stressed the importance of implementing the 25-year Comprehensive Cooperation Agreement.  The 2021 agreement would have the PRC invest 400 billion USD in Iran’s economy in exchange for discounted Iranian oil.  PRC Vice Premier Zhang Guoqing visited Iran on December 3 and 4, his second official visit to Iran this year.[106] Zhang met with Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian on December 4 where the two pledged to expand cooperation with one another and with Moscow to counter American “unilateralism.”[107] Pezeshkian met with PRC President Xi Jinping at the BRICS summit in Kazan, Russia; Zhang said that his visit a month and a half later is a follow up on the meeting between the two presidents.[108] Both the PRC and Iran have issued official statements emphasizing their strategic partnership and cooperation.[109]

Zhang and Pezeshkian both expressed their desire to begin implementing the 25-year Sino-Iranian Comprehensive Cooperation Agreement signed in 2021.[110] The final details of this agreement have not been publicly released, but a draft obtained by the New York Times reportedly revealed that China will invest 400 billion USD in Iran’s economy and Iran will provide a reliable and cheap supply of oil in return.[111] Iran currently exports 92% of its oil supply to the PRC at a discounted rate of approximately 30% according to the head of the Research Center at the Iran Chamber of Commerce Hojatollah Mirzaei.[112] The deal was originally proposed in 2016 by PRC President Xi.[113] 

Syria

The PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs has called for Syria's territorial integrity to be “respected” and declined to comment on the Assad regime’s collapse. The PRC has historically maintained good relations with Bashar al-Assad’s regime and provided it support throughout the years.[114] Syria joined the Belt and Road Initiative in January 2022, and, although some analysts view this as the PRC’s long-term commitment to Syria, there have been no significant investments by Chinese firms.[115] Assad also made a visit to China in September 2023, his first since the start of the Syrian civil war in 2011.[116] Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Mao Ning said at the time that the visit would “take bilateral relations to new heights.”[117] The collapse of the pro-Beijing Assad government less than 15 months later sets back the PRC's efforts to expand its influence in the Middle East as it must forge new ties with the Syrian rebel government if it hopes to retain relations with Syria.[118] China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokeswoman Mao Ning was asked numerous questions about Syria following Assad's exile to Russia in the December 9 press conference. Mao Ning stated that Syria's territorial integrity and sovereignty “should be respected” following Israeli air strikes against the capital city of Damascus. She declined to comment on questions about Assad, such as if the PRC maintained contact with Assad as he entered exile.[119]

exile.

Latin America

The PRC Foreign Ministry and PRC embassy in Cuba spoke out against findings that the PRC is maintaining signals intelligence (SIGINT) facilities in Cuba. The Washington-based think tank Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) published a report detailing the locations and function of suspected PRC surveillance stations in Cuba in July 2024.[120] The authors of the report used satellite imagery to assess four sites on the island as possible PRC SIGINT facilities. CSIS republished its findings with new updates on December 6.[121] The report lists Bejucal, El Salao, Wajay, and Calabazar as sites with “observable SIGINT instrumentation, clear physical security infrastructure (guard posts, perimeter fencing, military insignia, etc.), and other characteristics that suggested intelligence collection.” El Salao is located near the US naval base at Guantanamo Bay, while the other three sites are near Havana.[122]

The PRC embassy in Cuba denounced the report as “fake news” with “no factual basis” in a statement on December 8. The embassy’s statement said that “China and Cuba are good friends, good comrades and good brothers. The cooperation between China and Cuba is upright, aboveboard, mutually beneficial and win-win.”[123] PRC Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Mao Ning gave a similar statement in a regular press conference on December 11. Mao criticized US policy in Latin America and the Caribbean and said that “the cooperation between China and Cuba is aboveboard and is not directed against any third party.”[124]

The PRC’s comments are consistent with past PRC statements on its relationship with Cuba. PRC Foreign Minister Wang Yi and Cuban Foreign Minister Bruno Rodríguez Parrilla on September 27, 2024. The two foreign ministers discussed the PRC and Cuba’s 64 years of diplomatic relations; the PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs reported that Cuba’s foreign minister “thanked China for its assistance to Cuba's economic and social development and for firmly safeguarding Cuba's legitimate rights and interests in international occasions.”[125] PRC President Xi Jinping met with Cuban President Miguel Díaz-Canel Bermudez in the PRC in 2022 and again on the sidelines of the BRICS Summit in 2023; Xi expressed the PRC’s support for Cuba on both occasions.[126] Cuba relies on the PRC as a key trading partner and received a debt relief agreement from the PRC in 2022.[127]

 

China-Taiwan Weekly Update, December 5, 2024

Click here to read the full report

Authors: Matthew Sperzel, Daniel Shats, Alison O’Neil, Karina Wugang, and Henry Mann 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: December 2, 2024

Key Takeaways  

• The People's Republic of China (PRC) warned against Republic of China - Taiwan (ROC) President William Lai’s upcoming transit through United States territory on his trip through the Pacific.
• ROC former president Tsai Ing-wen urged US support for Ukraine at the Halifax International Security Forum on November 23.
• Taiwan’s Ministry of National Defense (MND) reported sighting PRC balloons in Taiwan’s Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) for the first time since April 2024.
• PRC Defense Minister Dong Jun declined to meet with US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin on the sidelines of a security forum in Laos in protest against US arms sales to Taiwan. The snub came days after the US-PRC leaders’ meeting in Lima, Peru, highlighted the resumption of bilateral defense talks.
• The PRC suspended Director of the Central Military Commission (CMC)’s Political Work Department Admiral Miao Hua on suspicion of corruption. It dismissed allegations from anonymous US officials that Defense Minister Dong Jun is under investigation, however.
• The PRC decried the US plans to deploy medium and long-range missile systems to Japan and the Philippines in case of a Taiwan emergency. The US HIMARS and Typhon missile launchers increase the survivability and mobility of missiles based in Japan and the Philippines.
• European authorities are investigating a PRC cargo vessel that likely cut two undersea cables in the Baltic Sea on November 17-18.

Cross-Strait Relations

Taiwan

The People's Republic of China (PRC) warned against Republic of China - Taiwan (ROC) President William Lai’s upcoming transit through United States territory on his trip through the Pacific. Lai transited through Hawaii on November 30 and plans to visit Guam while en route to the Marshall Islands, Tuvalu, and Palau, which are Taiwan’s three remaining diplomatic allies in the Pacific.[1] Lai stayed in Hawaii for two nights; Hawaii governor Josh Green presented him with a gift in Honolulu.[2] Lai also had a phone call with US Representative Nancy Pelosi, who expressed well-wishes for Lai’s travels through the Pacific.[3] The PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) Spokesperson Lin Jian warned the United States on November 29 not to permit Lai’s transit and cited the PRC’s one-China principle, which states that Taiwan is an inalienable part of China and the PRC is the sole legitimate government of that China.[4] The United States does not recognize the one China principle but instead maintains a “one China policy” of maintaining diplomatic relations only with the PRC and not with Taiwan. The US policy acknowledges the PRC’s position but remains ambiguous about its own stance on the status of Taiwan. The PRC conflates international agreements that recognize the PRC as the government of China with its own one-China principle to falsely claim the existence an international consensus that the PRC is the rightful government of Taiwan and further Taiwan’s diplomatic isolation.[5]

PRC MFA spokeswoman Mao Ning said that the PRC “resolutely opposes any form of official exchanges between the United States and Taiwan.”[6] MFA spokesman Lin Jian gave a statement expressing opposition to Lai’s visit in a regular press conference on December 2 and said that the PRC “firmly opposes the United States’ connivance and support for ‘Taiwan independence’ separatists and their separatist activities in any form.”[7] Such statements are consistent with ongoing PRC efforts to paint Lai as a dangerous separatist and to discredit US support for the ROC.

Reuters cited unnamed Taiwanese officials who speculated that the PRC could hold drills, possibly including another Joint Sword-series exercise, in response to Lai’s transit.[8] Beijing has responded to past US visits by Taiwanese leadership by staging military drills around the ROC. When Lai visited New York and San Francisco as Taiwan’s vice president in August 2023, the PRC responded by holding drills around the island.[9] The PRC also held its inaugural Joint Sword drills around Taiwan in April 2023 after then-ROC President Tsai Ing-wen met with House Speaker Kevin McCarthy in California.[10] The PRC accused Lai of professing independence sentiments in his inaugural speech in May to justify launching the two-day-long Joint Sword 2024A exercises around the island.[11] The PRC staged its Joint Sword 2024B exercises on October 14 in response to Lai’s National Day speech, which the PRC claimed was escalatory for promoting Taiwanese independence.”[12] The PRC has established a precedent of using harsher rhetoric and bolder military actions against Lai than it used against past DPP presidents. ISW analysis of the October 14 exercises noted that the PRC's response to Lai’s speech did not acknowledge any de-escalation in Lai’s rhetoric; it instead framed the speech as a serious and deliberate provocation of Beijing.[13]

ROC former president Tsai Ing-wen urged US support for Ukraine at the Halifax International Security Forum on November 23. Tsai called upon democracies to continue supporting Ukraine as a means of deterring future authoritarian aggression.[14] Tsai stated, “We still have time to prepare ourselves, with the rest of the world” and that the United States should focus on arming Ukraine.[15] Tsai also thanked for the nations that support freedom of navigation in the Taiwan Strait, highlighted Taiwan’s resilience, and announced that next year’s Halifax Forum will take place in Taiwan.[16] This year’s Halifax forum featured discussions on European, Middle Eastern, and Asian security topics, including an informal off-the-record session entitled “Taiwan’s Friends: What to Do?”[17] US INDOPACOM commander Admiral Samuel Paparo attended the forum.[18]

PRC Foreign Ministry spokesman Lin Jian said that the PRC opposes “any ‘Taiwan independence’ separatists visiting countries with diplomatic ties to China under any pretext” and called upon Canada to adhere to the one-China principle.[19] Canada’s policy towards the PRC neither endorses nor challenges the one-China principle, like the United States’ policy.[20]

Taiwan’s Ministry of National Defense (MND) reported six PRC balloons in Taiwan’s Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) for the first time since April 2024. Taiwan’s MND observed the first balloon entering Taiwan’s ADIZ at an altitude of 33,000 feet on November 24.[21] PRC Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Mao Ning declined to comment on the issue.[22] Taiwan’s MND reported sighting two more balloons on November 27, another on November 28, and two more on November 29. MND reported the location of each balloon’s detection or ADIZ crossing relative to Keelung City in Taiwan’s north; all balloons were detected or entered Taiwan’s ADIZ within 104 nautical miles of Keelung.[23]

The balloons did not pass close enough to the ROC for officials to determine their purpose or intelligence-gathering potential. Taiwan accused the PRC of using balloons in “cognitive warfare” in January 2024, when frequent balloon overflights coincided with the Taiwanese elections. Taiwan’s MND first noted the balloons as ADIZ incursions on December 8, 2023. The balloons passed directly over the island of Taiwan for the first time on January 1. ISW has assessed that these balloon overflights likely took place as part of a broader effort to wear down Taiwan’s resources and response capabilities, consistent with the effect of normalizing ADIZ incursions more generally.[24]

Four China Coast Guard (CCG) ships entered restricted waters around Taiwan’s Kinmen islands on November 25th and 26th. Kinmen is a Taiwanese island group located three kilometers (1.9 miles) from the PRC’s coast.[25] Four CCG ships entered Kinmen’s southern restricted waters at four different locations on November 25 for approximately two hours.[26] The same four ships returned the next morning on November 26 to the same locations.[27] CCG ships intrude into Kinmen’s restricted waters in an effort to assert PRC law enforcement control, desensitize Taiwan to incursions in its restricted waters, and expend Taiwanese Coast Guard resources. Regular CCG patrols in Kinmen’s restricted waters began in response to the February 14 capsizing incident this year, and they occur in areas where the PRC may station ships in the event of a quarantine or blockade of Kinmen.[28] 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. 

The CCG’s intrusions into the waters south of Kinmen resemble a rehearsal for an operation to cut Kinmen off from resupply or intervention by sea, which would require PRC ships to position themselves to the south of the island. The CCG’s tactic of performing simultaneous entries into the restricted waters around Kinmen in different locations by multiple ships provides the CCG with experience in choreographing the initial actions that would be required for a real blockade operation to seal Kinmen off from the Taiwan Strait. Conducting the incursions also enables the PRC to gauge the Taiwanese coast guard’s response and the resources that it can deploy to challenge the stronger CCG. The high frequency of CCG incursions risks desensitizing Taiwan and its partners to them, which could grant the CCG an advantage in solidifying a blockade or quarantine if the PRC feigned the CCG activity as routine harassment of the Kinmen coast guard.

The ROC MND’s lowered threshold for air raid alerts shows how the PLA’s increased air incursions into Taiwan’s ADIZ have degraded Taiwan’s threat awareness and response capability. Taiwan’s RW News reported that the ROC Ministry of National Defense issued a confidential document at the end of 2022 that reduced its air raid warning threshold, shortening the warning distance from 70 to 24 nautical miles. This change means Taiwan will only activate air raid alerts if PLA aircraft fly past Taiwan’s contiguous zone boundary, 24 nautical miles from its territorial baseline. The shortened threshold would give some citizens just three minutes to seek shelter in an air raid.[29] ROC Defense Minister Wellington Koo said the change reflected growing threats of PLA activities.[30] The PLA increased its aerial incursions into Taiwan’s ADIZ in 2022 to nearly daily frequency. It increased them again in 2024, with aircraft crossing the median line of the Taiwan Strait an average of eight times per day in 2024. The old warning threshold thus would have required Taiwan to trigger air alerts several times per day.

The lowering of Taiwan’s air raid warning threshold is a concrete example of how the PLA’s ADIZ incursion campaign has weakened Taiwan’s threat response capability. The PRC’s normalization of a high volume of incursions drains Taiwan’s resources, exhausts its military personnel, and degrades its 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 and now has even less time to respond to a real attack.

The PLA’s monthly total air incursions into Taiwan’s ADIZ in November dropped below 300 for the first time since April but remained much higher than pre-2024 averages. Taiwan’s MND reported that 264 PLA aircraft crossed the median line of the Taiwan Strait and entered Taiwan’s ADIZ in November, 106 fewer than the 370 incursions in October. The November rate of incursions is comparable to October’s numbers when excluding the Joint Sword-2024B exercise on October 14, however, as the exercise contributed a record 111 incursions in one day. The PRC dramatically escalated incursions into Taiwan’s ADIZ following the election of Lai Ching-te in January 2024 and especially after Lai’s inauguration in May, with every month from May to October seeing over 300 incursions. Monthly ADIZ incursions surpassed 300 only once prior to 2024, when the PRC responded to then-US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan in August 2022 by launching record-scale military exercises around Taiwan.[31] ADIZ incursion numbers do not include aerial activity around the Taiwanese archipelagos of Kinmen and Matsu, which are west of the median line in the Taiwan Strait.

China

PRC Defense Minister Dong Jun’s refusal to meet with US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin at the ASEAN Defense Ministers’ meeting highlights the PRC’s continued willingness to use defense talks as a bargaining chip rather than as a mechanism for managing tensions. Dong and Austin both attended the ASEAN Defense Ministers’ Meeting Plus in Vientiane, Laos from November 20-21. Dong declined to meet with Austin on the sidelines of the forum, a refusal Austin called “a setback for the whole region.”[32] PRC Ministry of National Defense (MOD) spokesperson Wu Qian stated that the United States is “fully responsible” for the meeting not happening. Wu said that the United States “cannot damage China's core interests on the Taiwan issue while conducting exchanges with the Chinese military as if nothing had happened,” and urged the United Stated to “create favorable conditions” for high-level exchanges to take place.[33] An unspecified senior US defense official said that the PRC’s refusal to hold the meeting was a response to the proposed US sale to Taiwan of three medium-range National Advanced Surface-to-Air Missile Systems (NASAMS) and 123 Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air Missiles (AMRAAM) (Extended Range).[34]

Dong’s refusal to meet Austin demonstrates the PRC’s use of high-level defense talks as a bargaining chip to shape US policy on Taiwan, despite the fact that Chinese Communist Party (CCP) General Secretary Xi Jinping and US President Joe Biden highlighted the resumption of such talks during their meeting at the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) leaders’ summit in Lima, Peru, days earlier.[35] The PRC suspended high-level military exchanges with the United States following then-US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan in August 2022. Xi and Biden agreed to resume such talks during their meeting in San Francisco in November 2023. US and PRC military officers met for this year’s second session of the Military Maritime Consultative Agreement (MMCA) on November 6-8, after the United States announced the NASAMS sale to Taiwan.[36] A Pentagon spokesperson said that US-PRC dialogue is continuing despite the PRC’s refusal to hold a bilateral defense ministers’ meeting at the ASEAN event.[37] 

The PRC suspended Director of the Central Military Commission (CMC)’s Political Work Department Admiral Miao Hua on suspicion of corruption. It dismissed allegations from anonymous US officials that Defense Minister Dong Jun is under investigation, however. MOD spokesperson Wu Qian confirmed that Miao is “suspected of serious violations of discipline” and has been suspended from his duties.[38] Wu did not specify the allegations against Miao, but the CCP has used “serious violations of discipline” in the past to describe both corruption and perceived political disloyalty to the Party. Admiral Miao’s position as the PLA’s top political commissar, which he had held since 2017, made him the top official in charge of political discipline in the PLA and therefore one of the most powerful members of the PRC military’s leadership. The PLA is officially the armed wing of the Chinese Communist Party and has a dual command structure to ensure the military’s political loyalty, with a political commissar in each unit holding authority roughly equal to that of the unit’s commander.[39]

MFA spokesperson Mao Ning denied a Financial Times report citing unspecified US officials that the CCP is investigating Defense Minister Dong Jun for unspecified corruption allegations, however. Mao said the report was “chasing shadows.”[40] Her comment was not included in the transcript of that day’s MFA press conference. Dong’s two immediate predecessors, Li Shangfu and Wei Fenghe, were both expelled from the CCP following corruption investigations.[41]

The investigation into Admiral Miao is part of a continuing anti-corruption crackdown on the PLA and shows that CCP General Secretary Xi Jinping continues to distrust the political loyalty of the military. Li and Wei were both expelled from the CCP on June 27, 2024, months after being removed from their posts and after largely disappearing from the public eye. Li and Wei were previously the heads of the PLA procurement department and the PLA Rocket Force (PLARF), respectively, both of which have borne the brunt of the CCP’s anti-corruption campaign in recent years. [42] Bloomberg reported in January 2024 that US intelligence assessed that graft in the PLA hindered military effectiveness and was a reason behind PLARF purges, including a case in which investigators discovered some missiles that were filled with water instead of fuel.[43] The CCP took measures to strengthen political discipline in the military following the expulsion of Li and Wei. Miao was the top official in charge of this effort to instill political discipline, second to Xi himself.

Dong Jun’s position is relatively weaker than that of his predecessors, which is also a sign of Xi’s lack of trust in the PLA leadership. Dong was not appointed to the Central Military Commission (CMC) and was not made a State Councilor, unlike previous defense ministers. He therefore does not play the same role in PLA decision-making as his predecessors: the CMC is the PLA’s top decision-making body, while the Ministry of Defense is not part of the chain of command and is mainly responsible for military diplomacy.

Northeast Asia

Japan

The PRC criticized the United States' plans to deploy medium- and long-range missile systems to Japan and the Philippines in case of a Taiwan emergency. The US HIMARS and Typhon missile launchers would increase the survivability and mobility of missiles based in Japan and the Philippines. Japan’s Kyodo News cited unspecified sources who said the United States has drawn up plans to deploy a Marine Littoral Regiment equipped with High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems (HIMARS) at temporary bases along the Ryukyu Island chain, Japan’s islands closest to Taiwan, in the event of a conflict over Taiwan.[44] The US Army’s Multi-Domain Task Force (MDTF) will also station its long-range fires units in the Philippines, a deployment that would follow the stationing of US Typhon medium-range missile systems in the northernmost part of the country in April 2024.[45] These plans are part of a coordinated effort by the United States to leverage regional allies in the Indo-Pacific to aid the defense of Taiwan. PRC MFA spokesperson Mao Ning said the US-Japan contingency plans are “an excuse to strengthen regional military deployment, provoke tension and confrontation, and undermine regional peace and stability.”[46] The United States also stationed Typhon medium-range missile systems in northern Luzon in the Philippines, separately from the MDTF units it would deploy in the contingency plan. The Typhon systems can launch Tomahawk missiles with a range of over 1000 miles.[47] The MOD also urged the Philippines to withdraw the Typhon missile systems, claiming they are an “offensive weapon” contributing to regional instability.[48]

The United States is legally obligated to defend both Japan and the Philippines. Articles 5 and 6 of the Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security between the United States and Japan commits the US to defending Japan if attacked by a third party and provides an administrative agreement for the US to base troops in Japan respectively.[49] The Mutual Defense Treaty between the United States and Philippines requires the two countries to act together in the event of an attack on either.[50] The US missile deployments can improve the security and military preparedness of US allies in the first island chain, deter the PRC, and enable a more effective response to PRC military operations in the region. Major PRC cities such as Shenzhen, Fuzhou, and Shanghai are within the Typhon missile system’s range, although the US is extraordinarily unlikely to use these systems against cities themselves. The deployment of the system between the South China Sea and the Philippine Sea would offer long-range support in many of the anticipated conflict zones in a war over Taiwan. The Ryukyu Islands provide many positions from which HIMARS could help defend Taiwan as well, particularly to protect Taiwan’s eastern coastline, block the PLA’s entry into the Western Pacific, and safeguard crucial routes for Western reinforcements to reach Taiwan. Standard HIMARS Guided Multiple Launch Rocket System rockets have a range of around 45 miles or 72 kilometers.[51] HIMARS can also launch the MGM-140 Army Tactical Missile System (ATACMS), which has a range of 190 miles or 300 kilometers.[52]

The missile systems deployed to Japan and the Philippines will increase the survivability of missile forces based in those countries. The PLA Rocket Force, a major focus of the PRC’s military modernization, may launch missiles at US military bases in the Pacific during an invasion of Taiwan to reduce the speed and effectiveness of a US-led defense of Taiwan.[53] All US bases in the Pacific are within range of Chinese missiles.[54]  The HIMARS and the Typhon missile systems are highly mobile, which allows them to be repositioned quickly to evade destruction by enemy strikes.

Russia also objected to the planned deployment of US missiles to Japan, which demonstrates the growing PRC-Russia military alignment. Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said that a deployment of US medium-range missiles to Japan would threaten Russian security.[55] Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov added that Russia may respond with its own deployments of short and intermediate-range missiles in Asia if the US follows through on its plans.[56] Russia and the PRC held joint air exercises near Japan on November 29, part of a trend of growing bilateral military cooperation in the Pacific.[57] Russia and the PRC's military cooperation may indicate the US military deployments will impact geopolitics beyond the immediate Pacific theater.

Southeast Asia

Philippines

The United States’ establishment of a military task force to provide ISR support to Philippine operations in the South China Sea is part of a trend of coalition-building among US-aligned nations in the First Island Chain.  The US Department of Defense revealed the existence of Task Force Ayungin, a special forward-deployed task force to support Philippine operations in the South China Sea. The task force is named using the Tagalog name for Second Thomas Shoal, a Philippines-occupied shoal in the disputed Spratly Islands, which fall within the PRC’s territorial claims delineated by its in ten-dash line around the South China Sea.[58] Philippine National Security Adviser Eduardo Año said that the task force will provide intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) support to Philippine forces but will not conduct any operations. According to the Pentagon, Task Force Ayungin will assist in planning and training for the Armed Forces of the Philippines Western Command and the integration of four MANTAS T-12 and at least one T-38 Devil Ray unmanned surface vessels recently transferred to the Philippines.[59]  PRC MOD Spokesman Wu Qian criticized the task force, together with a US-Philippine intelligence sharing agreement signed earlier in November. Wu said that “defense and security cooperation between countries should be conducive to regional peace and stability,” and called the US-Philippines Mutual Defense Treaty “a product of the Cold War.” Wu accused the United States of undermining China’s territorial sovereignty and accused the Philippines of escalating the South China Sea dispute by violating the PRC’s sovereignty and its own commitments, provoking “trouble at sea,” and trying to pull in external forces. He said the PRC will “take all necessary measures to counter infringement and provocation.”[60]

The revelation of Task Force Ayungin is the latest development in a trend of strengthening defense relationships in the region as the United States and its allies form a counterbalancing coalition against the PRC. The Philippines also signed a reciprocal access agreement with Japan earlier in the year, which Philippine Defense Secretary Gilbert Teodoro Jr. said would allow Japanese forces to participate in joint military exercises within Philippine territory. Teodoro reported that details of military exercises with Japan are still to be determined. He also assured senators that Japanese troops would be on standby to help the Philippines with humanitarian assistance and disaster relief (HADR) during calamities.[61]

The PLA carried out military exercises the day after a joint United States-Philippines air exercise. This exercise marks the third occurrence of a symmetrical PLA response to joint United States-Philippine military exercises within Philippine maritime territory. On November 26 the United States and Philippine Air Forces carried out a joint exercise over the Western Pacific Ocean.[62] A statement from the US Air Force reported that this exercise was focused on improving force interoperability. The PLA Southern Theater Command carried out air and naval combat readiness patrols over Scarborough Shoal on November 28. The Southern Theater Command stated that this exercise was for the purpose of strengthening control and preserving national sovereignty over PRC territory.[63] This is the third time that the PLA has carried out military exercises in Scarborough Shoal following a joint exercise between the Philippines and its allies in Philippine maritime territory.[64] The PRC has established a precedent for responding in kind to joint military exercises in the South China Sea by the Philippines, which the PRC has repeatedly accused of acting provocatively and escalating tensions over disputed maritime territory. The CCG also conducted a patrol around Scarborough Shoal on November 30.[65]

The Philippine Coast Guard (PCG) deployed two patrol vessels in response to the PRC harassment of Philippine fishermen in Iroquois Reef. This event marks the first deployment of PCG vessels against PRC forces since the withdrawal of the BRP Teresa Magbanua from Sabina Shoal in September 2024. On November 28 the PCG reported that Philippine fishing boats were harassed by a PLA Navy Z-9 helicopter near Iroquois Reef.[66] Fishermen also reported the presence of CCG vessels, which shined lasers at the fishermen and stood by as two Philippine boats sank due to severe weather.[67] CCG spokesperson Liu Dejun characterized the incident as a law enforcement measure intended to halt “illegal fishing” activities.[68] The PCG responded by deploying two patrol vessels, the BRP Melchora Aquino and BRP Cape Engaño to Iroquois Reef.[69] PCG Spokesperson Commodore Jay Tarriela stated that the deployment is intended to show the PCG’s commitment to protecting fishing rights in the West Philippine Sea and the commitment of the Philippine government to not “surrender a square inch of our territory to any foreign power.”[70]

Iroquois Reef is located with Reed Bank near the Spratly Islands. The reef falls within the Philippine Exclusive Economic Zone according to the 2016 Permanent Court of Arbitration ruling, but the PRC continues to claim the territory and economic rights within it. Reed Bank contains many oil and gas deposits, but the Philippines suspended exploitation of these resources in 2015 due to territorial disputes.[71]

Territorial disputes between the PRC and the Philippines have resulted in multiple instances of harassment and military deployments throughout the South China Sea. The last PCG deployment against PRC forces occurred in September 2024, when the PCG withdrew the BRP Teresa Magbanua from Sabina Shoal following a five-month-long standoff.[72] Tensions between the two states seemingly plateaued since September, but a renewal of military deployments to features within the South China Sea may be on the horizon.  

Myanmar                                                                                                                                                 

The PRC is trying to protect its interests in Myanmar by brokering peace between the military junta and the Ta’ang National Liberation Army and advocating against the ICC prosecution of junta leader Senior General Min Aung Hlaing for crimes against humanity. The ethnic minority Ta’ang National Liberation Army (TNLA) announced its willingness to hold talks with the Myanmar military junta on November 25.[73] MFA spokesperson Mao Ning stated that the PRC will continue to actively promote peace and dialogue in the process.[74] The PRC has previously brokered a peace agreement with the TNLA in January 2024, but the deal fell through in June.[75] The International Criminal Court (ICC) accused junta leader Senior General Min Aung Hlaing of crimes against humanity for the treatment of the Muslim Rohingya just two days later on November 27, prompting the PRC Foreign Ministry to say the ICC has no jurisdiction according to the Rome Statute over acts committed by nationals of non-member states on their territories.[76] The PRC has not directly intervened militarily to support the junta or the rebels. It only involves itself when the civil war threatens its interests, particularly with access to natural resources and preventing negative spillover effects from conflict.

The PRC has important interests in Myanmar and has worked to protect its own investments. Myanmar has the highest level of transportation integration with Chinese networks out of all the countries on the PRC’s southwest border.[77] The PRC exported $13.5 billion USD of goods to Myanmar in 2022, while Myanmar exported $9.62 billion USD to the PRC the same year.[78] Myanmar is also critical to the PRC's geopolitical security by providing an alternative shipping route through the Bay of Bengal, thereby reducing reliance on the Strait of Malacca.[79] The PRC has invested $7.3 billion USD into the Kyaukphyu deep-water port in western Myanmar that will provide access to the Indian Ocean.[80] The PRC has also invested heavily in oil and gas pipelines that run from Kyaukphyu into Kunming in mainland China.[81] Precious stones account for 42% of exports from Myanmar to China and other natural resources make up a significant proportion of the rest of the exports.[82] The PRC also claimed to have wiped out all large-scale telecom scam centers in northern Myanmar, arresting 763 Chinese suspects in Tangyan on November 21.[83] Eliminating these scam centers was one of the PRC’s major interests in the Myanmar civil war because many of these scam centers targeted Chinese victims and entrapped Chinese nationals to work for them.

The PRC appears to be trying to minimize political instability, crime, and violence in Myanmar that could threaten its interests. The negative spillover effects from the civil war disrupt Chinese economic activities in the region and jeopardizes the viability of investments.

Europe

European authorities are investigating a PRC cargo vessel that likely cut two undersea cables in the Baltic Sea on November 17-18. [84] The Yi Peng 3 cargo ship departed from Ust-Luga, Russia on November 15, and sailed westward through the Baltic Sea.[85] Investigators determined that the ship dropped its anchor on November 17, severed the first cable, and continued to drag the anchor over 100 miles. The ship then turned off its transponder and cut the second cable at 3 am the next day.[86] It was ultimately forced to stop in the Kattegat Strait between Denmark and Sweden after Danish naval ships intercepted it. Unnamed individuals close to the investigation said that the ship’s hull and anchor showed damage consistent with the cutting of the cables.[87] Sweden launched an investigation on suspicion of possible sabotage, which occurred in Sweden’s Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ).[88] Publicly available ship tracking data from Marine Traffic showed NATO ships from Denmark, Germany, and Sweden surrounding the Yi Peng 3 on December 2 as investigations continue.[89] The PRC MFA said that the PRC is maintaining open channels of communication with Sweden and “other relevant parties.”[90]

European authorities are investigating whether Russian intelligence induced the Yi Peng 3 to cut the cables. The ship had just left a Russian port, whose port records indicate that the ship had a Russian captain. Russia has denied its involvement, however.[91] Russian ships have also been known to turn off their transponders – also known as “going dark” – to evade sanctions.[92] Research from the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration into illegal fishing found that fishing vessels also switch off their transponders to evade competitors or pirates and may go dark “adjacent to Exclusive Economic Zones and the high seas.”[93] The International Cable Protection Committee (ICPC) has stated that no “conclusive evidence” has yet proven the PRC’s intentional involvement in the cutting of the Baltic Sea cables.[94]

One of the severed cables ran between Finland and Germany, while the other ran between Sweden and Lithuania. Lithuania expelled three PRC diplomats on November 29, declared them personae non gratae, and ordered them to leave Lithuania within a week.[95] Lithuania accused the expelled parties of violating the Vienna Convention and domestic law; it is unclear whether the cable cutting incident prompted the expulsion. The PRC condemned Lithuania’s decision. PRC Foreign Ministry spokesman Lin Jian called on Lithuania to “adhere to the one-China principle, and push bilateral relations back on track” in a press conference on December 2.[96] The PRC and Lithuania have experienced an ongoing diplomatic spat over Taiwan; the PRC downgraded its ties with Lithuania in 2021 after Vilnius allowed Taiwan to open a representative office there.[97]

This incident was not the first in which PRC ships damaged European undersea infrastructure. Finland launched an investigation into possible sabotage after a PRC-flagged ship called New Polar Bear cut the Balticonnector gas line and a communication cable between Estonia and Finland in 2023.[98] The PRC admitted the ship’s role in causing the damage but claimed that the incident was unintentional.[99] Taiwan also accused the PRC of cutting undersea cables between Taiwan and its outlying Matsu Islands in 2023, which resulted in widespread internet slowdowns across the islands for over a month. The ROC National Communications Commission accused two PRC ships of damaging the cables, but Taiwan’s government refrained from accusing the PRC of orchestrating intentional sabotage.[100]

Russia

The PRC and Russia conducted their ninth joint strategic air patrol on November 29 in the Sea of Japan.[101] The People’s Liberation Army Air Force (PLAAF) stated that the air patrols aim to “test and enhance joint training and operational capabilities of the two air forces.”[102] The PRC and Russia have conducted the joint air patrols since 2019 under what the PRC referred to as an “annual cooperation plan.” This event marks the second such joint air patrol in 2024. The eighth joint air patrol took place over the Bering Sea in July.[103]

The PRC and Russia are conducting increasingly frequent joint military exercises in recent years, especially in the Pacific Ocean, and expanding the scope of their cooperation. The two countries have now held joint exercises in at least five different parts of the world since July, including naval exercises in the South China Sea, Gulf of Finland, Sea of Japan, Sea of Okhotsk, and Northern Pacific.[104]

Recent joint military exercises between the PRC and Russia have encroached on the air and sea space around the United States and its allies. The South Korean military confirmed on November 29 that six Russian and five PRC military aircraft, which included fighters and nuclear-capable bombers, entered South Korea’s ADIZ without prior notice.[105] South Korea responded by scrambling fighter jets in preparation for “contingencies.”[106] PRC and Russian bombers entered the US ADIZ near Alaska for the first time together on July 24 during the two countries’ eighth joint air patrol, prompting the US and Canada to scramble fighter jets to intercept them.[107] PRC and Russian naval vessels sailed together in the United States' EEZ in international waters near Alaska in September 2022 and August 2023.

 

China-Taiwan Weekly Update, November 21, 2024

Click here to read the full report

Authors: Matthew Sperzel, Daniel Shats, Alison O’Neil, Karina Wugang, and Will Pickering 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: November 18, 2024

Note: ISW will pause publication of the China-Taiwan Weekly Update during Thanksgiving week. Publication will resume according to the normal schedule following the Thanksgiving holiday.

Key Takeaways

• ROC President Lai Ching-te may plan to transit through Hawaii and possibly Guam during a trip to Taiwan’s South Pacific allies in late November or early December.
• The PRC released the captain of a Taiwanese fishing vessel whom it had detained since July following a visit by Taiwanese officials from Penghu County.
• Xi’s and Biden’s agreement not to integrate artificial intelligence (AI) into nuclear weapons control systems signals Beijing’s willingness to implement guardrails in areas that it has previously been noncommittal about cooperating in.
• The PRC debuted its J-35A stealth fighter at Airshow China 2024. The fighter is the PRC's second stealth plane and reportedly greatly expands China's power projection capability into the Pacific.
• Xi’s and Biden’s agreement not to integrate artificial intelligence (AI) into nuclear weapons control systems signals Beijing’s willingness to discuss AI safety despite previously withholding nuclear talks to punish the US for supporting Taiwan.
• The PRC did not interfere with a Philippine resupply mission to the Sierra Madre in Second Thomas Shoal. It is continuing to abide by a provisional agreement it reached with the Philippines in July 2024 despite continuing tensions over the two countries’ territorial disputes.
• The PRC warned the United States and the Philippines against increasing regional tensions following the signing of a US-Philippines intelligence sharing agreement.
• Anonymous European Union diplomats said that the EU has “conclusive” and “credible” evidence that a factory in the PRC’s Xinjiang region is producing and exporting drones for Russia.

Cross-Strait Relations

Taiwan

Reuters reported, citing anonymous sources, that ROC President Lai Ching-te plans to transit through Hawaii and possibly Guam during a trip to Taiwan’s South Pacific allies in late November or early December.[1] The Taiwanese government did not confirm the report. Such a trip would be Lai’s first visit to the United States as president and would mirror former ROC President Tsai Ing-wen's 2017 South Pacific trip, which also transited Hawaii and Guam.[2] The South Pacific states of Tuvalu, Palau, and the Marshall Islands are among the 12 countries that maintain formal relations with the ROC rather than with the PRC. Guam and Hawaii are both home to major US military bases that are likely to play a role in any US defense of Taiwan. The headquarters of the US Indo-Pacific Command are also in Hawaii. PRC MFA spokesperson Lin Jian stated that such transits violate the One China principle and will not stop the “inevitable trend” of China’s reunification. He urged the United States not to allow Lai’s transit.[3]

Tsai Ing-wen will embark on a trip to Canada to give a speech at the Halifax International Security Forum from November 22-24.[4] The annual summit, organized by Washington-based institution HFX, brings together leaders in government, defense, academia, and business. The trip would mark Tsai’s second trip abroad since leaving office on May 20, following a trip to Europe last month where she met with politicians and dignitaries in the Czech Republic, France, and Belgium. Tsai received the John McCain Prize for Leadership in Public Service at the 2020 iteration of the summit, honoring her efforts to safeguard Taiwan’s democracy and resist PRC aggression. Lin Jian responded to news of her trip by urging Canada to adhere to the One China principle and warning countries with formal ties to the PRC against hosting Taiwanese “separatists.”[5]

Beijing perceives meetings between high-ranking American and Taiwanese officials as steps toward formal Taiwanese independence and threats to PRC claims over the island. It started the Third Taiwan Strait Crisis in 1995 when the ROC’s then-president Lee Teng-hui visited his alma mater, Cornell University, in New York. Following then-US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan in 2022 and Tsai’s meeting with her successor, House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, in Los Angeles in 2023, the PRC held extensive military drills around Taiwan, including the first Joint Sword-series exercise in 2023. It has reacted less strongly to “stopover” transits than to formal public visits, however. The PRC has greatly increased its military and diplomatic pressure on Taiwan to deter further international engagement and assert PRC sovereignty claims since Tsai took office in 2016, and even more since Lai took office in 2024.[6]

The PRC released the captain of a Taiwanese fishing vessel whom it had detained since July following a visit by Taiwanese officials from Penghu County. The PRC detained the Penghu-registered Taiwanese fishing boat Da Jin Man 88 on July 2 for illegally fishing in PRC waters northeast of Kinmen during a PRC fishing moratorium. The CCG escorted the boat to the port of Quanzhou and detained its crew there for over a month. The incident was the first time the PRC had detained a Taiwanese vessel in 17 years.[7] The PRC released four of the boat’s crew members on August 13 but continued to hold the boat’s captain, surnamed Hong, and the boat itself.[8] The PRC released the boat and Captain Hong on November 15 following a visit by former Deputy Speaker of Penghu County Chen Shuang-chuan to Quanzhou the day before. Chen is also Chairman of the Penghu Cross-Strait Exchange Association. Chen arranged to pay 210,000 Chinese yuan (about $29,000 USD) in fines on behalf of Hong to secure his release.[9] Chen and other Penghu officials previously met with PRC Taiwan Affairs Office (TAO) Director Song Tao on October 24 to negotiate for Hong’s release. The TAO readout framed the visit as being entirely about resuming PRC tourism to Penghu, however, even though that was only a secondary objective of the trip.[10]

The PRC conducts direct negotiations with KMT party officials and local politicians such as Chen Shuang-chuan to legitimize the KMT as negotiating partners on behalf of Taiwan. The PRC released the Da Jin Man 88’s other crew members, as well as another fisherman, following negotiations with Kinmen officials of the KMT.[11] Conducting fruitful negotiations with KMT officials while refusing to publicly meet with DPP officials enables the PRC to help the DPP’s political opponents and reinforces the CCP’s message that acceptance of the 1992 Consensus, which the KMT accepts and the DPP rejects, is the requisite basis for cross-Strait relations. The 1992 Consensus is an alleged verbal agreement between representatives of the CCP and KMT that there is only one China and Taiwan is part of China, though the two sides disagree over which government rightfully represents “China.”

The PRC’s four-month detention of Hong may be intended to deter illegal Taiwanese fishing in PRC waters as the PRC strengthens its “law enforcement” against Taiwanese nationals. Illegal fishing in the area is common, but PRC authorities usually warn and drive away offenders rather than detaining them. The PRC may also have used its detention of Hong, his crew, and a Kinmen-based soldier named Hu detained earlier in the year to give it leverage in negotiations with Taiwan at the time. The two sides resumed stalled negotiations about the February 14 capsizing incident, in which two PRC fishermen died while fleeing a Taiwanese Coast Guard boat in Kinmen’s prohibited waters, weeks after the PRC detained the Da Jin Man 88. Local PRC authorities released both Hu and the crew of the Da Jin Man 88 soon after Taiwan agreed to return the boat and bodies of the deceased fishermen.[12] It is unclear what the PRC got in return for releasing Hong, if anything, however, other than payment of his fines. Chen said that Hong’s detention period was so long because unspecified “legal issues” had to be resolved before he could be released.[13]

Four Chinese Coast Guard (CCG) ships entered restricted waters around Taiwan’s Kinmen islands in two separate incursions on November 15th. Kinmen is a Taiwanese island group located just three kilometers (1.9 miles) from the PRC’s coast, a distance that has decreased in recent years due to a new PRC land reclamation project for an airport north of the island.[14] The Kinmen Archipelago’s restricted waters extend between 1.5 and 10 kilometers from its shores.[15] The CCG ships simultaneously entered Kinmen’s southern restricted waters at four different points at 8:50 a.m. and left at 11:00 a.m. The same four CCG ships returned to Kinmen’s restricted waters at 2:45 p.m. the same day and left at 5:00 p.m.[16] These two incidents mark the 50^th and 51^st times CCG ships intruded into Kinmen’s restricted waters this year. Taiwan does not claim territorial waters or a contiguous zone around Kinmen due to its proximity to the PRC but does maintain analogous “prohibited” and “restricted” maritime zones around Kinmen, where it claims exclusive rights to carry out law enforcement. The PRC claims Taiwan and all its associated waters to be PRC territory and denies the existence of any restricted or prohibited waters around Taiwanese islands.

The PRC began regular CCG patrols around Kinmen and frequent incursions into Kinmen’s waters since February 2024 in response to the February 14 capsizing incident. The patrols are intended to assert PRC law enforcement control around Kinmen and likely to punish Taiwan for the election victory of President Lai Ching-te in January. Beijing considers Lai to be a dangerous separatist. The PRC has incrementally changed its incursion strategy, especially since Lai’s inauguration in May. The patrols shifted from fixed routes and formations to dispersed, less predictable maneuvers that simultaneously enter Kinmen’s waters from multiple directions.[17] These tactics serve to establish a new status quo, desensitize Taiwan to the threat to Kinmen, and strain Taiwan’s resources as it must be prepared to mobilize at any time. Normalizing these patrols increases the likelihood that Taiwan will be caught unprepared if an apparently routine incursion turns into a full blockade that isolates Kinmen and other outlying islands. It is noteworthy that these incursions are regularly occurring at locations at which the PRC would likely need to station ships to enforce a blockade.

China

US President Joe Biden met with CCP General Secretary Xi Jinping on November 16 at the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum in Lima, Peru. This was Biden’s third meeting with Xi since becoming president. Xi’s rhetoric toward Biden was generally placatory while continuing to warn the United States not to escalate tensions. Xi signaled the PRC’s preparation for the US presidential transition and said that the PRC is ready to work with the Trump administration.[18] Xi warned the United States, however, not to challenge what he described as Beijing’s four “red lines:” Taiwan, democracy and human rights, the PRC’s “path and system,” and the PRC’s right to development.[19] Xi expressed the PRC’s resolve to continue asserting its “sovereignty, rights, and interests” in the South China Sea and stated that the United States should not instigate or get involved in bilateral disputes over contested land features. Xi reiterated that the PRC maintains a “fair position” on Russia’s war in Ukraine and portrayed the PRC as a mediator in the conflict, which ignores the PRC’s political and economic support to Russia. Xi also denied claims that the PRC was the perpetrator of cyberattacks, in an apparent reference to an ongoing investigation by US authorities into a PRC state-sponsored cyber operation that compromised several major US telecommunications companies.[20]

Biden expressed the United States’ opposition to “unilateral changes to the status quo” in the Taiwan Strait and called for an end to the PRC’s destabilizing military activity around Taiwan, according to the US readout.[21] Biden also addressed other key issues in the bilateral relationship, including the United States’ disapproval of the PRC’s continued support for Russia’s defense industrial base and US commitment to maintaining stability and freedom of navigation in the South China Sea. [22]

Xi and Biden agreed not to integrate artificial intelligence (AI) into nuclear weapons control systems, signaling Beijing’s willingness to implement guardrails in issues about which it has previously been noncommittal. Xi and Biden agreed during their meeting at APEC that the United States and PRC would maintain human control — as opposed to AI control — over their nuclear arsenals.[23] US National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan emphasized that the conversation aligned with Biden’s and Xi’s agreement to “work on AI safety and risk together” following last year’s Woodside Summit.[24] Sullivan stated that he did not foresee an “imminent risk” that either power would “hand over the control of nuclear weapons to artificial intelligence” but that the discussion took place as a long-term stabilization measure.[25]

The PRC’s acceptance of the US proposal marks a shift from the PRC’s earlier reluctance to accept limits on its application of AI. US National Security Council Senior Director for Technology and National Security Tarun Chhabra stated in June that the PRC was not in agreement with the US policy that AI should not be involved with nuclear weapons launch systems, following bilateral AI risk and safety talks in Geneva in May.[26] The PRC also refrained from signing an international agreement on the use of AI in the military during the Responsible AI in the Military Domain (REAIM) summit in Seoul on September 10.[27]

The agreement signals rare cooperation from the PRC in two critical areas of competition with the US, AI and nuclear weapons, in both of which the PRC has been disinclined to accept limits that might inhibit the PRC from gaining an edge. The PRC suspended nuclear arms control discussions with the US in July, citing the United States’ arms sales to Taiwan as the primary reason.[28] The PRC has long-maintained disinterest in engaging with the US over limitations on nuclear policy, however, according to Sullivan.[29] The PRC’s unwillingness to sequester issues regarding strategic stability from the rest of the bilateral relationship calls into question the PRC’s commitment to adhere to such agreements should tensions escalate.

The PRC has aimed to portray itself as a responsible nuclear power, deflect criticism of its nuclear arsenal expansion by emphasizing its no-first-use policy, and cast the United States as the destabilizing power in the bilateral relationship.[30] Xi’s agreement to limit the influence of AI over the PRC’s nuclear arsenal is consistent with the PRC’s intent to portray itself as a responsible nuclear power.

The PRC debuted its J-35A stealth fighter at Airshow China 2024. The fighter is the PRC's second stealth plane and reportedly greatly expands China's power projection into the Pacific. The J-35 is a mid-size twin-engine plane intended to be a multirole fighter. There is very little information publicly available about the newly debuted fighter, but many observable features such as the aircraft shape and wing closely resemble Lockheed Martin's F-35 fighter, and this may not be a coincidence, since PRC-based hackers stole data on the F-35 project in 2007 and 2008.[31] The J-35 prototype, FC-31 V2, has smaller dimensions then the other PLA stealth fighter, the J-20, with a length of 17.3 meters, a wingspan of 11.5 meters, and a height of 4.8 meters.[32] The J-35 has two known variants, a carrier-based variant and a land-based variant; the version that made its public debut at Airshow China 2024 is the land-based J-35A.[33] The carrier-based variant has been developed to operate from the PLA’s Fujian aircraft carrier, which has yet to enter service, and other Type-003 carriers the PRC may build in the future. Photographs have shown the carrier-based J-35 to have foldable wings and a launch bar for catapult-assisted takeoff (CATOBAR).[34] The J-20 stealth jet cannot be operated from aircraft carriers, so the J-35 will thus give the PRC the ability to operate stealth combat aircraft far from its shores. The J-35 has a significantly shorter combat range than the J-20, at 750 miles and 1200 miles respectively, but this limited range is partially offset by its ability to operate from an aircraft carrier.[35] Weaponry can be mounted externally on the wings of a J-35, very likely significantly increasing its radar cross-section, or in the internal weapons bay.

The J-35 is designed to be a multirole fighter jet with strong stealth capabilities, but there are some design and logistical challenges that limit the effectiveness of the plane. The J-35 has less observable control surface than the J-20, and this may indicate less maneuverability. The J-35 may have difficulties masking its heat signature due to the double engine design—the F-22 tried to solve this issue with a specially designed trapezoidal engine nozzle, but the J-35 uses a rounded shape with serrated nozzles for heat dispersion.[36]

There are significant limitations to the PRC's technological development in spite of its espionage and intellectual property theft. For example, the PRC’s jet engine technology is outdated compared to Western military jets. The FC-31, the prototype of the J-35, is equipped with WS-13 engines, and the J-35 is supposed to be upgraded to WS-19 engines that are currently still in development.[37] The WS-13 Engines are based on Russian RD-33 engines with a major repair interval of roughly 810 hours and service lifespan of 2200 hours, and these intervals are significantly smaller than many Western engines.[38] The PRC has historically relied on Russian military technology and has made efforts to domestically develop its jet engines, but supply chain issues, reliability and quality control problems, and technological limitations have and will continue to hamper its ability to do so.[39] The PRC has strong manufacturing capabilities, however, and is successfully producing J-20s at scale using pulsating production lines, a capability that will likely expedite J-35 production as well.[40]

The J-35 is one of many new military advancements showcased at Airshow China 2024. The PLA also debuted an upgraded Z-20 helicopter, the Z-20J, designed to provide an effective anti-submarine platform for the Navy, and a variant of the J-15 fighter jet, the J-15T.[41] The airshow also showcased the Jiu Tian reconnaissance and attack drone and the HQ-19 anti-ballistic-missile system.[42] The J-35 and the J-15T are both likely to be fielded on the Fujian aircraft carrier, and the CATOBAR system to launch and land fighter jets allows these aircraft to take off with heavier loads than are possible using the ski jumps on the Liaoning and Shandong.

Southeast Asia

Philippines

The PRC conducted military exercises and a law enforcement patrol near the Scarborough Shoal, reinforcing its territorial claims amid its dispute over new Filipino maritime territory laws. On November 13 the PLA Southern Theater Command held naval and air combat drills and a joint patrol near Scarborough Shoal.[43] This is the second PLA joint air and maritime patrol around Scarborough Shoal in four months. On November 14 the China Coast Guard (CCG) carried out a “law enforcement patrol” near Scarborough Shoal.[44] These exercises follow the November 10 announcement by the PRC’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) that demarcated the coordinates of the PRC’s territorial sea baseline claims around Scarborough Shoal. The PRC MFA stated that its claims are in accordance with the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).[45] The PRC’s invocation of international law likely aims to provide legitimacy to their “law enforcement” actions near disputed territory in the South China Sea.

This announcement by the PRC MFA also followed the signing of the Philippine Archipelagic Sea Lanes Act and Philippine Maritime Zones Act by Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr on November 8.[46] The Philippine Archipelagic Sea Lanes Act established a system allowing foreign vessels and aircraft to exercise the right of passage through Philippine waters. The Philippine Maritime Zones Act defined the Philippines’ internal waters, archipelagic waters, territorial sea, contiguous zone, exclusive economic zone and continental shelf. The Philippines’ territorial definitions include the disputed Spratly Islands and Scarborough Shoal, claims that the PRC criticized as the illegal incorporation of PRC territory. The Philippine government stated that these two laws are intended to align Philippine domestic law with international law according to UNCLOS and the South China Sea Arbitration ruling of 2016. The ruling determined that the PRC‘s expansive South China Sea territorial claims were inconsistent with international law and rejected all PRC territorial or maritime claims determined to be part of the Philippines‘ exclusive economic zone (EEZ) and continental shelf.[47] The PRC protested the Philippines’ “unilateral actions” and stated that the PRC will continue to defend its territorial rights by all means necessary.

The PRC did not interfere with a Philippine resupply mission to the Sierra Madre in Second Thomas Shoal. It is continuing to abide by a provisional agreement it reached with the Philippines in July 2024 despite continuing tensions over the two countries’ territorial disputes.[48] The Philippines successfully completed a rotation and resupply mission to the BRP Sierra Madre, a grounded warship that acts as a Philippine military outpost in Second Thomas Shoal. The PRC released a statement that the CCG observed this resupply mission and reported that the exercise was completed “with China’s approval.”[49] This marks the third resupply mission since the provisional agreement between the PRC and the Philippines was reached. The PRC claims that it “allows” Philippine resupply missions to Second Thomas Shoal to give the impression that it has legal jurisdiction over the Shoal, though the Philippines rejects this framing.

The PRC warned the United States and the Philippines against increasing regional tensions following the signing of a US-Philippines intelligence sharing agreement. On November 18 United States Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin and Philippine Secretary of National Defense Gilberto Teodoro signed the General Security of Military Information Agreement (GSOMIA).[50] The text of the agreement has not been released by either government, but according to the US Department of Defense (DoD) the GSOMIA is focused on providing a legal framework for increased sharing of information and defense technology between the two states.[51] The DoD said the agreement was made after two years of bilateral negotiations and will enhance interoperability between United States and Philippine forces. This signing marked Defense Secretary Austin’s fourth visit to Manila, the most of any United States Secretary of Defense, emphasizing Washington’s view of the importance of close relations between Manila and Washington.

PRC MFA spokesperson Lin Jian commented on the agreement during a press conference, stating that agreements “must not target third parties or harm the interests of third parties” and warning the two states against undermining regional peace and stability.[52] The semi-official state-owned newspaper Global Times cited two PRC-based experts who argued that this agreement could result in additional provocative actions from the Philippines.[53] The PRC has previously stated its concerns over Philippine and United States military cooperation and its implications for PRC maritime security.[54]

Oceania

Palauan President Surangel Whipps Jr.’s reelection reinforces US naval power projection into the Pacific islands. Palauan President Surangel Whipps Jr. won reelection in Palau’s November 2024 election.[55] Taiwan President Lai Ching-te congratulated Whipps Jr. on social media, and Whipps made a deliberate layover in Taiwan on November 13 on his way to Azerbaijan for the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC COP29).[56] Palau is one of 12 countries that has diplomatic relations with the ROC rather than the PRC. Whipps has remained extremely vocal in his support for Taiwan’s participation in international bodies, stating that the Taiwanese “deserve to have a voice” at the UN during an interview to Taiwanese media, and also commented on Palau’s efforts to diversify its economy amidst PRC tourism restrictions that Beijing imposed in retribution for Palau’s support of Taiwan.[57]

Whipps also stated that he may ask the United States for a Patriot missile defense system again in light of the recent PLA’s test of an intercontinental ballistic missile in September 2024, which landed in the southern Pacific Ocean. The Palauan Senate previously rejected the proposal in 2023.[58] The US military has been working on a number of large construction projects in Palau, including defense radars in Angaur and Ngaraad state, seaport expansion in Koror, and airstrip expansion of the WWII-era runways on Peleliu.[59] Palau has a Compact of Free Association (COFA) with the United States that grants the US military permission to operate on the island in exchange for economic and military aid.[60] Palau is strategically significant because of its location in the Second Island Chain and because it is the Pacific island closest to the South China Sea that hosts important US military infrastructure. These facts would make it a prime target for the PRC in the event of war in the Pacific, and so the Patriot missile systems would act as deterrence and add a line of defense in the event of an attack.

Whipps also claimed that PRC research vessels and other boats have operated in Palau’s Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ).[61] The PRC's foreign ministry has denied the allegations. These types of incursions have historically been used to normalize PRC presence in foreign waters, especially waters where the PRC has territorial claims. The PRC also named two underwater seamounts within Palau’s EEZ with Chinese names earlier in 2024, which may indicate a preparation to assert claims in the area. [62] The PRC does not currently claim any territory in Palau’s EEZ, however. The PRC will most likely redouble efforts following Whipps’ reelection to pressure the island nation to cease its support of Taiwan and military cooperation with the United States.

Russia

Anonymous European Union diplomats said the EU has “conclusive” and “credible” evidence that a factory in the PRC’s Xinjiang region is producing and exporting drones for Russia. An unspecified senior EU official told South China Morning Post on November 15 that intelligence sources have reported the existence of the drone factory in Xinjiang, but that the EU has yet to confirm this information, whether the drones have already been shipped, and how much PRC authorities knew about the operation.[63] EU foreign ministers met on November 18 to discuss the evidence. Several foreign ministers including Germany’s Annalena Baerbock warned that the PRC would face “consequences” if the EU finds that it is providing drone aid to Russia.[64] PRC MFA spokesperson Lin Jian denied the allegations, claiming that Beijing has never provided lethal weapons to parties to the conflict and has always “strictly controlled military and dual-use drones.” He claimed that the PRC’s “objective and fair” position on the Ukraine war crisis and promotion of peace talks is in “sharp contrast to the practice of some countries that have adopted double standards and fanned the flames in the Ukrainian crisis.”[65]

The US Department of the Treasury sanctioned two private PRC firms in October for their involvement in producing drones for Russia, the first time the United States has accused PRC entities of sending lethal aid to Russia’s war effort in Ukraine. The Treasury statement said that Russia’s Garpiya-series drone was developed by PRC-based experts and produced in the PRC in collaboration with Russian defense firms. It did not mention the location of the factories, however.[66] Reuters previously reported based on European intelligence sources that one of the companies now sanctioned by the United States, Redlepus Vector Industry Shenzhen Co., collaborated with Russian firms and established a joint drone research center in Xinjiang.[67] It appears likely that this joint drone research center is the same as the Xinjiang factory the EU officials mentioned, or related to it.

The PRC MFA told Reuters at the time that it was unaware of a Russia-PRC drone production project and that the PRC had strict export controls on drones. A US National Security Council spokesperson said that the United States had not seen any evidence that the PRC government was aware of the transactions or had any involvement in providing lethal aid to Russia.[68] PRC firms providing lethal assistance to US-sanctioned Russian firms or jointly collaborating with Russia to produce lethal equipment marks a significant departure from the PRC’s cautious approach to supporting Russia and undermines the PRC’s professed neutrality on the war in Ukraine.

Latin America

PRC President Xi Jinping’s inauguration of Chancay Port before the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum signals the PRC’s growing investment in Latin America. Xi’s visit to Peru featured talks with Peruvian President Dina Hercilia Boruarte Segarra, his third meeting with the Peruvian leader in one year.[69] Xi opened his visit by inaugurating Chancay Port and designating it the beginning of a “21^st century maritime silk road.”[70] PRC shipping company Cosco will exclusively operate the $3.6 billion deepwater port.[71] The port will reduce shipping time to the PRC by 10 days.[72]

Xi aims to link Peru, and Latin America more broadly, to global Belt and Road Initiative efforts. PRC rhetoric around Chancay and activity in Latin America more broadly aligns with the historical and cultural messaging used in other Belt and Road Initiative projects. PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesman Lin Jian spoke of the port as instrumental to the “Inca Trail of the New Era” and emphasized the ancientness of Chinese and Peruvian cultures.[73] Lin also emphasized “mutual respect, equality and mutual benefit, openness and inclusiveness, and win-win cooperation” with regard to PRC activities in Latin America; this rhetoric closely resembles past PRC messaging around its interactions with the “Global South.”[74]

The PRC has used port infrastructure as a means of advancing its economic, and at times military, security around the world.[75] Some observers have expressed concerns that infrastructure projects like Chancay pose a security threat and entrench the PRC’s influence in the region.[76] The PRC has claimed that Chancay Port exists only for commercial purposes; the port could improve the PRC’s naval power projection in the region if used militarily, however.[77]

China-Taiwan Weekly Update, November 13, 2024

Click here to read the full report

Authors: Matthew Sperzel, Alison O’Neil, Karina Wugang, and Frank Mattimoe 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: November 13

Key Takeaways  

• The ROC government’s November 6 petition to disband the Chinese Unification Promotion Party (CUPP) and indictment of agents acting on behalf of the PRC illustrates the extensiveness of PRC infiltration and political warfare efforts in Taiwan. 
• The PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) released coordinates demarcating its claimed territorial sea baseline around Scarborough Shoal on November 10.[1] The PRC’s announcement of a territorial sea baseline around Scarborough Shoal likely aims to legitimize its territorial claim by fabricating a legal basis using internationally recognized maritime law concepts.
• PRC Foreign Minister Wang Yi and Russian Security Council Secretary Sergei Shoigu met in Beijing for the 19th round of PRC-Russia strategic security consultations.[2] The PRC's and Russia’s differing emphases signal the partnership’s shared interests with distinct priorities.

Cross-Strait Relations

Taiwan

The ROC government’s November 6 petition to disband the Chinese Unification Promotion Party (CUPP) and indictment of agents acting on behalf of the PRC illustrates the extensiveness of PRC infiltration and political warfare efforts in Taiwan. Taiwan’s Ministry of the Interior (MOI) announced that it would petition for the disbandment of the CUPP for electoral interference on behalf of the PRC.[3] The CUPP is a minor political party established in 2005 whose platform is based on support for unification with the PRC and the One China Principle, which recognizes the PRC as the legitimate representative of China and Taiwan as a part of that China. The MOI stated in its indictment that the CUPP has systemically developed pro-Beijing groups and interests in Taiwan since its founding.[4] Taiwan’s Chiayi District Prosecutor’s Office pressed charges on November 6 against CUPP members Chang Meng-chung and his wife, Hung Wen-ting, for taking NT$74 million (US$2.3 million) from the CCP to produce pro-PRC propaganda.[5] The MOI announced on November 8 that it has investigated and found evidence to pursue eight  cases against 11 people for violating national security laws, laws governing cross-strait relations, and election integrity laws.[6] Taiwanese law enforcement also linked 134 CUPP members to serious crimes such as murder, robbery, transnational human trafficking, and gang violence.[7] This is the first time that the MOI has requested that the Constitutional Court dissolve a political party, illustrating the severity of PRC interference in Taiwanese domestic politics.[8]

Taipei prosecutors also indicted the heads of two “hometown associations”  on November 5 for organizing a PRC-funded trip for Kuomintang (KMT) officials before Taiwan’s January 2024 presidential elections.[9] Hometown associations are social and cultural organizations of people with common ancestry or ties to a common birthplace. The presidents of the Taiwan and Taipei Anhui Province hometown associations were charged with violating the Anti-Infiltration Act for allegedly recruiting 24 KMT officials at the request of Liao Jian, head of the PRC’s Anhui Province Taiwan Affairs Office (TAO), and paying travel expenses to the mainland that totaled approximately NT$33,000 (US$1,000) per person.[10] The PRC hosts urged the attendees during the trip to support KMT candidate Hou Yu-ih in the presidential election over Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) candidate William Lai Ching-te on basis that Hou’s victory would allow for “peaceful cross-strait development.”[11]

Both the CUPP and hometown association influence campaigns fit into the broader PRC strategy of conducting political warfare to “win without fighting.” The PRC strategy in Taiwanese politics broadly has the following components: increasing public support for reunification and weakening local resistance through media and grassroots efforts, gaining political power by bribing politicians and political parties, and accessing confidential information for espionage. These efforts aim to soften internal resistance against eventual Taiwanese reunification with China to make an invasion easier or unnecessary. A key aspect of the “winning without fighting” strategy is the United Front: the CCP strategy to covertly influence and gather intelligence both domestically and abroad.[12] PRC President Xi Jinping has called the United Front “an important magic weapon for uniting all Chinese people at home and abroad to achieve the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation.”[13]

The recent prosecution of the CUPP and the hometown associations illustrates the degree to which the PRC has been undertaking systemic efforts to undermine Taiwan’s political system in line with the United Front strategy. The CUPP has no presence in any of the five branches of the ROC central government, but the party has been able to spread PRC propaganda with the use of radio and digital media as far back as 2011.[14] Taiwanese authorities charged three Taiwanese citizens affiliated with the CUPP in August 2024 with developing a spy network to recruit Taiwanese military personnel on behalf of the PRC[15] The petition to disband the CUPP would dismantle a channel through which the CCP accesses the Taiwanese population.

Hometown associations have a history of co-optation to support CCP interests. The CCP may have recruited hometown associations to rally for pro-CCP electoral reform initiatives during the 2021 Hong Kong elections.[16] Hometown associations have also contributed to PRC transnational repression and monitoring efforts against PRC dissidents living abroad, including the 10,000-member Henan association in New York, which has considerable electoral influence.[17] The Anhui hometown association case was notable because of the PRC’s targeting of Taiwanese public officials — the PRC pushed CCP narratives of cross-strait relations over the multi-day trip. This interaction demonstrates the opportunities hometown associations offer in helping the PRC achieve its political aims through a grassroots approach.

The PRC’s exploitation of Taiwanese political and social organizations reveals the extensiveness of their influence operations.

China

PRC President Xi Jinping congratulated incoming US President Donald Trump on his election victory. Xi called Trump on November 7 and “pointed out that history has shown us that China and the United States will benefit from cooperation and suffer from confrontation.”[18] PRC Vice President Han Zheng gave US Vice President-elect JD Vance a congratulatory call on the same day.[19] The PRC Foreign Ministry reported that it hopes that “the two sides will uphold the principles of mutual respect, peaceful coexistence and win-win cooperation.”[20] The PRC sent a similar congratulatory message to US President Joe Biden following his election win in 2020. Xi called for both sides to “uphold the spirit of non-conflict, non-confrontation, mutual respect and win-win cooperation.”[21] Xi also sent a similar message following Trump’s electoral victory in 2016, calling for “greater progress in China–U.S. relations from a new starting point.”[22]

The PRC Foreign Ministry has adhered to standard rhetorical protocol in its responses to Trump’s election. PRC Foreign Ministry spokesperson Mao Ning said that the PRC is “committed to promoting the stable, healthy and sustainable development of Sino–US relations” during a regular press conference on November 7.[23] Mao avoided addressing specifics and said that “we do not answer hypothetical questions” in response to an inquiry about Trump’s potential tariffs against Chinese goods.[24] She also said that the PRC “firmly opposes any form of official exchanges between the US and Taiwan” in response to a question on Trump’s statement that China will not “invade” Taiwan.[25]

People’s Liberation Army Navy and Air Force representatives participated in the Military Maritime Consultative Agreement (MMCA) Working Group with US Indo-Pacific Command (USINDOPACOM) counterparts from November 6–8.[26] The semi-annual MMCA meetings provide a platform for representatives from both countries’ militaries to “clarify intent and reduce the risk of misperception, miscalculation, or accidents,” according to USINDOPACOM Director of Strategic Planning and Policy Jay Bargeron, who led the US delegation.[27] This MMCA meeting was the third since President Joe Biden and CCP General Secretary Xi Jinping agreed to restart the talks during their meeting on November 15, 2023.[28] 

The CCP views military-to-military communication as a bargaining chip that it can use to influence US behavior to the party’s benefit, in contrast with the United States’ view of the talks as a means of escalation management to prevent and control crises. The PRC suspended high-level military dialogue in August 2022 in direct response to then-US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan.[29] The PRC declined a US-proposed meeting between US Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin and then-PRC Defense Minister Li Shangfu in May 2023, which PRC officials have attributed to US sanctions on Li since 2018, before he became Defense Minister.[30] MFA spokesperson Mao Ning stated at the time that “the US should show sincerity and take practical actions to create necessary conditions for military dialogue and communication.”[31] The PRC’s history of withholding high-level military communication to influence US behavior suggests that the PRC could suspend MMCA talks again if bilateral relations deteriorate and the US takes actions that the PRC opposes.

Southeast Asia

Philippines

The PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) released coordinates demarcating the PRC's claimed territorial sea baseline around Scarborough Shoal on November 10.[32] The PRC’s announcement of a territorial sea baseline around Scarborough Shoal likely aims to legitimize its territorial claim by fabricating a legal basis using internationally recognized maritime law concepts.  

Scarborough Shoal is a contested atoll approximately 140 miles from the Philippine island of Luzon in the South China Sea. The PRC wrested effective control of the shoal from the Philippines in 2012 following a months-long standoff between PRC and Filipino ships and has since maintained a near-constant maritime security presence around the shoal.[33] Scarborough Shoal is still the site of frequent confrontations in which China Coast Guard (CCG) and maritime militia vessels regularly execute dangerous tactics to expel Filipino vessels from the area.[34]

The PRC MFA published a statement on November 10 that claims that its newly announced territorial sea baseline around Scarborough Shoal is in accordance with the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) and is a “natural step by the Chinese government to lawfully strengthen maritime management.”[35] The PRC’s invocation of UNCLOS to justify the territorial sea baseline likely aims to validate its territorial claims on the pretense of adhering to an internationally recognized convention. The PRC frequently appeals to international law to vindicate its “law enforcement” actions, often excessively violent, against the Philippines and other rival claimants in the South China Sea.[36] The PRC’s November 13 air and sea combat drills at Scarborough Shoal, which the PLA southern command said were “a patrol and guard activity carried out by the theater troops in accordance with the law,” are consistent with such appeals.[37]

The PRC’s claimed territorial sea baseline risks escalation with the Philippines should the PRC attempt to detain Filipinos that enter within 12 nautical miles of the shoal on legal grounds. The PRC enacted a law on June 15 that stated that the CCG can arrest and detain foreigners illegally entering or exiting PRC territorial boundaries for up to 30 days without trial and 60 days in “complicated cases.”[38]

The PRC has conducted law enforcement around other disputed features in the South China Sea where it has established a territorial sea baseline, including the entirety of the Paracel Islands, an archipelago that the PRC seized control of from Vietnam in 1974. The Vietnamese MFA called on the PRC on October 31 to release Vietnamese fishermen that the PRC detained for fishing around the Paracel Islands.[39] A PRC-based think tank called the South China Sea Probing Initiative stated that the PRC arrested the Vietnamese fishermen in April and May for “illegal” fishing in the PRC’s territorial waters around the Paracel Islands.[40]

The PRC’s announcement of the territorial sea baseline around Scarborough Shoal follows the Philippines’ enactment of the Maritime Zones Act on November 8, which defines the Philippines’ internal waters, archipelagic waters, territorial sea, contiguous zone, exclusive economic zone, and continental shelf. The PRC MFA released a statement on November 8 that condemned the act as a serious infringement on the PRC’s territorial sovereignty.[41] The statement criticized the law for “illegally incorporating” Scarborough Shoal and the Spratly Islands into the Philippines’ territory by using domestic legislation to solidify the “illegal ruling” of the arbitral tribunal.[42] The arbitral tribunal ruling refers to a 2016 decision by the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA), which determined that the PRC’s claims to exclusive “historic rights” over resources and jurisdiction within its nine-dash line have no legal basis under UNCLOS.[43] The ruling did not address sovereignty disputes over specific features in the South China Sea. The US Department of State announced its support for the Philippines’ enactment of the Maritime Zones Act, which it stated aligns Philippine domestic laws with UNCLOS and the PCA ruling.[44]

Europe

German police arrested and searched the house of a former US military contractor on November 8 on suspicion that he offered sensitive information from the US military to a PRC intelligence service. The German Federal Prosecutor’s Office stated that the contractor had made contact with Chinese officials and offered to provide the Chinese government with sensitive intelligence and to reconnoiter US military installations in Germany.[45] China’s Ministry of Affairs spokeswoman reported that she was not aware of the situation.[46]  The arrest comes amid heightened security concerns in Germany that employees in critical infrastructure industries and government may be passing information to the PRC and Russia. Germany’s Interior Ministry drafted legislation in October to improve security checks for employees in nationally sensitive infrastructure and engineering fields, the country’s Chancellery, government ministries and Office of the Federal President.[47]

This arrest follows a string of PRC-related espionage cases in Germany in the past year. German authorities arrested a PRC national on October 1 for alleged foreign agent activities that include passing on information regarding arms deliveries, which she obtained while working for a logistics company, to a member of a PRC intelligence service.[48] The member of the intelligence agency, identified as Jian G., was arrested on April 22 while working for a German member of European Parliament. The office of the German Federal Prosecutor General accused Jian G. of passing on information about negotiations and decisions in the European Parliament and spying on PRC opposition figures in Germany for PRC intelligence.[49]

Russia

PRC Foreign Minister Wang Yi and Russian Security Council Secretary Sergei Shoigu met in Beijing for the 19th round of PRC-Russia strategic security consultations.[50] The PRC's and Russia’s differing emphases signal the partnership’s shared interests with distinct priorities.

The recurring consultations are a platform for the PRC and Russia to coordinate policy and strengthen cooperation on international security issues.[51] The PRC readout highlighted the PRC's and Russia’s strong political trust and pragmatic cooperation, which created a new paradigm for relations between neighboring major countries and contributed to unity and cooperation for Global South countries.[52] Shoigu stated that the most important task is “to counter the policy of dual containment of Russia and China being pursued by the US and its satellites and further strengthen foreign policy coordination, including building a Eurasian architecture of equal and indivisible security.”[53] Russian President Vladimir Putin defined the Eurasian security architecture on June 14 as “a system of bilateral and multilateral guarantees of collective security in Eurasia” to replace what Putin viewed as a collapsing Euro-Atlantic security system.[54] Shoigu’s rhetoric is consistent with past Russian framing of the two countries as victims of the United States’ efforts to maintain hegemony and suppress efforts to create a multipolar world order.[55] Former Russian Security Council Secretary Nikolai Patrushev made similar appeals to exercise collective resistance during past rounds of the strategic security consultation.[56]

The focus of both leaders’ statements speaks to subtle differences in the countries' goals for the PRC-Russia partnership. The PRC’s emphasis on multilateralism and a common Global South identity signifies its regard for the bilateral relationship as an anchor to support the PRC’s cultivation of a community of countries that aligns with its interests and legitimizes PRC leadership on the world stage. Russia’s appeals to form a united front with the PRC indicate its more urgent desire to solidify an alliance that can challenge US hegemony in Europe and Asia.

The PRC and Russia are conducting increasingly frequent joint military exercises in recent years and expanding the scope of their cooperation. The two countries have held joint exercises in at least five different parts of the world since July, including naval exercises in the South China Sea, Gulf of Finland, Sea of Japan, Sea of Okhotsk, and Northern Pacific.[57] PRC–Russia cooperation also extends to political coordination on international security issues in the United Nations (UN). The US Deputy Ambassador to the UN Robert Wood accused the PRC and Russia on November 4 for “shamelessly protecting” North Korea from consequences for its arms buildup, which Woods stated emboldened North Korea to continue developing its ballistic missile, nuclear, and weapons of mass destruction programs.[58]

 

China-Taiwan Weekly Update, November 6, 2024

click here to read the full report

Authors: Matthew Sperzel, Daniel Shats, Alison O’Neil, and William Pickering 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: November 6, 2024

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’s hosting of the 5th Cross-strait Media Summit in Beijing from October 31 to November 1 contributes to its efforts to cultivate a favorable information landscape in Taiwan.
• TAO Spokesperson Zhu Fenglian announced new steps to develop Fujian province as a center for cross-strait integration on October 30 that likely aim to foster Taiwan’s economic dependence on the mainland and build political support for cross-strait integration.
• The China Coast Guard entered Taiwan’s restricted waters around Kinmen three separate times from October 28–30.[1] Normalizing CCG incursions between Kinmen and the main island of Taiwan enhances the PRC’s preparedness to initiate a future blockade or quarantine of the islands.
• PRC hackers directly targeted US presidential candidates and other major political figures in an extensive cyber espionage campaign.
• The PLA aircraft carriers Liaoning and Shandong conducted joint military exercises for the first time in the South China Sea.

Cross-Strait Relations

The PRC’s hosting of the 5th Cross-strait Media Summit in Beijing from October 31 to November 1 contributes to its efforts to cultivate a favorable information landscape in Taiwan.[2] Director of the Taiwan Affairs Office (TAO) Song Tao urged media personnel on both sides of the strait to instill a common Chinese national identity in Taiwan, promote Cross-strait media exchanges, and advance the “reunification of the motherland.”[3] Standing Committee member of the Beijing Municipal Party Committee Yang Jinbai stated that members of the media on both sides of the strait should disseminate the concept of “one family across the strait,” a common CCP political platitude meant to reinforce the notion that Taiwan is a part of China.[4] Vice Chairman of the Taiwanese media conglomerate Want Want Group Chou Hsi-wei attended the summit and echoed the view that both sides of the strait are Chinese, and encouraged media personnel in Taiwan and the PRC to reject narratives about the PRC from the United States, Western countries, and “Taiwan independence forces.”[5] Statements from an influential Taiwanese media executive that align with Beijing’s narrative of cross-strait relations and Taiwan’s political status benefit the PRC’s efforts to shape public perceptions.

The Financial Times reported in July 2019 that editorial managers at Want Want Group-owned media outlets receive daily editorial oversight directly from the PRC’s TAO, which dictates content relating to Cross-strait relations and the PRC.[6] Want Want Group later sued the Financial Times reporter who wrote the article for defamation, but withdrew the case in March 2021.[7] The TAO is a primary United Front organization that is responsible for carrying out the PRC’s Cross-strait policy. The United Front is a whole-of-government and society effort to advance the CCP’s ideology and interests by co-opting non-government segments of Chinese society. United Front activities against Taiwan aim to inculcate in the Taiwanese public CCP notions that the PRC is the only legitimate government of China and Taiwan is a part of that China.

The PRC has actively attempted to extend its influence throughout Taiwanese media in recent months. The ROC National Security Bureau (NSB), Ministry of Justice Investigation Bureau (MIJB), and other government agencies launched an investigation in July into claims that a reporter from the PRC’s state-run media outlet Xinhua was illegally working on the production of a Taiwanese political talk show. The investigation was in response to a June 25 Liberty Times report that Xinhua reporter Zhao Bo participated in the program’s discussions to determine topic selection and script production at the request of the Taiwan Affairs Office, citing an anonymous journalist.[8] The source stated that the CCP bargained for Xinhua’s involvement in exchange for supporting the company’s commercial interests in the mainland.[9] The Mainland Affairs Council (MAC) stated that the report was well-founded and verified and that the PRC reporter arrived in Taiwan in February 2024 and left in May.[10] MAC stated the investigating agencies would not make the conclusions of the investigation public, but that it would provide the relevant information to prosecutors.[11]

The PRC is also attempting to influence figures outside of the mainstream media. Several Taiwanese YouTubers called attention to CCP efforts to recruit them to facilitate United Front work in June 2024. The celebrities claimed that the CCP is spending considerable resources to lure Taiwanese internet celebrities to influence Taiwanese politics.[12] The CCP also approached several internet celebrities and artists with contracts to join new political parties, which would express support for by holding shows and events that promoted CCP-aligned narratives of cross-strait relations.[13]

TAO Spokesperson Zhu Fenglian announced new steps to develop Fujian province as a center for cross-strait integration on October 30 that likely aim to foster Taiwan’s economic dependence on the mainland and build political support for cross-strait integration.[14] The policy measures include steps to relax Taiwanese businesses’ mainland market access, establish a Fuzhou-Matsu “industrial cooperation park,” and build a Pingtan cross-strait common market pilot zone. Pingtan is a PRC island roughly 20 miles from Taiwan’s Matsu Islands. The measures are  part of a sweeping initiative that the PRC announced in September 2023 to transform Fujian into a “demonstration zone” for cross-strait integration, which entails incentives to strengthen people-to-people and economic exchanges, infrastructure to facilitate trade, and policies to enhance cross-strait permeability.[15] The PRC has already released 45 policy measures under the program in three batches.

Earlier policy measures received wide support from target audiences in Taiwan, including the “Fuzhou-Matsu City Pass,” a 300 RMB (approximately 42 USD) benefits card that facilitates the travel and settlement of Matsu residents in Fujian’s capital city of Fuzhou. Many of the PRC’s integration initiatives target Taiwan’s outer islands, which are more inclined to buy in to such projects due to their relatively undiversified economies and politics that favor cooperation with the PRC. 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.

Xi Jinping urged greater effort to develop Fujian as the driver of cross-strait integration during a tour of the province that began on October 15.[16] Xi visited various institutions and locales during his tour, including free trade pilot zones, schools, rural areas, and cultural sites. Xi’s tour came a day after the PRC staged Joint Sword 2024B military exercises around Taiwan that simulated a blockade. The TAO’s announcement of the new steps was a response to a press conference inquiry about how the government planned to implement Xi’s calls for Fujian’s further cross-strait integration. Xi’s presence in Fujian immediately after military exercises aimed at Taiwan and immediately prior to the announcement of new cross-strait integration measures signals the extent of his control over cross-strait policies, both coercive and persuasive. Xi’s appeals to positively develop cross-strait integration likely aimed to portray the PRC as an advocate for peaceful relations instead of an aggressor in the aftermath of the military exercises. Official readouts of Xi’s tour in Fujian made no mention of Joint Sword 2024B.

An order of US-made drones signals Taiwan’s increasing interest in asymmetric defense as the ROC seeks to upgrade its UAV capabilities. Taiwanese news reported on October 29 that Taiwan’s Ministry of National Defense “signed a ‘letter of offer and acceptance’ late last month, the step before signed contracts that specify quantities, dollar values and delivery dates.”[17] US Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA) had confirmed in June it would sell drones to the ROC in an order worth $360 million.[18] Taiwan’s order will include 720 Switchblade missiles and up to 291 Altius 600M loitering munitions.[19]

The ROC’s order from Anduril and Aerovironment is consistent with joint US-ROC efforts to bolster drone capabilities in recent months. Top Indo-Pacific commander Admiral Samuel Paparo announced in June 2024 that he wanted to turn Taiwan into an “unmanned hellscape” of drones should the PRC attack.[20] Since then, ROC efforts to develop its drone warfare capabilities have included hosting a multi-day visit to Taipei by representatives of 26 US drone companies along with Department of Defense and Department of Commerce officials.[21]

An ISW report noted the key role that drones have played in Ukrainian defense and could likewise play in the defense of Taiwan. Drones with limited ranges can operate effectively from Pacific islands belonging to Japan, the Philippines, and Taiwan. This range of operations encompasses the Taiwan Strait and could reach the PRC’s coast.[22] Even so, as ISW’s report notes, preemptive drone purchases are not a panacea because of the rapid development of drone and counter-drone technologies: “The requirement to be able to field millions of drones is a requirement to be able to produce millions of drones rapidly, not to have them warehoused in advance.”[23] ROC Defense Minister Wellington Koo has likewise noted that Taiwan will make efforts to acquire drones from multiple sources, as production is currently too low to support the ”hellscape” concept.[24] The latest order of US drone systems will supplement Taiwan’s existing ones, but Taipei will likely maintain efforts to boost its domestic production capacity. Even as Taiwan finalizes drone orders from abroad, it is ramping up efforts to boost production by building a UAV production line in Minxiong.[25]

The China Coast Guard (CCG) entered Taiwan’s restricted waters around Kinmen three separate times from October 28–30.[26] Normalizing CCG incursions between Kinmen and the main island of Taiwan enhances the PRC’s preparedness to initiate a future blockade or quarantine of the islands. Kinmen is a group of Taiwan-controlled islands with a large military garrison roughly 3 kilometers from the coast of the PRC. Each instance over the three days involved four CCG ships in different locations to the south of Kinmen. The incursion on October 30marked the 49th instance of CCG ships entering waters under Taiwan’s jurisdiction around Kinmen this year.[27] The PRC has normalized CCG patrols to erode Taiwan’s control over the waters since February.

The PRC would need to surround the island to cut it off from resupply or intervention by sea in an operation to take control of the island. The location of the CCG ships’ points of entry into restricted waters is conducive to such a course of action. The CCG’s tactic of performing simultaneous entries into the restricted waters around Kinmen in different locations by multiple ships provides the CCG with experience in choreographing the initial actions that a real blockade operation would entail to seal Kinmen off from the Taiwan Strait. Conducting the incursions also enables the PRC to gauge the Taiwanese coast guard’s response and the resources that it can deploy challenge the stronger CCG. The high frequency of CCG incursions risks desensitizing Taiwan and its partners to them, which could grant the CCG an advantage in solidifying a blockade or quarantine if the PRC feigned the CCG activity as routine harassment of the Kinmen coast guard.

The PLA maintained a high number of incursions into Taiwan’s Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) in October, consistent with the new normal it established since ROC President Lai Ching-te’s inauguration. Taiwan’s Ministry of National Defense (MND) reported that PLA aircraft crossed the median line of the Taiwan Strait and entered Taiwan’s ADIZ 370 times in October.[28] The PRC increased ADIZ incursions significantly after Lai’s inauguration in May, with over 300 incursions in May and every month since. The only time ADIZ incursions exceeded 300 in one month prior to 2024 was the record 446 incursions in August 2022, which coincided with a massive spike in PLA activity around Taiwan following then-US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan. A large portion of the total in October came from the 111 incursions on October 14 as part of the PRC’s Joint Sword 2024B exercise around Taiwan. ADIZ incursion numbers do not include aerial activity around the Taiwanese archipelagos of Kinmen and Matsu, which are west of the median line in the Taiwan Strait.

The PRC has normalized a much higher volume of ADIZ incursions against Taiwan than in previous years as part of an intensified PRC pressure campaign against the new administration of Lai Ching-te, whom the PRC considers a dangerous separatist. The high frequency of ADIZ 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.

China

PRC hackers directly targeted US presidential candidates and other major political figures in an extensive cyber espionage campaign. The threat actor targeted the phone numbers belonging to nearly 100 known individuals, including former President Donald Trump, members of his family, his running mate JD Vance, members of the Harris campaign, and Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer.[29] Investigators are calling this unprecedented campaign Salt Typhoon, following the Microsoft naming convention for cyber threat actors attributed to the PRC.[30] US investigators have not yet uncovered the extent of data the hackers managed to exfiltrate, but believe the threat actors to have tapped into audio calls and collected unencrypted messages, according to unnamed sources involved in the investigation that spoke to the Washington Post, including a Trump campaign advisor.[31]  This kind of data in the hands of PRC officials could provide them invaluable insight on who US officials communicated with and the content of their conversations.[32] PRC Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Lin Jian denied China’s involvement on October 28, claimed that that the US was deliberately misattributing the operation for politically motivated reasons, and made general counter accusations about American hacking.[33]

The FBI and the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) had been investigating Salt Typhoon since at least September 2024 for its infiltration into major US telecommunications infrastructure providers including Verizon, Lumen, and AT&T — which ISW has previously reported on.[34] US investigators did not discover until recently that Salt Typhoon had pursued specific phone numbers of major officials and potentially achieved persistence on their devices, however.[35] US intelligence officials believe the PRC to be relatively indifferent to the outcome of the presidential race compared to other US adversaries but highly interested in shaping the outcome of down-ballot races based on candidates’ stances on specific issues like Taiwan.[36]

The phone tapping operation of presidential campaigns mark a significant escalation in a year where the PRC has already conducted highly intrusive campaigns against infrastructure belonging to the US and its partners. US and foreign partner cybersecurity and intelligence agencies stated on February 7 that Volt Typhoon, another PRC state-sponsored cyber threat actor, 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.[37] The Salt Typhoon revelations follow a September 18 cybersecurity advisory from the US and UK that revealed an extensive botnet under the control of PRC state-sponsored cyber threat actor Flax Typhoon. The botnet infected over 260,000 small office/home office (SOHO) routers and internet-linked devices worldwide, almost half of which were in the US.[38] Canada’s Communications Security Establishment (CSE) also released a report on October 30th detailing PRC infiltration into at least 20 government agencies.[39] The PRC may assess that difficulty of symmetrical retaliation for transgressions in cyberspace provide it little incentive to refrain from conducting such espionage operations.

The US Department of State and Department of the Treasury imposed sanctions on 398 entities and individuals on October 30 for assisting Russia in circumventing sanctions as it wages war against Ukraine, including 13 PRC companies.[40] ISW detailed in May 2024 Russia’s heavy reliance on PRC-provided machine tools and microelectronics for maintaining its defense industrial production.[41] This is reflected in the types of sanctions on the PRC companies, which sold over US$150 million of products to Russia since January 2023.[42] About $50 million worth of equipment came from the mainland PRC, including $33 million worth of Computer Numerical Control (CNC) machine tools. Other products sold from the PRC include thermal imaging scopes, video surveillance items, and electronic components. About $100 million worth of products sold to Russia were high-performance electronic components from Hong Kong.[43] Among those electronic components are semiconductors, capacitors, circuit boards and sensors.

Hong Kong has emerged as a hub for PRC companies to circumvent sanctions on Iran, Russia, and North Korea since the PRC moved to strengthen political control over the territory in 2019.[44] Five of the thirteen PRC companies that the United States added to its sanctions list were Hong Kong-based companies. Hong Kong-based companies and individuals account for a significant portion of PRC entities that are subject to sanctions for supporting US adversaries’ military activities.[45] Hong Kong’s lenient regulatory environment facilitates relatively easy concealment of corporate ownership and the rapid creation and dissolution of shell companies.

The PLA aircraft carriers Liaoning and Shandong conducted joint military exercises for the first time in the South China Sea. PRC Ministry of Defense (MOD) Spokesperson Zhang Xiaogang stated during a press conference on October 31 that the two-carrier exercise was part of the People’s Liberation Army Navy’s (PLAN) annual training plan and aimed at improving the carrier strike groups’ systematic combat strength.[46] Exercise footage released by the PLA Navy shows the following: 3 Type 55 destroyers, 3 Type 52D destroyers, 3 Type 54A frigates, and 2 901 fleet supply ships along with 12 J-15 carrier-borne jets.[47] Zhang did not provide the specific dates on which the exercises occurred. Satellite imagery showed that the Liaoning and Shandong were docked at the same port in Hainan on October 8.[48] The Liaoning participated in Joint Sword 2024B exercises around Taiwan on October 14 and traveled back into the South China Sea before returning northward to its home port in Qingdao on October 22.[49] A PLAN WeChat post stated that the Liaoning’s far-seas combat mission spanned the Mid-Autumn Festival (September 17), PRC National Day (October 1), and other festivals.[50] The post stated that the dual aircraft carrier drills with the Shandong took place in late October, indicating that the exercises occurred after the Joint Sword 2024 exercises.

The dual carrier drills demonstrate the growing role of the PRC’s aircraft carriers in projecting naval power in the Indo-Pacific. Exercises involving two aircraft carriers and their accompanying vessels highlight the PRC’s capability to conduct complicated operations with precise coordination.

Northeast Asia

North Korea
The PRC expressed concern over North Korean nuclear tests on October 31. North Korea launched an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) on October 30 into the sea west of Okushiri Island in what Japan announced was its longest-flying missile test yet.[51] PRC Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Lin Jian responded to a question for comment on the missile test and reports of North Korean soldiers in Russia, by stating that “China is concerned about the development of the situation on the Peninsula.”[52] Lin also said that the PRC “believe(s) that maintaining peace and stability on the Peninsula and promoting the political settlement of the Peninsula issue are in the common interests of all parties.”[53] North Korea fired more a barrage of short-range ICBMs on November 5, which landed in the waters between Japan and the Korean Peninsula.[54] The PRC had not commented on the latest launch at the time of writing.

Lin’s October 31 statement on the North Korean nuclear tests is consistent with previous PRC statements to North Korean military provocations, which advocate for stability while refraining from public condemnation of its only treaty ally. PRC Permanent Representative to the UN Ambassador Zhang Jun stated in 2023 that the PRC is “committed to the denuclearization of the peninsula, the peace and stability on the peninsula, and the political settlement of the issue through dialogue.”[55] As a recent ISW report noted, the PRC-North Korea relationship is “fraught with mistrust.” [56]—A rare North Korean official criticism of PRC in 2017 for attempting to rein in its weapons program indicates that the matter is a point of tension in the relationship, even as North Korea remains economically dependent on the PRC.[57]

The PRC may have used a January meeting to warn North Korea against nuclear testing. PRC Vice Foreign Minister Sun Weidong and  North Korean Vice Foreign Minister Pak Myong Ho met on January 26 to discuss “issues of mutual interest and concern” in the international space.[58] The meeting took place around the time North Korean leader Kim Jong-un had begun to shift to a more aggressive footing against South Korea, testing a new intermediate-range missile and launching artillery shells into water near South Korean islands in early January.[59] This timing of the meeting supports the possibility that Sun could have pressed Pak for peace on the peninsula. The talks may have made an impact on North Korean thinking; test launches dropped from over 30 in 2023 to 7 in 2024. 

Southeast Asia

The Philippines

The Philippine military began two weeks of exercises that will include rehearsing the seizure of an island in the South China Sea.[60] Philippine Army Colonel Michael Logico announced on November 4 that the exercises would include live-fire drills and beach landing drills with artillery and assault rifles.[61] Armed Forces of the Philippines Chief General Romeo Brawner Jr. stated that these exercises are for comprehensively responding to threats against Philippine maritime rights and sovereignty and are not directed at any particular country.[62] The PRC and the Philippines have engaged in periodic confrontations over disputed features in the South China Sea for decades. The frequency and intensity of such confrontations increased in the past year as the CCG and PRC maritime militia vessels take a greater role in thwarting the Philippines’ access to the West Philippine Sea. The Philippines has responded to this increase in tensions by holding several multilateral and unilateral military exercises throughout the South China Sea. The PRC has not yet responded to the announcement of the upcoming exercises but has criticized previous Philippine military exercises in the South China Sea, particularly those involving the United States.[63] When asked, Col. Logico stated that the PRC is likely to monitor the exercises, but unlikely to act against the Philippines. The Philippines military has previously simulated retaking an island with assistance from Australia and the United States.[64] It is unclear whether these forthcoming island seizure exercises will resemble previous joint measures. The exercises signal the Philippines’ defiance of the PRC’s aggressive tactics in the South China Sea and demonstrate its willingness to defend its territorial claims.

Vietnam

The Vietnamese Foreign Ministry issued a protest against the PRC’s illegal detention of its fishermen and vessels in the Paracel Islands and demanded their immediate release. According to a PRC-based think tank, the South China Sea Probing Initiative (SCSPI), the Vietnamese fishermen have been detained for six months for illegal fishing activities.[65] PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesperson Lin Jian said in a November 1 press briefing that Vietnam was at fault for the situation and urged Vietnamese authorities to “raise the awareness of its fishermen” to ensure that they were not acting illegally in PRC territory.[66] Ownership of the Paracels is disputed, with the PRC, Taiwan, and Vietnam all holding competing claims over the islands. The Paracels are under de facto control of the PRC and are administered as part of Hainan province.[67]

In September 2024 another altercation between Vietnamese fishermen and PRC law enforcement occurred near the Paracel Islands.[68] Vietnamese sources reported that PRC ships chased the fishermen, intercepted the ship, and attacked the fishermen with iron pipes. The PRC MFA released a statement saying that PRC authorities were dispatched to respond to illegal Vietnamese fishing activities.[69] Following this altercation, a series of meetings were held between Vietnamese President To Lam and PRC Premier Li Qiang in Hanoi. The October 12-14 meetings resulted in a series of bilateral agreements expanding cooperation on agriculture, manufacturing, and infrastructure and a joint statement agreeing to increase bilateral military exchanges and patrols.[70] The two also discussed developments in the South China Sea, promising to peacefully manage disagreements and avoid further escalation.[71] It is unknown whether the detained Vietnamese fishermen were discussed during the course of these meetings, but this ongoing point of contention illustrates the unresolved tensions between Vietnam and the PRC.

Oceania

The Palauan election on November 5th will be consequential to US-PRC influence in the Pacific Islands. Palau’s position as the anchor of the second island chain in the Pacific and the closest Freely Associated State with the US to the Taiwan Strait and South China Sea makes it one of the most strategically significant of the United States’ small allies in the Pacific.[72] Palau’s status as a Freely Associated State refers to its Compact of Free Association (COFA) with the United States, which grants the United States military permission to operate in Palau in return for the United States providing financial support and assuming responsibility for national defense. The United States and Palau renewed their COFA in May 2023 for USD$889 million in aid to Palau over the next 20 years, and Congress approved it in March 2024.[73] Palau is one of 12 countries that currently recognize Taiwan.

Roughly 16,000 registered voters are expected to cast ballots for incumbent President Surangel Whipps Jr. and former President Thomas Remengesau Jr.[74] Vote tallies at the time of writing are strongly in favor of Whipps, with 3161 votes to Remensegau's 2262 votes. Absentee ballots will not be tabulated for another seven days, however.[75] Some locals are concerned the US military presence will make Palau a target if war breaks out, which has made US military presence a political issue.[76] The PRC has been applying pressure on Palau to rescind its recognition of Taiwan, according to Whipps.[77]

The extent to which Palau will embrace cooperation with the US military is dependent on the next administration even though neither candidate has signaled a major change in Palau's stance on bilateral relations. Whipps is a fierce critic of PRC interference in the Pacific Islands and has openly welcomed the US military.[78] He has accused the PRC of exerting political pressure on Palau through tourism restrictions, acquiring of Palauan media outlets, bribery of local officials, and hacking government institutions to steal information.[79] Taiwan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs issued a statement that China’s interference in Palau is tantamount to intimidation, inducement, and economic coercion.[80] Whipps wrote in a letter to then-US Defense Secretary Mark Esper in 2020 that “Palau’s request to the US military remains simple – build joint-use facilities, then come and use them regularly.”[81]  Whipps has also suggested that the United States should equip Palau with Patriot missiles.[82] Whipps’ family business Surangel & Sons has partnered with the US military in 37 defense contracts, although Whipps himself has not worked for the company since taking office in 2021.[83] By contrast, former President Remengesau has been president for 16 of Palau’s 30 years as an independent state and has aimed to reduce Palau’s reliance on US aid, which accounts for over 10% of the island’s GDP. [84] Remengesau has implemented ambitious environmental policies and has expressed willingness to cooperate with the PRC on environmental and economic matters.[85]

Palau’s election will indicate the strength of its opposition to rising Chinese influence. Several Pacific Island nations have rescinded their recognition of Taiwan in the last 5 years under pressure from the PRC. The Solomon Islands and Kiribati switched recognition to the PRC in 2019 and Nauru in January 2024, immediately after Taiwan’s election.[86] Tuvalu reaffirmed its recognition of Taiwan after the re-election of its incumbent president in February, but faced challenges from an opposition that supported reviewing the country’s diplomatic ties with Taiwan.[87] As ISW noted in the October 30 China-Taiwan Weekly Update, the PRC has been actively increasing outreach to the Pacific Islands through diplomatic and economic exchanges such as the BRI, and its military interest in the region is evident with a PRC warship’s first known port visit to Vanuatu on October 21.[88]  While both candidates officially support maintaining ties with Taiwan, the extent to which their administrations would resist PRC influence and accept US military presence is consequential for US-PRC competition in the Asia-Pacific.

 

China-Taiwan Weekly Update, October 30, 2024

click here to read the full report

Authors: Matthew Sperzel, Daniel Shats, Alison O’Neil, and Grant Morgan 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: October 28, 2024

Key Takeaways  

• The United States approved a nearly $2 billion US arms sale to Taiwan including three advanced surface-to-air missile systems. The PRC condemned the sale and threatened unspecified countermeasures.
• Taiwan’s Constitutional Court struck down most provisions of a set of controversial legislative reforms that would have imposed more checks on the presidency’s executive authority.
• CCP General Secretary Xi Jinping used the BRICS Summit in Kazan, Russia from October 24–26 to promote expanded cooperation between "Global South" countries and burnish the PRC’s reputation as a champion of developing countries’ interests. Growing interest in BRICS participation from the new partner countries signals progress towards that goal for the PRC.
• US intelligence officials and threat intelligence researchers are calling attention to assess that PRC information operations are targeting down-ballot candidates and members of Congress to incite divisions in a fraught US political environment. PRC influence efforts likely aim to degrade US policymaking by entangling certain candidates in controversial narratives and detracting from PRC-related issues.
• The PRC Type 055 destroyer CNS Xianyang made its first known deployment to the South Pacific and visited Vanuatu.
• PRC President Xi Jinping met Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi on the sidelines of the BRICS summit in Kazan as the PRC and India work to resolve longstanding border tensions.

Cross-Strait Relations

Taiwan

The United States approved a nearly $2 billion US arms sale to Taiwan including three advanced surface-to-air missile systems. The PRC condemned the sale and threatened unspecified countermeasures. The United States approved a sale to Taiwan worth a total of $1.988 billion on October 26 that includes three National Advanced Surface-to-Air Missile Systems (NASAMS) along with AN/TPS-77 and AN/TPS-78 radar turnkey systems It is the 17^th and largest US sale to Taiwan under the Joe Biden administration.[1] An unspecified PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) spokesperson denounced the sale, saying that it seriously violated the one-China principle, seriously infringed upon the PRC’s sovereignty and security interests, seriously damaged Sino-US relations, endangered peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait, and sent a seriously wrong signal to “‘Taiwan independence’ separatist forces.” The spokesperson urged the United States to immediately stop arming Taiwan and said that the PRC will take “all necessary measures” to defend its sovereignty and national security.[2] Taiwan Affairs Spokesperson Zhu Fenglian made a similar statement and accused Taiwan’s Lai Ching-te administration of trying to rely on the United States and to “use force” to seek independence. She warned Lai that buying weapons would only make Taiwan’s situation more dangerous.[3]

The NASAMS will strengthen Taiwan’s air defense capabilities against hostile aircraft and cruise missiles. They can detect aerial objects at 300 kilometers, engage targets at 40 to 60 kilometers, and include counter jamming capabilities. Retired Taiwanese air force officer Chou Yu-ping said the systems would be deployed in Taipei. Associate research fellow at Taiwan’s state-funded Institute for National Defense and Security Research (INDSR) Shu Hsiao-huang said that the NASAMS would replace the HAWK surface-to-air missile system, which covers medium-range and low-to-medium altitude objects in Taiwan’s air defense.[4] The NASAMS has a shorter range than Taiwan’s domestically developed Sky Bow (Tien Kung) I and II SAMS but is significantly more mobile. Tien Kung missiles are launched out of silos, while NASAMS can be deployed on trucks or rail. Taiwan also has nine mobile Patriot missile batteries, which have a range of at least 160 kilometers and have been shown to be effective against ballistic missiles. The Tien Kung system can also reportedly be used against ballistic missiles.[5]

A delegation from Taiwan’s Penghu Islands met with PRC Taiwan Affairs Office (TAO) Director Song Tao to negotiate the release of a Taiwanese fishing captain detained in the PRC and resuming tourism between the PRC and Penghu. Chairman of the Penghu Cross-Strait Exchange Association Chen Shuang-chuan and his son, Penghu County Speaker Chen Yu-jen, led a delegation to meet with Song in Beijing on October 24. Taiwanese media reported that the delegation was trying to secure the release of a Taiwanese fishing captain surnamed Hong whom the Chinese Coast Guard detained in July for illegally fishing in PRC waters. The PRC released Hong’s vessel, the Da Jin Man 88, and four crew members in August but kept Hong detained for “further investigation.” The Penghu delegation also hoped to discuss relaxations in PRC restrictions on tourism to Penghu.[6] The PRC banned individual travel to Taiwan in 2019, citing poor cross-Strait relations. Local officials from Kinmen and Matsu, Taiwan’s other major outlying islands in the Taiwan Strait, had success earlier in 2024 in securing the release of other Taiwanese fishermen and negotiating the resumption of PRC tourism to their islands.[7] 

The TAO readout of the delegation’s meeting with Song Tao did not mention the issue of Captain Hong’s release at all. The readout said that the Chens stated that they came to Beijing to call for the reopening of PRC tourism to Penghu. Song Tao stressed that adhering to the “1992 Consensus” is the key to peaceful cross-Strait relations and criticized Taiwan’s ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) for promoting “separatism” and severing Taiwan’s historical connection to China. Chen Shuang-chuan said that people “from all walks of life in Penghu agree with the ‘1992 Consensus’” and hope for a return to peaceful cross-Strait relations.[8]

The 1992 Consensus is an alleged verbal agreement between semi-official representatives of the PRC and the then Kuomintang (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” as the People’s Republic of China, while the KMT interprets it as the Republic of China. The DPP does not recognize the 1992 Consensus and considers the ROC and PRC to be mutually non-subordinate. The PRC suspended exchanges with Taiwan’s government in 2016 after the election of DPP president Tsai Ing-wen. It insists that the 1992 Consensus must be the common political basis for all cross-Strait negotiations.

The TAO conducts direct negotiations with KMT party officials and local politicians to legitimize the KMT as negotiating partners on behalf of Taiwan and to benefit KMT-leaning constituencies in Taiwan. Taiwan’s outlying islands of Kinmen and Matsu are solidly pan-Blue (KMT-leaning) regions, while Penghu has a more varied political makeup.[9] Conducting fruitful negotiations with KMT officials while refusing to meet with DPP officials is a way in which the PRC helps the DPP’s political opponents and reinforces the CCP’s message that the 1992 Consensus is the critical basis for cross-Strait relations.

Taiwan’s Criminal Investigation Bureau (CIB) charged a Taiwanese criminal gang member and nine military officers with spying for the PRC. The criminal, Lee Huei-hsin, was a member of the “Sun Alliance” criminal organization and managed a temple in a district of New Taipei. The CIB said that she first came into contact with PRC intelligence officials during a temple-related exchange in Macau in June 2023, then used her criminal and religious connections to find recruits for a spy ring. Lee used financial leverage and payments to recruit six active and three retired Taiwanese military officers, whom she paid to collect sensitive travel and work schedules that were then sent to the PRC. The recruits had to take a picture in uniform with a PRC flag and a promise to surrender in case of war.[10]

The AEI-ISW report on PRC short-of-war coercion of Taiwan identified both the recruitment of Taiwanese military personnel and the co-optation of organized crime among the PRC’s lines of effort to weaken Taiwan’s will and capacity to defend itself.[11] Taiwanese authorities have uncovered numerous instances of the CCP bribing ROC military personnel to form spy rings and sign pledges to surrender. A Reuters investigation in 2023 found that at least 21 serving or retired Taiwanese military officers with the rank of captain and above have been convicted of spying for the PRC from 2013 to 2023.[12][13] Besides cases like Lee Huei-hsin’s, the CCP co-opts Taiwan’s criminal underworld to directly promote pro-unification political activity. A notable example is the founder of Taiwan’s China Unification Promotion Party (CUPP), Chang An-lo, who is also an organized crime figure called the “White Wolf.”[14] Chang told PRC state media in 2021 that he was turning Taiwanese youth “from Green to Red.”[15]

The PRC responded to Taiwan Foreign Minister Lin Chia-lung’s visit to Guatemala by calling on Guatemala to switch diplomatic recognition to the PRC. Lin visited Guatemala on October 24-25 to mark the 90^th anniversary of diplomatic ties between Guatemala and the ROC. He met with Guatemala President Bernardo Arévalo and invited him to visit Taiwan.[16] PRC MFA spokesperson Lin Jian responded by reiterating the PRC’s position that Taiwan is PRC territory. He claimed that “more and more people with vision in Guatemala” are leaning in support of establishing relations with the PRC and urged the Guatemalan government to “make the right choice at an early date.”[17] 

The PRC is attempting to restrict Taiwan’s independent voice in international politics by “poaching” its diplomatic allies and trying to enforce an international “consensus” on the one China principle. It has increasingly argued that UN Resolution 2758, which expelled the ROC from the United Nations and gave its seat to the PRC in 1971, constitutes a “prevailing consensus” that Taiwan belongs to China and that the PRC is the sole legal government of China.[18] It refuses to have diplomatic relations with countries that recognize Taiwan and has used a variety of methods, including economic incentives and coercion, to persuade countries to recognize the PRC instead. Guatemala is one of 11 remaining countries that maintain diplomatic relations with the ROC after Beijing convinced Nauru to cut ties with Taiwan two days after Taiwan’s 2024 election.[19]

Taiwan’s Constitutional Court struck down most provisions of a set of controversial legislative reforms that would have imposed more checks on the presidency’s executive authority. The KMT and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), which jointly hold a majority in Taiwan’s Legislative Yuan (LY), passed the legislation in May despite opposition from the ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) and mass protests. The DPP immediately appealed for a constitutional review. The law would have permitted 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 required the president of Taiwan to deliver a State of the Nation address and submit to a question-and-answer session at the discretion of the LY.[20] The Constitutional Court ruled that the “contempt of legislature” law, the LY’s ability to summon and question the President, and new legislative powers to investigate government officials were all unconstitutional. It directed the LY to amend the laws.[21] President Lai offered to deliver a “state of the nation” address anyway, even though he is not required to.[22]

Lai’s political opposition could have used the new reforms to hinder the Lai administration’s policy agenda and will continue to fight for them despite the court ruling. The KMT and TPP have argued that the reforms are necessary checks and balances on the executive branch’s power. KMT majority leader Fu Kun-chi said that the KMT legislators would not cooperate with the court’s request to amend the law. He also stated that the KMT would not welcome Lai to address the LY on his own terms, calling him an “emperor.”[23] The KMT disagrees with the DPP stance on a variety of issues including defense spending and cross-strait relations, so its ability to check Lai’s executive power with investigations and confirmation processes would likely have implications for Lai’s military and civil defense initiatives and other programs.

China

CCP General Secretary Xi Jinping used the BRICS Summit in Kazan, Russia from October 24-26 to promote expanded cooperation between "Global South" countries and burnish the PRC’s reputation as a champion of developing countries’ interests. Growing interest in BRICS participation from new partner countries signals progress towards that goal for the PRC. The PRC is cultivating a common “Global South” identity while pursuing BRICS expansion to strengthen the credibility of its advocacy for alternative mechanisms for world governance to supersede what the PRC frames as hegemonic Western-dominated institutions. This BRICS summit featured newly admitted members Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, and the UAE.[24] Saudi Arabia was invited to join BRICS but has not yet accepted the invitation.[25] BRICS also invited representatives from 26 other countries and UN Secretary-General António Guterres for the “BRICS+ Leaders Dialogue.”[26] Xi used the platform to advocate for the collective rise of the "Global South" and highlight the PRC’s supposed contributions to solving global security crises such as the wars in Ukraine and the Middle East.[27] Xi welcomed interest from "Global South" members in BRICS cooperation and advocated for further progress toward a multilateral world order by strengthening developing countries’ representation in multilateral forums.[28]

PRC appeals to "Global South" countries during the BRICS summit characterize the organization as an inclusive platform for disenfranchised countries that strives for the realization of a more “equal and orderly multipolar world.”[29]. PRC state media characterized the PRC as the “backbone of BRICS cooperation and a core member of the Global South.”[30] BRICS admitted 13 new “partner” countries in October, including Algeria, Belarus, Bolivia, Cuba, Indonesia, Kazakhstan, Malaysia, Nigeria, Thailand, Turkey, Uganda, Uzbekistan, and Vietnam.[31] Azerbaijan, Malaysia, and Turkey have already applied to join BRICS as full-fledged members. Growing membership and cooperation from other countries can be interpreted by Xi and the PRC government as an indication of broader acceptance of PRC-led world governance institutions.

The PRC’s attachment of the “Global South” label to its global security initiatives likely aims to legitimize them and attract wider international support. The PRC and Brazil held the inaugural meeting of the “Friends of Peace” platform on September 27, which has the stated purpose of expanding dialogue and giving Global South countries a voice to advance a “political settlement of the Ukraine issue.”[32] 13 of the 17 participating countries signed a joint communiqué that expresses support for the PRC' and Brazil’s six-point peace plan for the Russia-Ukraine war—India notably did not sign the communique. The PRC has been trying to attract international support for the plan since Ukrainian leaders called for greater participation from the "Global South" in de-escalating the war in June while advancing Ukraine's own peace platform.[33] The United States, EU, NATO, and Ukraine have all criticized the PRC-Brazil plan due to aspects of the plan that favor Russia, such as its omission of a demand for Russia to withdraw from Ukrainian territory. Several of the non-BRICS countries that attended in summit were also signatories to the communiqué, including Indonesia and Turkey, a NATO member.[34] The PRC’s persistent framing of its world governance initiatives as "Global South"-oriented contributes to the PRC information operation claiming that PRC policies represent the interest of countries that identify with the "Global South" label.

US intelligence officials and threat intelligence researchers assess that PRC information operations are targeting down-ballot candidates and members of Congress to incite divisions in a fraught US political environment. PRC influence efforts likely aim to degrade US policymaking by entangling certain candidates in controversial narratives and detracting from PRC-related issues. The US Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) called out PRC, Russian, and Iranian efforts to spread divisive narratives online before the US election in an October 21 election security report.[35] ODNI officials stated in an October 7 Department of State press briefing that the PRC was attempting to influence down-ballot races and candidates, regardless of party affiliation.[36] ODNI officials stated that the PRC’s efforts focused on candidates whom Beijing perceives to threaten its core interests, especially regarding Taiwan.

The Microsoft Threat Analysis Center released an election security update on October 23 that highlighted the focus of PRC influence operations on down-ballot candidates and members of Congress.[37] Microsoft highlighted antisemitic narratives, accusations of corruption, and promotion of opposition candidates as dominating the substance of PRC operators’ content.

The Washington Post attributed the recent activity to the PRC state-sponsored information operation Spamouflage, based on its analysis of more than 19,000 posts on X/Twitter from accounts that it identified using data from the US Justice Department and other threat intelligence organizations.[38] The politicians whom the Washington Post and Microsoft investigations identified as the targets of PRC influence efforts are outspoken critics of the PRC. The account operators’ focus on spreading antisemitic rhetoric represents an attempt to seize on politically sensitive issues after the start of the Israel-Hamas war in October 2023 to mire US politicians in controversy.

The Washington Post’s findings are consistent with findings from investigations by network analysis and social media intelligence firm Graphika, which assessed in September that Spamouflage operators posed as Americans on social media to foment political division ahead of US elections.[39] The findings also align with research from UK-based research nonprofit the Institute for Strategic Dialogue, which reported in February that suspected Spamouflage accounts focused on creating a sense of dismay in the United States by portraying the election as a high-stakes showdown and symbol of a divided United States. Themes at this time also included sowing doubt about election integrity, highlighting social problems, and featuring direct criticisms of President Biden.[40] The shifting themes of information operations reveals the opportunistic nature of PRC influence efforts, as well as their evolution to focus on sowing political division and undermining faith in the US electoral process.

Southeast Asia

Indonesia

Indonesian patrol ships drove a Chinese Coast Guard (CCG) vessel away from an Indonesian vessel during three separate incidents in the North Natuna Sea. The Indonesian Maritime Security Agency (IMSA) reported that a CCG vessel had approached the Norwegian-flagged MV Geo Coral on October 21st, 23rd, and 25^th, and three times interrupted the ship’s ongoing seismic surveillance operations north of Indonesia’s Natuna Islands, which it was conducting for the state-owned Indonesian firm PT Pertamina. The area is part of Indonesia’s Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) but overlaps with the PRC’s claims in the South China Sea based on the PRC's Nine-Dash Line.[41] PRC Foreign Ministry spokesperson Lin Jian claimed that the CCG’s movements were routine patrols in waters under PRC jurisdiction. Lin added that “China is ready to enhance communication and consultation with Indonesia through diplomatic channels and properly handle maritime differences between the two countries”. [42]The IMSA announced that it would continue to conduct intensive patrols within the waters of North Natuna to ensure ” its sovereign right to explore” its natural resources[43] The CCG vessel first entered the waters on October 17. Jakarta shadowed it with coastguard ships backed by maritime surveillance aircraft and a naval vessel. There was no indication of violence in the confrontations.

This incident follows similar standoffs that have occurred between the two countries over the past decade. Despite acknowledging Indonesian sovereignty over the Natuna Islands in 2015, China has continuously challenged Jakarta’s rights to patrol and extract resources in the nearby waters. In 2016, a CCG operation forcibly intervened and recovered a Chinese vessel from an Indonesian coastguard ship after Indonesia had seized the boat for illegal fishing activities.[44] In 2020 and 2021, the PRC sent a series of law enforcement and maritime survey vessels into waters under Indonesian and Malaysian jurisdiction. Similar incidents occurred in 2023 as well. One incident in 2020 involved the Indonesian government sending multiple naval vessels, military jets, and over 600 troops in response to PRC incursions over Indonesia’s fishing rights.[45]

The PRC has gradually normalized patrols in the exclusive economic zones of Indonesia, Malaysia, Vietnam, and the Philippines, which all claim different parts of the South China Sea. Its actions against Indonesia have been at a much lower intensity than those against the Philippines and Vietnam but are consistent with the PRC’s efforts to enforce its maritime claims in the South China Sea and prevent other countries from resource exploitation there.

The PRC will likely attempt to avoid escalating its confrontations with Indonesia given its recent attempts to strengthen defense ties with Jakarta.[46] The CCG patrols may be meant to put regional countries into difficult situations where they must attempt to balance protecting their own interests with maintaining their vital economic relations with the PRC.[47]

Oceania

The PRC Type 055 destroyer CNS Xianyang made its first known deployment to the South Pacific and visited Vanuatu.[48] The Xianyang and Type 052 destroyer CNS Nanning – both part of the Southern Theater Command navy – arrived at Vanuatu’s capital, Port Vila.[49] The PRC embassy in Vanuatu described the visit as a “technical stop” for resupply.[50]

The Xianyang’s visit is consistent with concerted and public PRC efforts to cultivate ties with Vanuatu and with Pacific island nations more broadly. The PRC Foreign Ministry said on October 18 that the “foundation of China-Vanuatu friendship is accelerating” and that “Chinese elements can be seen everywhere on the island.”[51] It described Vanuatu’s “development potential,” highlighting Vanuatu’s deepwater port at Luganville that “can accommodate two 10,000-ton cruise ships at the same time with the help of China.”[52] The Type 055 destroyer displaces roughly 12,000-13,000 tons;[53] the Type 052 is smaller. Director of the CCP International Department Liu Jianchao met with Vanuatu’s Minister of Finance Johnny Koanapo on October 16 and discussed “deepening exchanges of experience in state governance and promoting the construction of a China-Vanuatu community with a shared future in the new era.”[54] PRC President Xi Jinping and Premier Li Qiang met with Vanuatu Prime Minister Charlot Salwai in July 2024 during Salwai’s visit to Beijing.[55]The PRC also donated a presidential building complex to Vanuatu in July 2024.[56] A PRC naval hospital ship, the Peace Ark, visited Vanuatu in 2014 and 2018.[57] Vanuatu is a Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) country, as are a number of other Pacific Island nations: Cook Islands, Fiji, Kiribati, Federated States of Micronesia, New Zealand, Niue, Papua New Guinea, Samoa, Timor-Leste, and Tonga.[58] PRC military diplomacy and outreach efforts to Vanuatu will likely continue as the PRC seeks to expand its influence and power projection in Oceania. FDI, security cooperation, and military diplomacy – including port visits and police cooperation, which the PRC has used across Oceania to varying extents[59] – offer the PRC a means of power projection. Vanuatu could offer the PRC an especially critical foothold due to its location near Australia. Access to Vanuatu could also enhance the PRC’s access to the Solomon Islands, which maintains a security agreement with the PRC.[60] PRC former representative to New Zealand Jie Wenji said that the PRC has rapidly improved its power projection capabilities and that the PRC navy “can be used all over the world”[61] in reference to the Xianyang port visit.

The PRC Commerce Ministry expressed its opposition to United States sanctions placed on PRC companies involved with the production and export of attack drones to Russia. PRC Commerce Ministry spokesperson He Yadong criticized the sanctions for being unilateral and without basis in international law and norms in an October 24 press conference.[62] He reiterated that the PRC has strict rules regarding the export of dual-use items and stated that since the beginning of the war in Ukraine the PRC has issued several notices on drone exports and forbids the export of civilian drones to be used for military purposes.[63]  The provision and use of PRC dual-use goods for military purposes by the Russian Armed Forces has been widely documented.[64]

The United States Treasury Department announced on October 17 that it would be targeting two PRC firms for working with previously sanctioned Russian firms in the development of the Garpiya-series attack drone.[65] This was the first time that the United States sanctioned PRC entities for sending lethal aid to Russia for the war effort in Ukraine. Following the announcement of sanctions, PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesperson Mao Ning denied that the PRC provided lethal weapons to Russia and characterized the Treasury Department’s statement as an attempt to pressure the PRC.[66]

Reports of Putin’s alleged request to Elon Musk to limit Starlink access in Taiwan could signify a shift in Russian policy towards Taiwan. Russian President Vladimir Putin asked Elon Musk to avoid activating Starlink satellite internet service over Taiwan as a favor to Xi Jinping, according to an October 25 Wall Street Journal report.[67] Representatives from the PRC embassy in Washington have stated that they are unaware of the specifics of this situation, and thus unable to comment on it.[68] Musk has denied the allegations. National Security Council spokesperson John Kirby declined to comment on the report and Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov stated that the only communication the Kremlin had with Musk concerned space and future technologies.[69] Overt efforts by Putin and the Russian government to aid in PRC efforts regarding Taiwan are very uncommon and typically limited to rhetorical statements echoing the PRC’s stance on Taiwan’s political status. A direct request such as the one Putin allegedly made to Musk would be a significant departure from previous Russian actions towards Taiwan and would signify further alignment between the PRC and Russia.

Starlink does not provide internet service in Taiwan, in part due to Taiwanese government restrictions on non-domestic satellite operations. The Taiwanese government has been working to develop a domestically produced version of Starlink as part of its Beyond 5G project.[70] This project, part of a collaboration between the Ministry of Science and Technology and the Ministry of Economic Affairs, is working to develop a low-earth orbit satellite by 2027. Taiwanese government officials have placed an emphasis on protecting and improving communications infrastructure amid constant PRC attacks that risk interrupting Taiwanese access to the internet and isolating the island.

South Asia

PRC President Xi Jinping met Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi on the sidelines of the BRICS summit in Kazan as the PRC and India work to resolve longstanding border tensions. The last formal bilateral meeting between the two leaders took place in 2019, prior to the May 2020 border skirmish that killed four Chinese and 20 Indian troops.[71] PRC Foreign Ministry spokesperson Lin Jian commented that “China is willing to work with India to adhere to the strategic height and long-term perspective to view and handle China-India relations, strengthen communication and cooperation, enhance strategic mutual trust, properly handle differences, and promote the return of bilateral relations to the track of stable development as soon as possible.”[72] PRC and Indian forces have already begun withdrawing from the contested border stand-off points and dismantling structures constructed along the border following a pre-BRICS agreement to disengage.[73]

 

China-Taiwan Weekly Update, October 23, 2024

click here to read the full report

Authors: Matthew Sperzel, Daniel Shats, Alison O’Neil, and Henry Mann of the Institute for the Study of War;

Editors: Dan Blumenthal and Frederick W. Kagan of the American Enterprise Institute

Data Cutoff: October 22, 2024

Key Takeaways

• The ROC Mainland Affairs Council criticized the PRC for interfering in Taiwan’s arts and entertainment industry after Taiwanese artists and performers reposted the PRC’s announcement of military drills around Taiwan on October 14.
• The PRC accused a joint US-Canadian transit of the Taiwan Strait of undermining peace and threatening the PRC’s sovereignty.
• PRC President Xi Jinping traveled to Kazan, Russia for the 16th BRICS summit from October 22 to 24. The summit will cover BRICS expansion and deepening financial cooperation among member states.
• The United States sanctioned two PRC firms involved in producing drones for Russia. This is the first time the United States has accused PRC entities of sending lethal aid to Russia’s war effort in Ukraine.

Cross-Strait Relations

Taiwan

The ROC Mainland Affairs Council (MAC) criticized the PRC for interfering in Taiwan’s arts and entertainment industry after Taiwanese artists and performers reposted PRC announcements of military drills around Taiwan on October 14.[1] The MAC stated that the CCP uses political ideology to intervene in performing arts activities and has even required artists to make political statements when performing in mainland China due to strict regulations against “endangering national unity sovereignty, and territorial integrity.” Several artists reposted specific CCP unification slogans during the PRC’s Joint Sword 2024B exercises last week, such as “reunification with the motherland is inevitable.”[2] The PRC state broadcaster CCTV subsequently published screenshots of Taiwanese artists’ expressions of support for unification and encouraged them to follow up and clarify their stances.[3]

The MAC emphasized the CCP’s inculcation of political ideology in the art and entertainment industry in a statement on October 1. It called out the CCP for mobilizing Taiwanese celebrities to express pro-unification stances to their audiences after dozens of Taiwanese artists, actors, and celebrities publicly supported unification.

The PRC pressures Taiwan’s arts and entertainment industry in a variety of ways, ranging from threats of banning and ostracization to direct co-optation. Some of the banned performers and bands have expressed support for Taiwanese statehood, whereas others have simply performed at concerts dedicated to causes such as anti-annexation and support for Hong Kong protesters in 2019. The PRC pressured the popular Taiwanese band Mayday to support the PRC’s claim that Taiwan is a part of China in December 2023.[4] 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. Several Taiwanese YouTubers also called attention to CCP efforts to recruit them to facilitate United Front work in June 2024. The United Front is a whole-of-government and society effort to advance the CCP’s ideology and interests by co-opting non-government segments of Chinese society. United Front activities against Taiwan aim to inculcate in the Taiwanese public CCP notions that the PRC is the only legitimate government of China and Taiwan is a part of that China. The celebrities claimed that the CCP is spending considerable resources to lure Taiwanese internet celebrities to influence Taiwanese politics.[5] YouTuber Ba Jiong revealed that a draft 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.[6] 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 PRC likely aims to shape the younger generation’s perceptions of Taiwan’s political status and Chinese identity to conform to CCP cross-strait policies through such pressure on Taiwan’s arts and entertainment industry. Young people make up most of celebrities’ fans and therefore are the audience for their political expressions, both at in-person events and on social media.

The PRC thanked South Africa for demanding that Taiwan relocate its representative office out of Pretoria. South Africa first asked Taiwan’s representative office to relocate from Pretoria, its administrative capital, verbally in December 2023.[7] It also requested that Taiwan relocate the office in April 2024 and then issued an “ultimatum” to Taipei on October 7, 2024, stating that it would close the office if it did not relocate.[8] PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesperson Mao Ning approved of South Africa’s demand and stated that the one-China principle is “a recognized norm of international relations and the will of the international community and the general trend.” She also said that “‘Taiwan independence’ is unpopular and will fail.”[9]

Taipei responded by declaring it will not relocate the office. Taiwanese officials have stated that Taipei “retains the right to determine its location and status,” because the office is Taiwanese property.[10] ROC Foreign Minister Lin Chia-lung said that the office “is still in operation and will stay in the capital” and that South Africa is violating a 1997 agreement stating that Taiwan could maintain an office in South Africa’s capital despite South Africa’s formal relations with the PRC (established in 1996, before South Africa broke off ties with Taiwan in 1998).[11] Taiwan may also consider requesting South Africa to move its representative office out of Taipei in response.[12]

Taiwan faced a similar issue in 2017 when Nigeria ordered Taiwan’s liaison office to relocate from the administrative capital. In this case, Taiwan complied.[13] The Washington Post reported that it “remains unclear whether South Africa would follow through on its threat to shut down the office’s operations if Taipei sticks with its insistence on not moving.”[14]

China

The PLA conducted live-fire drills near an island in the Taiwan Strait a week after it carried out the Joint Sword 2024B exercise around Taiwan. The Maritime Safety Administration (MSA) announced that the drills would take place in the waters near Niushan Island on October 22, eight days after the Joint Sword exercise and two days after a US and Canadian warship jointly transited the Taiwan Strait. Niushan Island, part of Fujian Province, is 165 kilometers from Taipei and 80 kilometers south of Taiwan’s Matsu islands. It is the closest point in the PRC to the main island of Taiwan.[15] Taiwan’s Ministry of National Defense said the PLA drill is part of an annual routine military exercise. It said the PLA is using the drill to exert deterrence in the Taiwan Strait.[16]

CCP General Secretary Xi Jinping visited an island county opposite Taiwan days after the PLA’s Joint Sword 2024B exercise around Taiwan. Xi visited Dongshan County on October 16 as part of an inspection tour of Fujian Province. Dongshan County was the site of a battle in 1953 in which the ROC unsuccessfully tried to retake the island from the PLA, four years after the CCP established the PRC and expelled the KMT from the mainland. It was the last battle of its kind between PRC and ROC forces. Dongshan has also been the site of PLA drills, including landing exercises. PRC media and government readouts did not specify whether Xi inspected military facilities in Dongshan and did not mention any connection with the Joint Sword exercise.[17] Xi visited the memorial hall of former Dongshan CCP Party Secretary Gu Wenchang. CCTV and other state media noted that Xi has mentioned Gu in speeches many times and that Gu played an important role in defending Dongshan from KMT forces.[18] This is Xi’s first inspection tour of Fujian since 2021.

The PRC accused a joint US-Canadian transit of the Taiwan Strait of undermining peace and threatening the PRC’s sovereignty. The Arleigh Burke-class guided-missile destroyer USS Higgins and Royal Canadian Navy Halifax-class frigate HMCS Vancouver jointly conducted a transit of the Taiwan Strait on October 20. A statement from US INDOPACOM said the ships transited through a “high seas corridor in the Strait that is beyond the territorial sea of any coastal state.”[19] PLA Eastern Theater Command (ETC) spokesperson Li Xi said the ETC mobilized naval and air forces to monitor the transit. Li claimed the transit “disturbed the situation and undermined the peace and stability of the Taiwan Strait.”[20] PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) spokesperson Lin Jian claimed that “the Taiwan issue is not an issue of freedom of navigation, but an issue concerning China's sovereignty and territorial integrity.” He said the PRC “firmly opposes any country provoking or threatening China's sovereignty and security in the name of freedom of navigation.”[21] The rhetoric reflects frequently stated PRC positions and is similar to its response to the Canadian transit on August 1 and the German transit on September 14.[22] It is harsher than the response to the previous US-Canada joint transit in November 2023, however, when the ETC did not accuse the United States and Canada of undermining peace.[23]

PRC President Xi Jinping traveled to Kazan, Russia for the 16th BRICS summit from October 22 to 24. The BRICS summit will be the first to include new members Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, and the United Arab Emirates. Its original members are Brazil, Russia, India, the PRC, and South Africa.[24] Russian foreign affairs advisor Yuri Ushakov called the summit “the largest foreign policy event ever held by Russia,” with high-level representatives from 36 countries attending including 20 heads of state.[25] Xi arrived in Kazan, along with CCP Secretary of the Secretariat Cai Qi and Foreign Minister Wang Yi, on October 22.[26] MFA spokesperson Lin Jian said that the PRC is "willing to work with all parties to promote the steady and long-term development of the 'Greater BRICS Cooperation.'"[27]

BRICS expansion will be an agenda item for discussion in Kazan. Lin Jian noted that the Kazan summit will constitute the first meeting since BRICS’ expansion.[28] Four new members joined in 2024. Saudi Arabia was also invited to join but has not yet accepted the invitation.[29] Belarusian Foreign Minister Maxim Ryzhenkov claimed in September that the next wave of membership expansion will be announced at the Kazan summit, though BRICS officials have not confirmed this claim.[30] Russian President Vladimir Putin said at least 34 countries have expressed interest in joining BRICS, including Turkey, a NATO member.[31] PRC ambassador to Russia Zhang Hanhui said in an interview with state-owned Global Times that the summit will outline a “development blueprint for the BRICS mechanism” and that the PRC welcomed further expansion of BRICS and “BRICS Plus” cooperation.[32]

Financial cooperation among BRICS countries will also be a major topic and priority for the PRC. Global Times cited Institute of Developing Countries at the China Institute of International Studies Director Wang Youming, reporting that economic and financial cooperation is expected to be among key topics.”[33] Ambassador Zhang said the summit aimed to achieve “new landmark results” in areas such as finance, artificial intelligence, and energy and minerals. He particularly stressed financial cooperation, saying that countries should “strive to promote breakthroughs in domestic currency settlement and cross-border payment cooperation.” Zhang commented on the prospects of promoting a common BRICS currency by noting that the PRC has advanced the internationalization of its currency, the renminbi. BRICS adopting the renminbi, or another common currency, would reduce reliance on the US dollar among Global South countries.[34]

Northeast Asia

Japan

The Chinese Coast Guard (CCG) claimed that it “expelled” a Japanese fishing boat from the territorial waters of the Japan-controlled Senkaku Islands. CCG Spokesman Liu Dejun claimed the vessel was illegally fishing in Chinese waters on October 15 and 16.[35] The PRC and ROC both claim sovereignty over the uninhabited Senkaku Islands, which they call the Diaoyu Islands. Japan’s Coast Guard reported that CCG ships entered the territorial waters around the Senkaku Islands two days in a row, marking the 39th such incursion in 2024, but did not confirm whether the CCG expelled a Japanese boat.[36] There have been between four and twenty CCG incursions into the Senkaku Islands’ territorial waters within 12 nautical miles of the islands in months since April 2019. The CCG’s claimed expulsion of Japanese boats from the waters around the Senkaku Islands serves to legitimize the PRC’s law enforcement jurisdiction there and demonstrate the PRC’s de facto control of the islands, even though Japan administers the islands.

The CCG began near-daily incursions into the Senkaku Islands’ contiguous zone, and occasionally territorial waters, in 2012. It significantly increased the frequency of these incursions in 2019. It has made 90–110 incursions in most months since April 2019 into the Senkaku Islands’ contiguous zone. There have been only 9 days since October 20, 2023, without CCG incursions into the Senkaku contiguous waters. This behavior appears to be part of a long-term PRC strategy to gradually erode Japanese control and assert Chinese sovereignty over the islands.[37]

Russia

The United States sanctioned two PRC firms involved in producing drones for Russia. This is the first time that the United States has accused PRC entities of sending lethal aid to Russia’s war effort in Ukraine. A US Department of Treasury statement said that the two PRC firms worked with US-sanctioned Russian firms to develop and manufacture the Garpiya-series drone in PRC-based factories and ship them to Russia.[38] Russia has deployed Garpiya drones against Ukraine.[39] The Treasury statement said that the PRC-based Xiamen Limbach Aircraft Engine Co. produced the L550E engine for the Garpiya in the PRC in collaboration with Russian company Izhevsk Electromechanical Plant Kupol (IEMZ Kupol), a subsidiary of Russian state-owned weapons company Almaz-Antey.

The statement also stated that the PRC company Redlepus Vector Industry Shenzhen Co. works with the Russian firm TSK Vektor to ship the UAVs to Russia. TSK Vektor is an intermediary between IEMZ Kupol and its PRC suppliers. TSK Vektor and IEMZ Kupol are both under US sanctions. The statement said that Redlepus has used Vektor to export components with UAV applications since the beginning of 2024, including aircraft engines, parts of automatic data processing machines, and electrical components. It further said Redlepus worked with IEMZ Kupol and TSK Vektor to establish a joint drone research and production center. [40] Reuters previously reported on the collaboration between Redlepus and the Russian firms to produce drones, including establishing a joint drone research center in the PRC’s Xinjiang region.[41]

The PRC MFA told Reuters it was unaware of a Russia-PRC drone production project and that the PRC had strict export controls on drones. A US National Security Council spokesperson said that the United States had not seen any evidence that the PRC government was aware of the transactions or had any involvement in providing lethal aid to Russia.[42] Xiamen Limbach and Redlepus Viktor are private firms. PRC firms providing lethal assistance to US-sanctioned Russian firms or jointly collaborating with Russia to produce lethal equipment nevertheless marks a significant departure from the PRC’s cautious approach to supporting Russia and undermines the PRC’s professed neutrality on the war in Ukraine.

South Asia

The PRC and India reached an agreement on border issues contested since 2020.[43] Weeks-long disengagement talks between the two sides concluded with an agreement that both sides would resume border patrols along the Line of Actual Control (LAC) between Aksai Chin and Ladakh.[44] The two sides have held rounds of talks while maintaining military assets stationed at the border since Indian and PRC forces attacked each other with sticks and stones in May 2020. Indian PM Narendra Modi and PRC President Xi Jinping agreed to “intensify” de-escalation efforts at the 2023 BRICS Summit in Johannesburg.[45]

Indian Foreign Minister Subrahmanyam Jaishankar stated that “the disengagement process with China has been completed.” Reuters reported that “the two militaries will patrol contested points along the border according to an agreed schedule.”[46] The two sides have not released a joint statement.[47] PRC Foreign Ministry spokesperson Lin Jian stated in a press conference that “at present, the two sides have reached a solution to the relevant issues, which China has positively evaluated. In the next step, China will work with India to implement the above solution.”[48]

The PRC affirmed that it seeks to expand PRC-Pakistan cooperation at the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit in Islamabad. In his first visit to Pakistan as PRC Premier, Li Qiang met with Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif for the Shanghai Cooperation Organization meeting. Li stated that “China is willing to work with Pakistan, focusing on establishing an upgraded version of the CPEC.”[49] Li said that the new China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) will “aim to accelerate the construction of major projects in areas such as railways, roads, and ports” and increase “practical cooperation in agriculture, mining, information technology, and energy.”[50] PRC Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Mao Ning stated in an October 14 regular press conference that “China and Pakistan are iron-clad friends and all-weather strategic partners.”[51]

Expanded PRC-Pakistan cooperation could take the form of counterterrorism and security efforts. The South China Morning Post reported that Li Qiang met with Pakistani military officials during his visit and told them that the PRC hopes to improve counterterrorism cooperation. Li told Sharif that “China firmly supports Pakistan’s counterterrorism efforts and is willing to actively promote counterterrorism cooperation, helping Pakistan to strengthen its counterterrorism capacity building.”[52] The SCO summit took place following a militant attack that killed two Chinese nationals in Karachi on October 6. This attack prompted PRC calls for Pakistan to improve its security situation and raised questions about Pakistan’s ability to protect PRC assets. Islamabad’s inability to control its security situation has long frustrated Beijing.

China-Taiwan Weekly Update, October 18, 2024

click here to read the full report

Authors: Matthew Sperzel, Daniel Shats, and Alison O’Neil 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: October 15, 2024

Key Takeaways  

• The PRC launched a large-scale military exercise around Taiwan in response to Taiwan President Lai Ching-te’s National Day speech. It framed Lai’s speech as a new level of “provocation” even though the speech was more restrained than Lai’s inaugural address. The PRC was likely planning a strong military reaction regardless of the content of Lai’s speech.
• The Joint Sword 2024B exercise was an escalation from previous Joint Sword-series exercises and featured a significantly expanded role for the Chinese Coast Guard in blockade operations.
• The PRC announced sanctions against Taiwanese DPP legislator Puma Shen, United Microelectronics Corporation founder Robert Tsao, and Shen’s Kuma Academy civil defense organization. It added Shen and Tsao to its list of “‘Taiwan independence’ diehards.”
• The PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs announced sanctions on October 10 against three US defense firms and ten senior executives over military aid to Taiwan that the United States approved on September 29.
• Russia and the PRC concluded joint naval drills and patrols in the Pacific.

Cross-Strait Relations

Taiwan

The PRC launched a large-scale military exercise around Taiwan in response to Taiwan President Lai Ching-te’s National Day speech. It framed Lai’s speech as a new level of “provocation” even though the speech was more restrained than Lai’s inaugural address. Lai gave his first National Day speech as Taiwan’s president on October 10. The speech was notably less critical of the PRC than his inauguration speech on May 20 and did not feature any changes to Lai’s well-established position on cross-strait relations. He stated that the Republic of China “put down roots in Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen, and Matsu” and repeated a line from his inauguration speech that “the Republic of China and the People’s Republic of China are not subordinate to each other,” adding that “the People’s Republic of China has no right to represent Taiwan.” He stressed his commitment to “resist annexation or encroachment upon our sovereignty.” The speech did not directly reference the PRC’s military actions, gray-zone coercion, infiltration, or other actions against Taiwan that Lai discussed in his inauguration speech, however.[1] It focused heavily on domestic issues and emphasized building Taiwan’s resilience against climate change, infectious disease, and security threats, implicitly framing the PRC as merely the third of three main challenges that Taiwan faces. Lai expressed willingness to work with the PRC on climate change, infectious disease, and regional security, the same three core challenges he identified. Lai ended his speech by signaling continuity in Taiwan’s cross-Strait policy: the Taiwanese people’s determination to defend national sovereignty, their efforts to maintain the status quo of peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait, their hope for parity and dignity in cross-strait dialogue and exchanges, and their determination to protect their free and democratic way of life all remain “unchanged.”[2]

Taiwan’s Mainland Affairs Council (MAC) highlighted Lai’s emphasis on continuity in Taipei’s cross-strait policy and his expression of goodwill toward the PRC, including efforts to promote cross-strait exchanges and collaborate on shared concerns. It also reiterated Lai’s statement that the ROC and PRC are mutually non-subordinate, however, and said the PRC’s “one China principle” has no room for the survival of the Republic of China.[3]

The PRC's response to Lai’s speech did not acknowledge any de-escalation in Lai’s rhetoric and instead framed the speech as a serious and deliberate provocation of Beijing. The PRC’s Taiwan Affairs Office (TAO) spokesperson Chen Binhua said on the day of the speech that Lai advocated a "‘new two-state theory’ of ‘mutual non-subordination,’ fabricated the fallacy of ‘Taiwan independence,’ promoted separatist ideas, and incited hostile confrontation between the two sides of the strait.” Chen rejected the notion that the division between the PRC and ROC is about “democracy vs authoritarianism,” a motif of many Lai speeches, saying that different political systems “are not an obstacle to reunification, nor are they an excuse for division.” He stressed that the PRC has “the confidence and ability to achieve the complete reunification of the motherland” and is “closer than ever to achieving national rejuvenation.”[4] Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) spokesperson Mao Ning made similar comments that day and repeated standard PRC rhetoric about Taiwan. It is relatively rare for the MFA to comment at length about developments in Taiwan because the PRC does not consider Taiwan a foreign affairs issue.[5]

The PLA Eastern Theater Command (ETC) and Chinese Coast Guard (CCG) carried out a large-scale one-day exercise called Joint Sword-2024B that simulated a blockade of Taiwan. The exercise occurred on October 14, four days after Lai’s speech. This is the second such exercise in 2024, after the two-day Joint Sword-2024A that followed Lai’s inauguration in May.

PRC government bodies and state media released a collection of statements and commentaries about Lai’s speech on and around October 14 that were significantly harsher than the initial PRC reactions on October 10. Ministry of National Defense (MOD) Spokesperson Wu Qian accused “Lai Ching-te and his ilk” of forgetting their ancestors, deliberately severing historical ties to China, and inciting hostility and confrontation between the two sides of the Taiwan Strait. He said the purpose of the PLA exercise is to communicate to “Taiwan independence elements” that “the sword is hanging over their heads and that seeking ‘independence’ is a dead end.” He said that Joint Sword 2024B is not a repeat of 2024A but an increase in pressure triggered by pro-independence “provocations.”[6] TAO spokesperson Chen Binhua said the drills were a “resolute punishment” for Lai’s “separatist claims” and warned that Lai would “push the Taiwanese people into the abyss of disaster” if he continued his “delusions” and pro-independence “provocations.”[7] Chen, who gave the initial TAO response to Lai’s speech, gave another statement on October 15 that claimed Lai’s National Day speech was an “even more harmful and destructive ‘Taiwan independence’ statement” than before. Chen picked apart lines in Lai’s speech to argue that Lai was trying to sever the historical ties between the two sides of the Taiwan Strait and to mobilize all of Taiwan’s society to pursue “secession.” He denied that there was any “goodwill” in Lai’s speech, possibly in rebuttal to the MAC statement on October 10, and called Lai a “peace destroyer.”[8] Authoritative commentaries in state media called Lai an “outright secessionist” and warned Taiwanese “secessionists” that “the more they provoke, the faster they will perish.”[9]

The PRC was likely planning a strong military reaction regardless of the content of Lai’s speech. Media on both sides of the Taiwan Strait speculated after the Joint Sword 2024A exercises in May that the PLA would hold a second exercise in the series later in the year, as the naming convention implied there would be a Joint Sword 2024B.[10] The PRC also launched a rocket that flew through Taiwan’s Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) on Taiwan’s National Day and announced the launch in advance.[11] The PRC considers Lai and his Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) dangerous separatists and was deeply displeased when Lai’s election victory in January gave the DPP an unprecedented third consecutive presidential term. CCP media and officials often label Lai in particular a “Taiwan independence worker,” a term he once used to describe himself, despite Lai’s efforts to moderate his position later in his political career.[12]

The PRC framed Lai’s speech as an “escalation” likely to justify increased military coercion against Taiwan. The MOD framed the October 14 drills as an escalation in response to “provocation” by Lai even though Lai’s National Day speech was milder on the issue of cross-strait relations than his inauguration speech and did not reveal any shifts in his administration’s position.  The TAO also issued harsher rhetoric about Lai’s speech on October 15 to retroactively justify the scope of Joint Sword 2024B.

The Joint Sword 2024B exercise was an escalation from previous Joint Sword-series exercises and featured a significantly expanded role for the Chinese Coast Guard (CCG) in blockade operations. The PLA Eastern Theater Command (ETC) published a map of the approximate exercise areas, which included six zones to the north, northwest, southwest, and east of Taiwan. It showed three additional zones near Taiwan’s outlying islands of Matsu, Dongyin, and Wuqiu.[13] ETC Spokesperson Li Xi stated that the Liaoning aircraft carrier group operated jointly with PLA Army, Navy, Air Force, and Rocket Force troops to train ship-aircraft cooperation, joint air control, and strike on maritime and ground targets. Li stated that the purpose of the drills was to test the joint combat capabilities of all services and arms, blockade key ports and areas, and send a strong warning against “separatist acts.”[14] This is the first time the Liaoning participated in a Joint Sword exercise, though the Shandong aircraft carrier participated in the first exercise of the series in 2023. The ROC Ministry of National Defense (MND) stated that 125 PLA aircraft flew sorties around Taiwan on October 14, of which 111 crossed the median line of the Taiwan Strait and entered Taiwan’s ADIZ. This is nearly double the previous all-time high of 56 ADIZ incursions in one day.[15]

All the six claimed areas of operation around Taiwan in Joint Sword 2024B overlapped with the ROC’s contiguous zone, the area of water between 12 and 24 nautical miles from Taiwan’s shores. This is an escalation compared to the 2024A exercise in May when all the exercise areas pressed up against the ROC’s contiguous zone but did not cross into it. The PLA exercises around Taiwan in August 2022, an unnamed precursor to Joint Sword that the PRC launched in response to then-US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan, went even further by overlapping in some areas with Taiwan’s sovereign territorial waters. The areas of the major PLA exercises between 2022 and October 2024 collectively include nearly all the waters surrounding Taiwan. The PLA is developing its capacity to operate anywhere around Taiwan and establish sea and air control wherever it may need to.

The Liaoning aircraft carrier group operated in Joint Sword 2024B to the southeast of Taiwan, past the Bashi Channel between Taiwan and the Philippines. Approximately 90 J-15 fighter jets and 40 carrier-based helicopters took off from the Liaoning in one day, compared to 80 fighter jets and 40 helicopters from the Shandong in three days during the inaugural Joint Sword exercise in April 2023.[16] ETC spokesperson Li Xi said the Liaoning’s involvement helped to “test the combat capabilities of integrated operations inside and outside the island chain by troops of multiple services.” PLA National Defense University Professor Zhang Chi said the Liaoning’s position east of the Bashi Channel allowed it to control a key chokepoint, form a “solid maritime barrier” and establish “external blockade and internal pressure.”[17] Placing an aircraft carrier group east of the Bashi Channel could be the PLA’s means of blocking the passage of foreign militaries seeking to support Taiwan in a blockade or invasion scenario.

The October 14 exercise was the shortest of the PRC’s major joint exercises around Taiwan, lasting only 13 hours. Joint Sword-2024A in May lasted two days, Joint Sword-2023 lasted three days, and the August 2022 drills lasted over ten days. It is unclear whether the reduced length of the drills is a sign of restraint by the PRC or intended to demonstrate the PLA’s ability to mobilize and execute missions quickly.

The CCG played a much more prominent role in the exercise than it did in previous exercises around Taiwan, which indicates that the PRC plans for it to play a critical role in a potential blockade of Taiwan. 17 CCG ships participated in the exercise around Taiwan, the same as the number of PLA ships. CCG formations 2901, 1305, 1303, and 2102 completed a patrol that fully encircled Taiwan for the first time and coordinated with PLAN ships drilling in the same areas. CCG ship 2901, one of the Coast Guard’s largest ships, participated for the first time.[18] The CCG released a rough map of the patrol that depicted the route in the shape of a heart around Taiwan, with the message “the patrol is in the shape of loving you.”[19] A similar number (16) of CCG ships participated in the 2024A exercise in May, but the majority of them patrolled around Taiwan’s outlying islands.[20] Four CCG ships operated east of Taiwan during the 2024A exercise but in a much more limited geographic scope. CCG ships also patrolled around Taiwan’s outlying islands in the Taiwan Strait on October 14. Four of them entered restricted waters around the islands, which also happened during the 2024A drills.[21]

The expanded role of the CCG in the blockade drills is consistent with the PRC increasingly relying on the CCG over other maritime forces to assert the legitimacy of its law enforcement authority in waters that it claims. The PRC has normalized CCG patrols in the restricted waters of Taiwan’s Kinmen islands since February to erode Taiwan’s control over the waters and assert PRC jurisdiction there. The CCTV-affiliated state-run social media Yuyuan Tantian suggested that the “Kinmen model” can be applied around other Taiwan-controlled territories and ultimately around Taiwan itself.[22] The state-owned tabloid Global Times cited an anonymous PRC expert who speculated that the CCG will intensify and increase the frequency of its activities around Taiwan to “restrict the operational space of ‘Taiwan independence’ separatist forces.” The same expert said the CCG 2901 ship in particular could be used to prevent “separatists” from fleeing through Taiwan’s eastern waters, as the large ship can operate at sea for an extended period.[23] The PRC may plan to use the CCG to patrol in and around Taiwan-controlled waters during a real blockade operation, intercept Taiwanese ships attempting to pass, and arrest “separatists” under the guise of legitimate law enforcement. It will likely use PLA Navy ships and other military assets to prevent entry by US or other Taiwan-friendly foreign forces into the region.

Four CCG ships entered the restricted waters of Taiwan’s Matsu Islands during the PRC’s Joint Sword 2024B drills around Taiwan. Taiwan’s Coast Guard Administration (CGA) detected two CCG ships that entered the restricted waters west of Nangan (Matsu) Island and another two that simultaneously entered restricted waters north of Dongyin Island at 8 am on October 14. The ships circled the islands continuously until 6 pm, with the former two ships sailing around both Nangan and Beigan islands.[24] The CGA said the PRC has intruded into Taiwan-controlled waters near Taiwan’s outlying islands 44 times this year, including the October 14 incursions. One CCG ship also carried out patrols near the Taiwanese island of Wuqiu, though Taiwan did not report an incursion into restricted waters there.[25] The CCG said it practiced boarding and inspection drills during these patrols.[26]

Joint Sword 2024B did not include patrols around Kinmen, even though Kinmen was included in the 2024A exercises in May and has been the most frequent site of CCG incursions into Taiwan-controlled waters this year. Nearly all the 44 PRC incursions into Taiwan’s restricted or prohibited waters in 2024 were around Kinmen, the closest of Taiwan’s territories to the PRC. The only CCG incursions into Matsu’s restricted waters occurred during the Joint Sword 2024A exercise in May 2024.

The PRC is considering unspecified “further measures” in retaliation for Taiwan’s trade restrictions on the PRC. The measures are very likely part of the CCP’s economic coercion against the Lai administration. The PRC Ministry of Commerce (MOFCOM) claimed on October 12—two days after Lai’s National Day speech—that the DPP has not taken any measures to lift trade restrictions that MOFCOM designated as “illegal trade barriers” in December 2023.[27] MOFCOM stated in December 2023 that it concluded an investigation and found Taiwan’s bans on 2,509 imports from the PRC to be in violation of the Cross-Strait Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA), a 2010 agreement in which the PRC and Taiwan committed to reducing trade barriers. ISW assessed that the December 2023 announcement was timed to influence Taiwan’s 2024 elections, as it came less than a month before Taiwan’s presidential elections on January 13, 2024.[28]

MOFCOM’s threat of unspecified economic measures against Taiwan is part of its multifaceted coercion campaign against Lai’s administration. MOFCOM has used the pretext of trade disputes to implement economic coercion against Taiwan on several occasions in the past year. It suspended ECFA tariff exemptions on 12 Taiwanese hydrocarbon and petrochemical products on December 21, before the Taiwanese election, and on 134 Taiwanese products of various kinds after Lai took office in May 2024.[29] The lack of specificity in MOFCOM’s October 12 announcement suggests that the PRC wanted to make the announcement shortly after Lai’s speech but is still deciding what specific measures it will impose.

The PRC announced sanctions against Taiwanese DPP legislator Puma Shen, United Microelectronics Corporation (UMC) founder Robert Tsao, and Shen’s Kuma Academy civil defense organization. It added Shen and Tsao to its list of “‘Taiwan independence’ diehards.” TAO spokesperson Chen Binhua claimed that the TAO decided to punish Shen, Tsao, and Kuma Academy after “carefully verifying” tips that it received from “people on both sides of the Taiwan Strait.” The TAO received the tips in an email mailbox it set up on August 7 to encourage reporting on Taiwanese “separatism.” [30] Kuma Academy is a Taiwanese nonprofit organization that trains Taiwanese civilians in civil defense skills such as first aid, self-defense, evacuation procedures, and countering disinformation.[31] Chen claimed that Kuma Academy cultivates “violent Taiwan independence elements” with support from DPP authorities and is an “out-and-out ‘Taiwan independence’ base.” He accused Puma Shen, as the head of the organization, of “maliciously” selling secessionist and “anti-China” ideas to Taiwanese people and widely spreading “the seeds of violent conflict in the Taiwan Strait. He said Tsao “provided huge financial support" for Kuma Academy to “engage in secessionist criminal activities” and funded pro-independence films and TV dramas.[32] Tsao pledged one billion Taiwan dollars (about US$32 million) to Kuma Academy in 2022.[33]

Chen said the TAO’s sanctions against Shen and Tsao will prohibit both men and their families from entering the PRC, restrict the cooperation of their “affiliated institutions” including Kuma Academy with PRC-based individuals and organizations, and “never allow” their affiliated companies and financiers to make profits in the PRC. He did not specify how this would affect UMC’s business in the PRC. The TAO also added Shen and Tsao to its list of “‘Taiwan independence’ diehards,” a list that it originally published in 2021 and now includes twelve people, including Shen and Tsao. This is the first time the TAO has added people to the list since 2022. Chen said Shen and Tsao will be “held accountable for life” and subjected to “other necessary punishment measures” under the PRC’s “Opinions on Punishing Taiwan Independence Diehards for Crimes of Separatism and Inciting Separatism.”[34] The “Opinions” are a set of authoritative legal guidelines that the PRC issued on June 21 to clarify the definitions and punishments for what it considers criminal Taiwanese “separatist activities” under its 2005 Anti-Secession Law. The Opinions called for severe criminal penalties up to life imprisonment or death for separatist “diehards,” which likely refers to the people on the list.[35] The PRC has not attempted to detain or charge any of the people on the list, even though its law permits trials in absentia.

The PRC’s sanctions against Shen and Tsao are very likely part of Beijing’s multifaceted “punishment” of the Lai administration following his National Day speech. Shen and Tsao are not officials in Lai’s administration and the TAO has not added Lai himself to its list of “diehard” separatists. The timing and stated reasons for the sanctions both point to a connection with Lai, however. The TAO announced the sanctions on October 14, the same day the PRC launched its Joint Sword 2024B exercises to “punish” Lai.

Targeting the sanctions at major proponents of Taiwan’s civil defense is likely meant to send a threatening message against Lai’s civil defense initiatives, which Lai mentioned in his speech. Lai inaugurated the Whole-of-Society Defense Resilience Committee in September to engage members of government, industry, academia, and civil society in improving Taiwan’s civil defense capabilities. Kuma Academy chair Liu Wen is a committee member and Robert Tsao is an advisor to the committee.[36] The committee aims to mobilize around 400,000 volunteers for Taiwan’s civil defense. It will organize a tabletop exercise in December, a small unscripted civil defense drill in March 2025, and a nationwide drill in June 2025 that will coincide with Taiwan’s annual Han Kuang military drills. [37]

The PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs announced sanctions on October 10 against three US defense firms and ten senior executives over military aid to Taiwan that the United States approved on September 29. The PRC will freeze the assets of Edge Autonomy Operations LLC, Skydio Inc., and Huntingdon Ingalls Industries Inc.[38] PRC Ministry of Defense (MOD) spokesman Wu Qian called the United States “treacherous” over the $567 million aid package, originally announced on September 29. The military aid package is the largest the United States has ever sent to Taiwan. Wu accused the United States of “double-dealing,” and called it to “stop using ‘two faces’ to deal with China.”[39] Wu made this statement outside the MOD’s regularly scheduled press conferences and more than ten days after the Ministry of Defense had already commented on it, marking a rhetorical escalation from past MOD statements against US military aid and arms sales to Taiwan. MOD spokesperson Zhang Xiaogang called on the United States to “stop military collusion” with Taiwan but did not call it “treacherous” in a regularly scheduled September press conference.[40]

Tsai Ing-wen visited Prague and addressed EU countries at the 28th Forum 2000 meeting. Former Taiwanese president Tsai Ing-wen discussed the threat that authoritarianism poses to democratic societies and emphasized Taiwan’s support for Ukraine. Tsai highlighted Taiwan’s resilience and efforts to build ties with the United States and European Union. [41][42]

The Czech Republic, which hosts the Forum 2000, has a history of bilateral cooperation with Taiwan. In 2023 the Czech Republic and Taiwan negotiated an arms sale of Czechian howitzers and missile transport trucks and agreed to collaborate on drone research.[43] In 2022 the Taiwanese drone firm Geosat signed an MOU with Czech firm Primoco.[44]

China

A PRC state-sponsored cyber threat actor’s apparent espionage campaign that targeted US telecommunications companies affected major internet service providers. Two anonymous people involved in the ongoing investigation stated that AT&T, Verizon, and Lumen were among the 10-12 companies that were affected.[45] Gaining access to the digital infrastructure of ISP and telecom companies would position PRC-based threat actors to steal sensitive data and potentially affect the flow of internet traffic. The Washington Post cited an unnamed US official who stated that the operation may have targeted systems that track federal wiretap requests to telecommunications providers, though it is not certain that the systems were compromised. Such a vulnerability would represent a significant risk for US intelligence efforts should the PRC plant false information or inform targets to hamper US surveillance.

Investigators are calling the campaign Salt Typhoon, following the Microsoft naming convention for cyber threat actors attributed to the PRC.[46] The ongoing investigation by the US government is still determining the scope and the nature of the compromise. The Biden administration established an interagency team to coordinate investigation and response efforts across the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI), and the Department of Homeland Security’s Cybersecurity and Information Security Agency (CISA).[47] Former CISA Director Chris Krebs suggested that the threat actor could be Advanced Persistent Threat 40 (APT40), another cyber threat actor that the Five Eyes, Germany, South Korea, and Japan have attributed to the PRC Ministry of State Security (MSS) Hainan branch.[48]

Salt Typhoon is also known as GhostEmperor and Famous Sparrow, according to Microsoft’s cybersecurity division. Estonian cybersecurity research firm ESET discovered the threat actor, which it named FamousSparrow, in 2021 after observing activity that targeted hotels, engineering companies, and international and government organizations in 12 countries worldwide, including Taiwan.[49] Russian cybersecurity research firm Kaspersky publicized other malicious activity from a Chinese-speaking threat actor that it called GhostEmperor a week later.[50] Kaspersky linked GhostEmperor to FamousSparrow based on a common IP address across the activity in both companies’ investigations. Kaspersky reported that the threat actor infiltrated government entities and telecommunications companies in Southeast Asia and suggested geopolitically motivated espionage as a possible purpose, based on the targets.

The PRC’s National Computer Virus Emergency Response Center, its cyber defense agency, released a report that accuses the United States and Five Eyes countries of cyber espionage against other countries amid the Salt Typhoon investigation.[51] The PRC consistently times its accusations of malicious foreign cyber activity to coincide with revelations of its hacking operations. The CVERC report, which has versions in English and several other languages, also claims there is “ironclad evidence” that the United States conducts false flag operations and uses stealth tools to mislead attribution analysis. The report also claimed that the United States inserts strings of other languages, such as Chinese characters, in digital footprints to frame China and other countries. PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) spokesperson Mao Ning claimed that some US tech companies, likely referring to Microsoft, are accomplices in US government cyber attacks against the global supply chain because they allow the US to exploit backdoors in their products and participate in US narratives that demonize the PRC.[52] The CVERC released reports in April and July that characterized another PRC state-sponsored cyber threat actor, dubbed Volt Typhoon,  as a disinformation campaign that US intelligence agencies conducted to exaggerate threats from the PRC and expand their budgets.[53]

Southeast Asia

The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) member states pressured the PRC to respect international law and push for a code of conduct for the South China Sea. The biannual ASEAN summit took place in Laos from October 6-October 11, with representatives from the ten member states and observing states in attendance.[54] During the summit, leaders discuss several issues including economic development, regional security, and diplomatic engagement. Several speeches and bilateral engagements discussed matters related to the South China Sea, where increased tensions between the PRC and ASEAN states have resulted in multiple maritime incidents. In a meeting between ASEAN leaders and the PRC, Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. expressed concern at the PRC’s “disregard of international law and standards” as evident in its actions in the South China Sea.[55] Marcos cited some recent incidents between the PRC and the Philippines, which he described as examples of harassment and aggression from the CCG. Li Qiang denied that the recent spike in tensions was the fault of the PRC, placing the blame on “external forces” interfering in the region.[56] Li stated that the PRC has a right to defend its sovereignty, and its actions follow international law. Leaders from several ASEAN states called for increased urgency in negotiations with the PRC to create a code of conduct governing behavior in the South China Sea. This code of conduct has been under negotiation since the early 2000s but has made little progress despite the increase in regional tension.

Philippines

Philippine and PRC vessels collided near Thitu Island on October 15. The Philippines Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources (BFAR) accused the PRC ship, which it stated was part of the Chinese Maritime Militia (CMM), of conducting dangerous maneuvers and threatening the safety of BFAR’s BRP Datu Cabaylo.[57] The CMM vessel reportedly sideswiped and collided with the BRP Datu Cabaylo, resulting in minor damages. The BRP Datu Cabaylo and another BFAR vessel were patrolling near Thitu Island, a Philippine-occupied island with a Coast Guard base and military infrastructure. Thitu Island is near Subi Reef, a South China Sea feature, and the location of a PRC military base. The PRC has previously stated its concern that the Philippines will continue to expand its military infrastructure on the island, threatening PRC territorial sovereignty.[58]

In response to the October 15 incident, PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesperson Mao Ning accused the Philippines of inciting violence and placing PRC fishermen in danger.[59] Mao stated that the Philippines had collided with the PRC, in direct opposition to Philippine official reports. This collision is the latest incident in a series of confrontations between the Philippines and PRC over disputed features in the South China Sea.

Vietnam

Vietnamese President To Lam and PRC Premier Li Qiang released a joint statement reiterating their earlier promise to manage maritime disputes peacefully. Premier Li traveled to Hanoi from October 12-14 for discussions on economic, diplomatic, and security issues.[60] During these meetings, the PRC and Vietnam signed ten agreements expanding bilateral cooperation on agriculture, manufacturing, and infrastructure.[61] They also released a joint statement that included an agreement to increase bilateral military exchanges and patrols and reiterated the importance of cooperation in the fields of security, intelligence, counter-terrorism, and transnational criminal activity.[62] Li and Lam also discussed developments in the South China Sea, promising to peacefully manage disagreements and preserve regional stability.[63] In addition to agreeing to avoid escalatory behavior in disputed waters, both sides agreed to effectively implement the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea and move towards the creation of a Code of Conduct for the South China Sea per international law. The two states previously agreed to manage disputes in the South China Sea peacefully during a meeting between Xi Jinping and To Lam in August 2024.[64]

The meeting between Li and Lam follows the Vietnamese Foreign Ministry’s October 4 accusations against the PRC, blaming them for attacks perpetrated against Vietnamese fishermen fishing near the Paracel Islands.[65] The fishermen reported that 40 assailants attacked them with metal pipes on September 29, resulting in three broken bones.[66] The Vietnamese Foreign Ministry blamed PRC law enforcement for the attacks, saying that their actions violated Vietnamese sovereignty, international law, and their earlier agreement to manage conflict peacefully.[67] The PRC MFA responded to these accusations, saying that while they did carry out law enforcement measures against “illegal” Vietnamese fishing, PRC law enforcement acted professionally throughout the encounter.

Russia

Russia and the PRC concluded joint naval drills and patrols in the Pacific. The PLA Navy WeChat reported that guided-missile destroyers Xining and Wuxi, supply ship Taihu, and missile frigate Linyi “completed troop assembly with Russia” in the Sea of Japan on September 9.[68] The same source described live-fire exercises between PRC and Russian ships from September 11-27 as part of the Beibu-2024 exercise, after which PRC and Russian naval fleets traveled to “relevant waters in the Pacific” and “conducted the fifth joint cruise.”[69]

Newsweek reported that a joint patrol began following the close of the Beibu-2024 exercises on September 27. It said that “Russian destroyers Admiral Panteleyev and Admiral Tributs, as well as Chinese destroyers CNS Xining and CNS Wuxi, frigate CNS Linyi, and replenishment ship CNS Taihu, took part in the patrol” but that it “was not clear whether they had sailed near the US coast off Alaska.” Newsweek also reported that the joint naval detachment “searched for a mock enemy submarine and used rocket-bomb launchers to destroy the target” and “practiced using air defense missile and jamming systems to repel an enemy air missile attack,” citing the Russian Pacific Fleet.[70] Newsweek reported that the Russian and PRC forces separated on October 14, with Russian warships entering the Miyako Strait and the PRC ships heading west toward Taiwan. [71] The PRC contingent approached southeast Taiwan during Joint Sword 2024-B exercises, according to Japan’s MOD.[72] Taiwanese defense researcher Chieh Chung said that these four ships “should have rendezvoused” with the PLA aircraft carrier Liaoning and Type 055 destroyer Anshan as they remained near Taiwan for the Joint Sword exercise.[73]

The PLA Navy WeChat reported that the Beibu exercises formally concluded in Qingdao with the arrival of Russian and PRC fleets on October 17.[74] Joint PRC-Russia coast guard drills incorporating the CGC’s Meishan and Xiushan ships also concluded on October 17. PRC and Russian ships “formed a formation for the first time to enter the North Pacific high seas joint patrol, conduct inspections and supervision of operating vessels in accordance with the law, and actively maintain the production order of fisheries in the North Pacific high seas.”[75]

Russian Defense Minister Andrey Belousov met PRC CMC Vice-Chair Zhang Youxia and PLA Admiral Dong Jun to discuss deepening PRC-Russia defense cooperation. Both sides affirmed strong PRC-Russia ties.[76] Belousov said that Russia will work with the PRC to celebrate the 80th anniversary of the Soviet Great Patriotic War and the PRC’s War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression.[77]

Iran

The PRC condemned the Israeli Defense Forces for attacking UN peacekeeper outposts in southern Lebanon on positions and sentry towers, which resulted in injuries to some peacekeepers. MFA Spokesperson Mao Ning and Ministry of Defense (MOD) Spokesperson Wu Qian stated that the PRC demands an investigation, accountability for those responsible personnel, and measures to prevent it from happening again. The PRC had 419 UN peacekeepers in the UN peacekeeping mission in Lebanon as of April.[78] The PRC peacekeeping contingent includes a multi-functional engineer detachment, a construction engineer detachment, and a medical detachment.[79] Wu stated that the PRC contingent was safe and that the PRC would take measures to enhance its security.[80]

PRC Foreign Minister Wang Yi held separate phone calls with the Israeli Foreign Minister Israel Katz and Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi on October 14.[81] Wang praised Iran’s recent diplomacy with Middle Eastern countries to mitigate potential Israeli retaliation for an Iranian missile barrage on October 1.[82] Wang stated that the PRC would “demonstrate its responsibility as a major country… and play a constructive role in promoting the cooling of conflicts.”

During a UN Security Council meeting on the Middle East on September 30, Wang advocated for a ceasefire in Gaza and Lebanon, a two-state solution to the Israel-Palestine conflict, a Palestinian-led government of post-war Gaza, and increasing international humanitarian assistance to the Middle East.[83] Wang claimed that the PRC is a “builder of peace, promoter of stability, and a contributor to the development of the Middle East… that never interferes in the internal affairs of Middle Eastern countries, never carves out spheres of influence in the region, and never seeks geopolitical interests by exploiting hot issues.”

China-Taiwan Weekly Update, October 11, 2024

click here to read the full report

Authors: Matthew Sperzel, Daniel Shats, and Alison O’Neil 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: October 10, 2024

Key Takeaways  

• The People’s Republic of China (PRC) accused Republic of China (ROC, Taiwan) president Lai Ching-te on October 10 of promoting separatism and inciting cross-strait confrontation in his National Day speech.
• The PRC urged Czechia and other “relevant countries” on October 8 not to interact with Taiwanese “separatist forces” in response to former ROC President Tsai Ing-wen’s plans to visit Czechia.
• The FBI announced charges against five PRC nationals who were caught near a US military base in August 2023 during annual exercises.
• The China Coast Guard (CCG) fired water cannons at Philippine civilian vessels completing a resupply mission at Scarborough Shoal.
• Vietnam accused PRC law enforcement of attacking ten Vietnamese fishermen near the Paracel Islands. The PRC aims to defend its control over the maritime features it administers and deny other states the ability to extract resources in areas it claims.
• The PRC supported a Russian draft proposal at the United Nations that calls for a UN investigation into the destruction of the Nord Stream 2 natural gas pipeline in September 2022.
• The militant group Baloch Liberation Army killed two Chinese nationals in an IED attack in Karachi on October 6.

Cross-Strait Relations

Taiwan

The People’s Republic of China (PRC) accused Republic of China (ROC, Taiwan) president Lai Ching-te on October 10 of promoting separatism and inciting cross-strait confrontation in his National Day speech. The PRC’s Taiwan Affairs Office (TAO) spokesperson Chen Binhua rejected that the division between the PRC and ROC is about “democracy vs. authoritarianism” and accused Lai of forcing notions of independence onto Taiwan.[1] Taiwan is already an independent and sovereign polity under the name of the Republic of China (ROC). Chen emphasized the PRC’s claim as the only legitimate government of China, including Taiwan, and the shared history and identity of the Chinese nation.[2] Chen claimed that the PRC was closer to achieving “national rejuvenation” than ever before.

National Rejuvenation is a Chinese Communist Party (CCP) mantra that describes the Chinese nation’s attainment of lasting greatness by the centennial of the PRC in 2049.[3] It acts as the PRC’s overarching strategic goal and compass for all policymaking, especially economic and foreign policy that aim to make the PRC a leading economic and political power in the world. The annexation of Taiwan and the political assimilation of other territories that the PRC regards as wayward or lost is a necessary step to achieve national rejuvenation.[4]

PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) spokesperson Mao Ning accused Lai of intentionally severing the historical ties between the people of mainland China and Taiwan in his speech.[5] Mao stressed the international consensus on the “One-China Principle,” which states that there is only one China, Taiwan is part of that China, and the PRC is its legitimate representative. This claim ignores the different “One China” policies of many countries around the world, which acknowledge the PRC as the government of China but in many cases do not take an explicit stance on Taiwan’s sovereignty.[6]

Lai emphasized in his speech on October 10 Taiwan’s determination to defend its national sovereignty and its commitment to living in a free and democratic society.[7] He cast the people of Taiwan as peace-loving and eager to engage with the rest of the world. Lai noted the shared nature of the challenges that the world and Taiwan are both facing, namely the expansion of authoritarianism that threatens the rules-based order and Taiwan’s free and democratic society. He denied that the PRC has the right to represent Taiwan and urged the PRC to meet its responsibility together with Taiwan to contribute to regional and global peace.

Lai’s speech on October 10 was his highest-profile public address since taking office on May 20. The PRC responded to Lai’s inauguration speech by launching two days of large-scale military exercises that closely surrounded Taiwan from May 23-24.[8] Chen Binhua called the exercises a “resolute punishment” for Lai’s inauguration speech, which the PRC claimed was provocative and promoting Taiwanese independence. Reuters cited an anonymous Taiwanese national security official on October 7 who assessed that the PRC would likely use Lai’s speech as a pretext to launch another round of premeditated military exercises in a show of coercion against Taiwan.[9] Reuters reported that it reviewed an internal security memo that outlines the Taiwanese government’s assessment of impending PRC military activities after National Day.

The PRC urged Czechia and other “relevant countries” on October 8 not to interact with Taiwanese “separatist forces” in response to former ROC President Tsai Ing-wen’s plans to visit Czechia. The ROC Presidential Office announced on October 7 Tsai’s plans to travel to Czechia and “other European countries” this weekend.[10] The announcement stated that Taiwan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs and National Security Council are responsible for planning the trip. Tsai will attend the Forum 2000 conference in Prague, which is focused on spreading democratic values and supporting human rights.[11] Reuters reported that Tsai will also visit France and Belgium.[12]

PRC MFA Spokesperson Mao Ning urged Czechia and the “relevant countries” to abide by the “One-China Principle” and not do anything to harm bilateral relations.[13] TAO Spokesperson Zhu Fenglian warned Czechia and the other countries not to send the wrong signal to “Taiwan independence separatist forces” and refrain from giving them a platform to spread “separatist fallacies.”[14]  Zhu accused the Democratic Progressive Party, Taiwan’s incumbent party, of engaging in separatist activities and deceiving the international community.

The PRC often lobbies foreign officials not to meet with Taiwanese officials. Mao accused Czech President Petr Pavel in January 2023 of violating Czechia’s political commitment to uphold the “One-China Principle” after he shared a phone call with Tsai, making him the first EU head of state to speak directly with a Taiwanese president.[15] Mao stated that Pavel ignored the PRC’s repeated attempts to dissuade Pavel from engaging with Tsai. US Congresswoman Young Kim stated in September that PRC officials contacted members of Congress and their staff to dissuade them from participating in a May delegation to Taiwan.[16] Legislators from six countries who attended an international summit in Taiwan in July claimed that PRC diplomatic officials contacted them before they departed to prevent them from attending.[17]

Pavel’s succession from his PRC-friendly predecessor Miloš Zeman was a setback for PRC influence in Central Europe. Czechia and Taiwan have strengthened relations under Czech President Petr Pavel despite PRC pressure to diplomatically isolate Taiwan. Within the past two years, Taiwan and Czechia have developed bilateral technology investment initiatives, direct flights, security partnerships, and cooperative plans to jointly provide aid to Ukraine.[18] Czech parliamentarians led delegations to Taiwan in March 2023 and June 2024, with the former consisting of over 150 businesspeople, scientists, and officials.[19]

China

The FBI announced charges against five PRC nationals who were caught near a US military base in August 2023 during annual exercises. A US National Guard officer discovered the five people taking photos of US military equipment at a campground near Camp Grayling, a US military base that was hosting the US National Guard’s annual Northern Strike exercise. The live-fire drills had around 7,000 participants, including some Taiwanese soldiers. The five people were students at the University of Michigan at the time. They claimed that they were “media” trying to take pictures of a meteor shower. The FBI and customs authorities questioned the students at the airport months later but did not arrest them. An affidavit that the FBI publicized on October 1 charged the five with conspiracy, tampering with evidence, and making false statements to federal officers. The FBI discovered pictures of US military vehicles on an external hard drive, which was seized from one of the people, and found that some of the people texted about deleting photos and messages to throw off suspicion. The suspects are not in custody because they returned to the PRC after graduating from the university, however.[20]

Two other University of Michigan students from the PRC were caught photographing military and naval infrastructure at Naval Air Station Key West in Florida in 2020. They were convicted and sentenced to prison.[21]

The PRC frequently denies that it carries out espionage activities in other countries. It has not commented on the FBI charges in this case but often accuses the United States of unfairly targeting students and academics from the PRC on illegitimate grounds. The PRC Ministry of State Security claimed on October 8 that the US Department of Justice’s (DOJ) “China Initiative,” which the DOJ initiated in 2018, aimed to “fabricate so-called ‘Chinese espionage cases.’" It said the DOJ has been “recklessly arresting Chinese-origin experts and scholars through malicious tactics, conducting indiscriminate investigations and harassment, continuously hyping the ‘Chinese espionage threat.’”[22]

Southeast Asia

Philippines

The China Coast Guard (CCG) fired water cannons at Philippine civilian vessels completing a resupply mission at Scarborough Shoal. On October 8 two vessels from the Philippines Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources (BFAR) conducted a resupply mission for Philippine fishermen near Scarborough Shoal.[23] During the resupply mission, three CCG ships shadowed and fired water cannons at the BFAR vessels.  Despite this interference, BFAR was able to carry out its mission successfully. Philippine Rear Admiral Roy Vincent Trinidad released a statement on the incident, saying that while it was a matter of concern it would not prevent the Philippines from continuing to patrol the West Philippine Sea and supporting its military and civilian vessels in the area. CCG spokesperson Liu Dejun accused the BFAR vessels of sailing in PRC waters without permission and stated that the CCG law enforcement measures were legitimate means to protect PRC territorial sovereignty.[24]

Confrontations between PRC vessels and Philippine civilian ships conducting resupply missions have occurred before. Most recently, on September 27 a PRC missile ship shadowed two BFAR vessels, BRP Datu Romapenet and BRP Taradipit, during a resupply mission to Half-Moon Shoal.[25] A BFAR aircraft monitoring the mission reported that the PRC vessel aimed a high-intensity laser at the pilots, an action which the Philippine authorities said constituted a threat to pilot safety.[26] A separate September 27 Philippine resupply mission to the BRP Sierra Madre in Second Thomas Shoal was not interrupted by the PRC due to a previous agreement made between the two countries. The difference in PRC behavior indicates that they are more likely to respond when the Philippines takes an action that the PRC sees as provocative or otherwise against PRC interests in the South China Sea.

Naval exercises between the Philippines, the United States, and allies began on October 7 near Subic Bay. The Sama Sama 2024 exercise also included participants from Canada, France, Australia, the United Kingdom, and Japan.[27] The exercises will take place over the next two weeks and will reportedly include drills focusing on anti-submarine warfare, anti-surface warfare, anti-air warfare, and maritime domain awareness. Participating assets from the United States include the USS Howard, personnel from the U.S. 7^th Fleet, three Command Task Forces, Destroyer Squadron Seven, and the Marine Corps’ Marine Rotational Force for Southeast Asia. Philippine assets included the BRP Jose Risal, BRP Waray, BRP Nestor Reinoso, special operations units, and supporting units.[28] This is the seventh iteration of the Sama Sama exercises, which has evolved from a bilateral exercise between the United States and the Philippines to a multilateral and multiplatform exercise.

The Philippines and the Republic of Korea (ROK) signed six bilateral agreements and elevated their ties to a “strategic partnership.” One of these six agreements will increase maritime cooperation between the Philippines and ROK navies.[29] Seoul’s ambassador to Manila, Lee Sang-hwa said that the October 7 agreements represented a “pivotal moment” in relations between the two states.[30] The two states have been steadily increasing their military ties through joint exercises and weapons sales over the past year. Modernizing the Philippine military and improving relations with regional partners are key elements of Marco’s foreign policy.[31] The establishment of close military relations with the United States, Japan, the ROK, and others may be intended to send a message to the PRC and warn against escalation within Philippine maritime territory. While there has been no official response to these agreements from the PRC, the Hong Kong-based media outlet South China Morning Post characterizes this agreement as an indication of the desire to counter the PRC within Manila and Seoul.[32]

Vietnam

Vietnam’s Foreign Ministry accused PRC law enforcement of perpetrating an attack on ten Vietnamese fishermen fishing near the disputed Paracel Islands. The fishermen initially reported that around 40 foreign assailants on boats assaulted them at sea with metal pipes on September 29, causing three of the fishermen to suffer broken bones. They did not identify the assailants. The Vietnamese Ministry of Foreign Affairs accused PRC law enforcement on October 4 of perpetrating the attack and claimed the PRC’s actions “seriously violated Vietnam’s sovereignty in the Paracel Islands,” international law, and an agreement by the leaders of the two countries to better manage their territorial disputes.[33] Vietnam said that PRC Maritime Safety Administration (MSA) vessels 101 and 301, assigned to Sansha City, surrounded the Vietnamese boat and deployed rubber-hulled inflatable boats to board it. Sansha is a small PRC settlement in the Paracel Islands that Beijing has designated a “prefecture level city” to administer all the PRC’s claims in the South China Sea.[34] The PRC MFA confirmed on October 1 that law enforcement authorities took measures to stop Vietnamese fishermen who it claimed were “illegally” fishing in waters near the Paracel Islands. The MFA did not mention the attack but claimed the PRC actions were “professional and restrained” and that it did not note any injuries.[35] It did not respond to Vietnam’s specific allegations.

A PRC think tank released an edited video of the incident and falsely claimed the fishermen used weapons to “initiate attack.” The PRC think tank South China Sea Probing Initiative (SCSPI) exclusively released a video of the incident that showed boats deployed from the Sansha Law Enforcement 101 ship surrounding the Vietnamese fishing boat. The fishermen tried and failed to prevent the MSA personnel from boarding. The think tank claimed the Vietnamese fishermen were “obviously trained, using long bamboo poles, harpoons and machetes to initiate attack.” It further claimed that three “Chinese auxiliary law enforcement officers were also injured to varying degrees” under attack by the Vietnamese fishermen. The video was edited and did not show anyone being injured.[36] SCSPI is a Beijing-based think tank affiliated with Peking University.

PRC state-owned tabloid Global Times claimed that the Vietnamese fisherman broke the helmets of two law enforcement personnel while using bamboo poles to prevent the personnel from boarding their fishing boat. The Global Times mischaracterized the ships as “China Coast Guard law enforcement vessels.” [37] The ships “Sansha Law Enforcement 101” and “Sansha Law Enforcement 301” are operated by local civilian law enforcement based in Sansha, rather than the paramilitary CCG.[38]

The PRC, Vietnam, and Taiwan all claim the Paracel Islands. The PRC seized control of the archipelago from Vietnam in 1974 and has since constructed military facilities on several islands, as well as the “city” of Sansha on Woody Island.[39] The PRC claims a straight territorial baseline around the archipelago, which means it claims full sovereignty over all waters between the islands as internal waters. It asserts the right to restrict unauthorized access to foreign nationals. International law does not recognize the PRC’s straight-baseline claim, however. The UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) allows states to claim territorial waters extending 12 nautical miles seaward from their coast but not to draw straight-line boundaries around entire island groups (except for a few designated “archipelagic states,” which the PRC is not). The United States military has conducted Freedom of Navigation Operations through the relevant waters to contest this PRC claim. Coordinates released by SCSPI show that the confrontation with the Vietnamese fishing boat occurred within the PRC’s illegally claimed “internal waters” but outside the UNCLOS-designated territorial waters.[40] International law has not determined which country has rightful sovereignty over the islands themselves.

Source: Asia Maritime Transparency Initiative[41]

The PRC’s confrontations with Vietnam are aimed at defending PRC control over the features it already administers, especially the Paracel Islands, and at preventing Vietnam from extracting resources in places the PRC claims. The PRC has used CCG, maritime militia, and research vessels to block Vietnamese energy exploration in Vanguard Bank and other energy-rich areas of Vietnam’s Exclusive Economic Zone. It used ramming and water cannons against Vietnamese ships trying to block PRC energy exploration and against Vietnamese fishermen fishing in waters near the Paracel Islands.[42] On the other hand, the PRC has done very little in the past few decades to challenge Vietnam’s presence in the Spratly Islands, where Vietnam occupies by far the largest number of features of any country. It has not publicly objected to Vietnam’s rapid island-building and militarization of the Spratly archipelago likely because it does not fear that those military facilities would be used against the PRC.

Russia

The PRC and Russia conducted another joint naval drill in the Pacific. Russian news reported joint PRC-Russia anti-submarine drills, following the joint Beibu/Northern Interaction 2024 exercises.[43] Two Russian anti-submarine destroyers, the Admiral Tributs, and the Admiral Panteleyev, participated in the exercise. The PRC sent the Type 055 destroyer Wuxi, the Type 054 frigate Linyi, and the Type 052 destroyer Xining.[44] This joint exercise follows joint PRC-Russia coast guard patrols in the North Pacific in September and points toward a pattern of growing Russia-PRC military cooperation in the Pacific.[45]  

The PRC supported a Russian draft proposal at the United Nations that calls for a UN investigation into the destruction of the Nord Stream 2 natural gas pipeline in September 2022. Russia’s UN representative Vassily Nebenzia convened a UN Security Council meeting on October 4 and called for an independent UN investigation into the destruction of the natural gas pipeline in the Baltic Sea. He criticized independent investigations by Denmark, Sweden, and Germany as inconclusive and accused the United States, Germany, and other Western countries of deliberately hindering or sabotaging investigations and even of confessing “complicity” in the “terrorist attack.”[46] PRC UN Representative Geng Shuang announced the PRC’s support for Russia’s proposal and likewise criticized the Danish, Swedish, and German investigations for lacking detailed conclusions. He did not speculate about the perpetrators of the pipeline explosion but questioned whether there was a “hidden agenda to the initial opposition to an international investigation” and whether “evidence [has] been covered up and destroyed over the past two years or so.”[47] The PRC has supported past Russian calls for a UN investigation into the pipeline’s destruction, but the UN Security Council rejected the past proposals.[48]

The PRC has sought to portray itself as a fair and neutral arbiter in the Russia-Ukraine war but aligns with Russia’s framing of the war. It is critical of NATO, portrays the Western security order and arms sales to Ukraine as fueling the war, opposes sanctions on Russia, calls the war a “crisis” rather than a “war,” and calls for respect for Russia’s “legitimate security concerns.” It has lent credence to Russia's narratives of US culpability in the war, including amplifying Russian allegations that the United States operated secret bio-labs in Ukraine and uncorroborated self-published reporting by US journalist Seymour Hersh that a US operation deliberately destroyed the Nord Stream 2 pipeline.[49] The PRC has not explicitly defended Russia’s invasion of Ukraine or provided lethal military aid to Russia, however.

South Asia

The militant group Baloch Liberation Army (BLA) killed two Chinese nationals in an IED attack in Karachi on October 6. The BLA opposes both the Pakistani government and Chinese investment in Pakistan and has a precedent of attacking Chinese projects and nationals there. The October 6 attack took place shortly before the upcoming Shanghai Cooperation Organization meeting in Islamabad, which will bring together regional leaders including PRC Premier Li Qiang.[50] The BLA has previously attacked Chinese workers and interests in Pakistan. Recent examples include a 2023 attack on a military convoy carrying Chinese workers in Balochistan[51] and a 2022 suicide bombing near a Confucius Institute in Karachi.[52] The BLA operates primarily in Balochistan province and rarely conducts high-profile attacks in Karachi.[53] Nikkei reported that the BLA is transitioning from a rural organization to a terrorist group capable of operating in urban environments.[54]

The Chinese embassy in Karachi responded by condemning the attack, urging Chinese citizens not to travel to Balochistan or Khyber Pakhtunkhwa,[55] and asking Pakistan to investigate. It also asked Chinese citizens and projects in Pakistan to remain vigilant and improve their security.[56] PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs member Liu Jinsong met with Pakistani Ambassador to China Hashmi on October 8 and “asked Pakistan to earnestly fulfill its commitments, do its best to do a good job in rescue and aftermath, thoroughly investigate the case, and severely punish the murderer.”[57] The Ministry of State Security (MSS), the PRC’s intelligence service, has declared that it will improve intelligence-sharing mechanisms to prevent future attacks.[58] Pakistani news sources reported that the Pakistani government is approving a security plan to ensure that the summit takes place safely following the Karachi attack.[59] Pakistani authorities recently declared that they will restrict the movement of PRC nationals visiting for the SCO meeting, although PRC Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Mao Ning denied knowledge of this plan.[60] Mao said that “China will work with Pakistan to effectively ensure the safety of Chinese personnel, projects, and institutions in Pakistan,” but did not specify the form this cooperation might take, in a press conference on October 10.[61

 

China-Taiwan Weekly Update, October 4, 2024

Click here to read the full report

Authors: Matthew Sperzel, Daniel Shats, and Alison O’Neil 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: October 1, 2024

Key Takeaways  

• Chinese Coast Guard ships entered the restricted waters of Taiwan’s Kinmen islands twice on September 26. The PRC has normalized such incursions since February to erode Taiwan’s control of the waters and assert the PRC’s right to enforce its laws there.
• The PRC has normalized a much higher volume of ADIZ incursions against Taiwan than in previous years as part of an intensified PRC pressure campaign against the new administration of Lai Ching-te.
• The PRC did not interfere with the Philippines’ resupply mission to Second Thomas Shoal.  The PRC likely intends to send a message to the Philippines that the PRC will not escalate further if the Philippines cooperates with PRC demands.
• The PRC, Brazil, and 11 other countries issued a joint communique that expresses support for the PRC-Brazil plan to end Russia’s war in Ukraine.  
• Reuters reported that a Russian defense firm established a program in the PRC to manufacture long-range attack drones for the Russian war in Ukraine. The PRC has provided dual-use components and other nonlethal equipment to support Russia’s defense industrial base. There are no corroborated reports of the PRC providing lethal aid to Russia.

• The PLA conducted military exercises and operations likely in response to a joint training exercise by the United States, Philippines, Japan, Australia, and New Zealand.  The PLA’s behavior indicates that it will maintain current levels of coercion and military presence within contested waters.

Cross-Strait Relations

Taiwan

Chinese Coast Guard (CCG) ships entered the restricted waters of Taiwan’s Kinmen islands twice on September 26. The PRC has normalized such CCG incursions since February to erode Taiwan’s control of the waters and assert the PRC’s right to enforce its laws there. Taiwan’s Coast Guard Administration (CGA) reported that four CCG 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 the same locations at 2:20 pm and left at 4:20 pm. The CGA said these were the 41^st and 42^nd such incursions in 2024.[1] The Fujian CCG announced the patrols and said their purpose is to “continuously strengthen law enforcement patrols in the waters near Kinmen, further strengthen control of relevant waters, and effectively safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of Chinese fishermen, including those in Taiwan.”[2]

The PRC began 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 September. The CCG has normalized its incursions into Kinmen’s waters despite the PRC and the ROC resolving most of the disputes related to the February 14 capsizing incident. 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 PLA has normalized very high numbers of incursions into Taiwan’s Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) each month since Lai Ching-te took office as president of Taiwan. Taiwan’s Ministry of National Defense (MND) reported that PLA aircraft crossed the median line of the Taiwan Strait and entered Taiwan’s ADIZ 322 times in September. This is less than the totals for the previous three months, but still much higher than almost all the monthly totals between January 2022 and Lai’s inauguration in May 2024. PLA incursions into Taiwan’s ADIZ climbed rapidly after Lai won Taiwan’s presidential election in January 2024 and hit a near-record high of 439 in July. The highest number of ADIZ incursions in one month was 446 in August 2022, which coincided with a massive spike in PLA activity around Taiwan following then-US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan. ADIZ incursion numbers do not include aerial activity around the Taiwanese archipelagos of Kinmen and Matsu, which are west of the median line.

The PRC has normalized a much higher volume of ADIZ incursions against Taiwan than in previous years as part of an intensified PRC pressure campaign against the new administration of Lai Ching-te, whom the PRC considers a dangerous separatist. The high frequency of ADIZ 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.

 

The PRC spoke out against a new US arms sale package to Taiwan as arms deliveries to the island continue. The White House announced a Presidential Drawdown Authority arms sale worth $567 million to Taiwan on September 29. The arms sale package will include “defense items, services, and military training."[3] CNA further reported that the new arms package will include UAVs.[4] The PRC spoke out against the sale, with PRC Foreign Ministry spokesman Lin Jian admonishing the US for supporting the “Taiwan independence attempt” and “emboldening Lai Ching-te and the DPP authorities.”[5] Taiwan News reported that its first shipment of Harpoon land-based anti-ship missiles arrived in Kaohsiung Port on September 27.[6] The United States approved the sale of these missiles in 2020 and will aim to conclude deliveries in 2028.[7]

The PRC could respond to ongoing approval and delivery of arms sale packages with sanctions, asset freezes, or bans on visits by senior executives, limiting the ability of US businesses—especially those connected to the US military—to access assets or operate in mainland China. The PRC has a range of policy options to choose from but has followed a precedent of sanctions as a response to US-Taiwan arms sales. In May and September of 2024, the PRC responded to announcements of US arms sales by freezing the assets of US-military-linked firms.[8] The PRC froze the assets of nine US firms in September and twelve US firms in May, also barring senior executives from visiting the PRC.[9] The sales that prompted these responses cost less than the sale announced on September 29, worth $567 million.

China

The Wall Street Journal reported that US investigators are investigating a hacking campaign by PRC state-sponsored threat actors that infiltrated US-based internet service providers (ISP) to conduct espionage.[10] Investigators are calling the campaign Salt Typhoon, following the Microsoft naming convention for cyber threat actors attributed to the PRC. Salt Typhoon is also known as GhostEmperor and Famous Sparrow, according to Microsoft’s cybersecurity division.[11] PRC-based threat actors’ access to US ISPs and telecommunications companies. Gaining access to the digital infrastructure of ISP and telecom companies would position PRC-based threat actors to steal sensitive data and potentially affect the flow of internet traffic.

Estonian cybersecurity research firm ESET discovered the threat actor, which it named FamousSparrow, in 2021 after observing activity that targeted hotels, engineering companies, and international and government organizations in 12 countries worldwide, including Taiwan.[12] Russian cybersecurity research firm Kaspersky publicized other malicious activity from a Chinese-speaking threat actor that it called GhostEmperor a week later.[13] Kaspersky linked GhostEmperor to FamousSparrow based on a common IP address across the activity in both companies’ investigations. Kaspersky reported that the threat actor infiltrated government entities and telecommunications companies in Southeast Asia and suggested geopolitically motivated espionage as a possible purpose, based on the targets.

The Salt Typhoon revelations follow a September 18 cybersecurity advisory from the US and UK that revealed an extensive botnet under the control of PRC state-sponsored cyber threat actor Flax Typhoon. The botnet infected over 260,000 small office/home office (SOHO) routers and internet-linked devices worldwide, almost half of which were in the US.[14]

Former US Director of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) suggested that the threat actor could be Advanced Persistent Threat 40 (APT40), another cyber threat actor that the Five Eyes, Germany, South Korea, and Japan have attributed to the PRC Ministry of State Security (MSS) Hainan branch.[15] The Wall Street Journal reported that Salt Typhoon’s focus on intelligence collection is notably different from other assessed PRC state-sponsored threat actors such as Volt Typhoon. The Five Eyes countries issued a joint advisory on February 7 that exposed Volt Typhoon’s targeting of critical infrastructure in the United States.[16] The Five Eyes countries assessed that the purpose of this campaign 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. 

PRC President Xi Jinping delivered a speech on PRC National Day that possibly aimed to rally popular support amid the PRC’s ongoing economic challenges. The PRC celebrated its National Day and the 75^th anniversary of its founding on October 1. PRC President Xi Jinping delivered a speech calling upon the nation to “resolutely oppose Taiwan independence,” notably not a part of last year’s National Day speech.[17][18] Xi’s speech emphasized the changes that China has experienced. He said that “China’s modernization has unfolded a magnificent picture,” but that “the road ahead will not be smooth” and that the PRC “must be prepared for danger in times of peace.”[19]

Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference Chairman Wang Huning likewise gave a National Day speech at a September 28 reception with high-level PRC leaders and 2000 members of the Chinese diaspora, including those from Taiwan, Hong Kong, and Macau, in attendance.[20] Wang and Xi’s National Day rhetoric reflected the PRC’s broader efforts to unite all parties around the CCP and common national goals: “Chinese-style modernization” and unity within China.[21] The intertwining notions of modernization, national unity, and strength amid economic hardship reflect the interrelatedness of these goals.

Northeast Asia

Japan

PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs Spokesperson Lin Jian criticized Japan for a joint naval transit through the Taiwan Strait with New Zealand and Australia on September 25.[22] Lin stated that the PRC was aware of the “political intentions” of Japan’s actions and reminded Japan not to interfere in Taiwan per its commitments to the PRC after normalizing relations in 1972.

The PRC has reversed its earlier held position that the Taiwan Strait is an international waterway since 2022 and claims “sole sovereignty and jurisdiction” over the strait.[23] The PRC does not deny other countries freedom to navigate through the strait, however, despite protesting the actions as provocations that support Taiwanese independence. Lin’s comments did not mention New Zealand or Australia, which sent naval ships through the strait on the same day.[24] New Zealand Defense Minister Judith Collins called it “a routine activity, consistent with international law, including the right of freedom of navigation as guaranteed under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.” The transit was the first for New Zealand since 2017.[25]

Southeast Asia

Philippines

The PRC did not interfere with the Philippines’ resupply mission to Second Thomas Shoal on September 27. The Philippines sent a civilian ship to Second Thomas Shoal on September 27 to deliver supplies to the BRP Sierra Madre.[26] The PRC did not interfere with this resupply mission, with official CCG statements saying that the PCG’s actions were in accordance with a July provisional agreement between the two states.[27] Friction arose following the initial announcement of the deal, due to a disagreement over whether the Philippines needed to provide prior notification to the PRC when conducting resupply missions.[28] Despite this point of contention and the fact that the PRC has repeatedly called for the PCG to remove the BRP Sierra Madre from what it sees as its sovereign territory, the CCG deployed to Second Thomas Shoal only monitored PCG actions throughout the resupply mission. The PLA’s actions are likely intended to send a message to the Philippines that the PRC will not escalate further if the Philippines cooperates with PRC demands.

The PLA conducted military exercises and operations likely in response to a joint training exercise by the United States, Philippines, Japan, Australia, and New Zealand.  The PLA’s behavior indicates that it will maintain current levels of coercion and military presence within contested waters. On September 28 the Philippines, Japan, United States, Australia, and New Zealand held a multilateral maritime cooperative activity (MMCA) in the Philippines EEZ intended to improve interoperability.[29] On the same day, the PLA Southern Theater Command reported that it held exercises near Scarborough Shoal focused on reconnaissance and surveillance, patrol and combat readiness, and joint strike capabilities.[30] Philippine defense authorities responded to PRC claims by rejecting the idea that PLA drills took place near Scarborough Shoal, saying that Philippine troops did not observe the activity[31] This is the second time that the PLA has held military exercises in Scarborough Shoal at the same time as joint Philippine and allied military exercises in the Philippines EEZ. This is the second time that the PLA has held military exercises in Scarborough Shoal at the same time as joint Philippine and allied military exercises in the Philippines EEZ.

Vietnam

The PRC MFA denied claims by Vietnamese state media that PRC authorities brutally beat and injured Vietnamese fishermen fishing near the disputed Paracel Islands. Vietnam’s Thanh Nien and Tien Phong newspapers reported that around 40 people aboard foreign vessels attacked 10 Vietnamese fishermen fishing near the islands on September 29. The assailants beat the Vietnamese fishermen with iron pipes and confiscated their fishing equipment. Three Vietnamese fishermen suffered broken arms or legs. [32] A Vietnamese local official said that a Chinese ship chased the fishing boat and that the armed assailants used canoes to intercept and attack the fishermen.[33] The PRC MFA said in response to a Reuters request for comment that Vietnamese fishing boats illegally fished in the waters of the Paracel Islands without the permission of the Beijing government and that relevant Chinese authorities took measures to stop them. The MFA did not mention the attack but claimed the PRC actions were “professional and restrained” and that it did not note any injuries.[34]

The Paracel Islands archipelago in the South China Sea is contested between the PRC, Taiwan, and Vietnam, but is entirely under PRC control. The PRC seized control of the archipelago from Vietnam in 1974 and has since constructed military facilities on several islands, as well as a small town on Woody Island.[35] The PRC claims a straight territorial baseline around the archipelago, which means it claims full sovereignty over all waters between the islands as internal waters rather than the standard territorial waters extending 12 nautical miles seaward from each island. It asserts the right to restrict unauthorized access to foreign nationals. International law does not recognize the PRC’s straight-baseline claim, however. The United States military has routinely conducted Freedom of Navigation Operations through the relevant waters to contest this PRC claim.

Russia

Reuters reported that a Russian defense firm established a program in the PRC to manufacture long-range attack drones for the Russian war in Ukraine. The PRC has provided dual-use components and other nonlethal equipment to support Russia’s defense industrial base. There are no corroborated reports of the PRC providing lethal aid to Russia. Reuters cited two anonymous European intelligence sources and documents it obtained which indicated that IEMZ Kupol, a subsidiary of Russian state-owned arms company Almaz-Antey, developed a long-range drone with help from PRC specialists and was manufacturing it on PRC soil. The US government levied sanctions on IEMZ Kupol in December 2023. Reuters said documents sent by IEMZ Kupol to the Russian defense ministry said the company developed the new Garpiya-3 (G3) drone with PRC assistance and could manufacture it “at scale” in the PRC for use in Russia’s war in Ukraine. Invoices reviewed by Reuters from a Russian firm that serves as an intermediary between IEMZ Kupol and PRC suppliers showed that unidentified PRC suppliers delivered seven drones, including two G3s, to IEMZ Kupol’s Izhevsk headquarters on unspecified dates. Another Reuters report from September 13 reported that Kupol used PRC engines and parts of its Garpiya-A1 drones in 2023. Reuters said the G3 drone model is an upgraded version of the G-A1 drone that was modified with help from PRC engineers. Other documents showed that IEMZ Kupol was working with the Russian defense firm TSK Vektor as an intermediary and the Shenzhen-based PRC firm Redlepus TSK Vector Industrial. One showed plans by IEMZ Kupol, TSK Vektor, and Redlepus to establish a joint Russian-PRC “Advanced UAV Research and Manufacturing Base” in the Kashgar special economic zone of the PRC’s Xinjiang province.[36] ISW cannot independently corroborate the Reuters reports at this time.

The PRC MFA told Reuters it was unaware of a Russia-PRC drone production project and that the PRC had strict export controls on drones. A US National Security Council spokesperson said that the United States had not seen any evidence that the PRC government was aware of the transactions or had any involvement in providing lethal aid to Russia.[37] The United States, Ukraine, and other countries have accused the PRC of supplying dual-use components such as semiconductors to Russia that are used in Russian military equipment. They have not publicized any cases of the PRC providing lethal equipment, however. Corroborated evidence of PRC firms providing lethal assistance to US-sanctioned Russian firms or jointly collaborating with Russia to produce lethal equipment would show a significant departure from the PRC’s cautious approach to supporting Russia and undermine the PRC’s professed neutrality on the war in Ukraine.

The PRC, Brazil, and 11 other countries issued a joint communique that expresses support for the PRC-Brazil plan to end Russia’s war in Ukraine. The PRC-Brazil plan is a “six-point consensus on the political resolution to the Ukraine crisis” on May 23 to set conditions for a political settlement based on the UN charter through inclusive diplomacy.[38] It outlines a series of vague steps to de-escalate the war and does not meet Ukraine’s base condition of Russia’s withdrawal from occupied territory.[39] Ukraine, the United States, and the European Union have dismissed the plan, despite PRC claims of widespread support from the international community.[40] The plan demands equal participation by both Ukraine and Russia at international peace summits.

Algeria, Bolivia, Colombia, Egypt, Indonesia, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Mexico, South Africa, Turkey, and Zambia expressed support for the plan through the joint communique. The PRC called Brazil, Indonesia, and South Africa “important members of the Global South” on July 26 before PRC Special Representative for Eurasian Affairs Li Hui conducted a round of shuttle diplomacy in the three countries to generate support for the PRC’s role as a mediator.[41]

The communique is a product of the PRC and Brazil-led “Friends of Peace” forum, which is devoted to expanding dialogue and giving Global South countries a voice to advance a “political settlement of the Ukraine issue.”[42] PRC Foreign Minister Wang Yi, Brazilian Foreign Minister Mauro Vieira, and Brazilian Chief Presidential Advisor Celso Luiz Nunes Amorim co-chaired the opening meeting of the forum at the UN headquarters in New York on September 27. [43] The PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) stated that representatives from 17 Global South countries attended.

Ukraine’s interest in involving the Global South in the peace process explains the PRC’s emphasis on winning approval from Global South countries for its role as a mediator. Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba and Deputy Head of the Office of the President Igor Zhovkva stated in June that Ukraine is interested in having a Global South country host a second peace summit, which Ukraine aims to hold before the end of the year.[44]

Zelenskyy called the PRC-Brazil plan “destructive” on September 12, however, and warned during the UNGA on September 25 that attempts to win over other countries to the plan conceal interests that are different from achieving a “full and just peace.”^[45] Then-NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg criticized Turkey on September 30 for endorsing the plan and stated that NATO countries should fully support Ukraine’s conditions for peace.[46]

The PRC will likely use the Friends of Peace forum to promote conditions for peace that are favorable to Russia. Attaching the label of Global South to the forum and associating the group’s joint communique with the PRC-Brazil peace plan enables the PRC to claim that its plan for reaching a “political solution” represents the collective Global South’s position. The PRC can use the PRC-Brazil plan to shape the course of the war by advocating for Russia’s representation at peace summits and calling for a ceasefire without demanding Russia’s evacuation from occupied territory.

The PRC and Russian militaries began their fifth joint naval patrol in the Northwest Pacific. The PRC and Russia held the first four joint maritime patrols in October 2021, September 2022, July 2023, and July 2024, making 2024 the first year that the PRC and Russia conducted the exercise twice in one year.[47]

The PRC and Russia concluded the 18-day PRC-led Northern/Interaction exercise on September 27. The Russian Ministry of Defense (MOD) announced that PRC and Russian naval vessels that participated in the Northern/Interaction exercises replenished supplies in the Sea of Okhotsk and initiated their joint exercise in the Northwest Pacific.[48] PRC military aircraft and naval vessels also participated in the Russian-led Okean-2024 exercises between two phases of Northern/Interaction.

The PRC and Russia also initiated joint coast guard patrols in the Northwest Pacific on September 13.[49] PRC state media claimed that the joint patrols aim to improve coordination and organization between the two countries and enhance their ability to “jointly respond to various maritime security threats.”[50] The China Coast Guard (CCG) and Russia’s Federal Security Service (FSB) first announced a memorandum of understanding regarding coast guard cooperation in April 2023 to strengthen maritime law enforcement.[51] The US Coast Guard (USCG) located four Russian Border Guard and CCG vessels conducting a joint patrol in the Bering Sea on September 28, marking the northernmost location where the USCG has observed CCG vessels.[52] The USCG stated that the vessels remained five miles within Russia’s Exclusive Economic Zone.

China-Taiwan Weekly Update, September 27, 2024

Click here to read the full report

Authors: Matthew Sperzel, Daniel Shats, and Alison O’Neil 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: September 27, 2024

Key Takeaways

• The PRC Ministry of State Security claimed that a hacker group called Anonymous 64 is a “cyber army” affiliated with the Taiwanese military's Information, Communications, and Electronic Force Command. Taiwan rejected the accusation.
• The PRC canceled tariff exemptions for 34 Taiwanese agricultural products on September 25. The PRC likely intends to undermine popular Taiwanese support for the DPP through fear of economic repercussions as a result of its cross-strait policy.
• The PRC condemned the latest US arms sale to Taiwan as support for Taiwan’s independence and froze the assets of nine companies in response to the sale.
• The PRC test-launched an intercontinental ballistic missile into the Pacific Ocean for the first time since 1980.
• PLA Southern Theater Commander General Wu Yanan attended the Chiefs of Defense conference in Hawaii and met with US Indo-Pacific Command chief Admiral Samuel Paparo. The PRC is increasing its emphasis on military diplomacy likely to stabilize bilateral relations in anticipation of the US administration change in 2025 and amid escalation in the South China Sea.
• A PLA aircraft carrier sailed through Japan’s contiguous zone for the first time. The transit may be part of a pattern of the PRC testing Japan’s military response.
• The Philippine Coast Guard has resumed its patrol of Sabina Shoal, fulfilling its promises to return to the disputed territory and ensure that the Shoal does not fall under PRC control. The CCG may deny Philippine resupply missions access to Sabina Shoal to compel the PCG to withdraw from the shoal.

Cross-Strait Relations

Taiwan

The PRC Ministry of State Security (MSS) claimed in a WeChat post that a hacker group called Anonymous 64 is a “cyber army” affiliated with Taiwan's Information, Communications, and Electronic Force Command (ICEFCOM) under the Ministry of National Defense.[1] The post claimed that the command is responsible for carrying out cyber operations, information operations, cognitive warfare, electronic warfare, and public opinion warfare against the PRC. The MSS doxxed three members of the ROC military in its post and claimed that they are active-duty personnel of ICEFCOM. The MSS accused ICEFCOM of malicious cyber operations against the PRC that target the aerospace, defense, and energy industries to steal data and collect intelligence for the ROC government. The MSS also accused ICEFCOM of manipulating public opinion and hiring trolls to undermine the PRC’s political system. ICEFCOM rejected the accusations in a statement and stated that it is responsible for information and network security for national defense.[2]

The PRC’s accusations against Taiwan are possibly a response to recent revelations about its own hacking operations. The US Department of Justice announced on September 18 a law enforcement operation that disabled botnet malware that PRC state-sponsored cyber threat actor Flax Typhoon controlled.[3] Flax Typhoon gained notoriety for its extensive penetration of Taiwanese networks, including government agencies, educational institutions, critical manufacturing industries, and information technology companies. PRC claims that aggressors are targeting it in cyberspace usually come soon after revelations of hacking operations by PRC state-sponsored cyber threat actors.[4] The PRC has deflected accusations of hacking with claims counter accusations against other countries, which portray it as a victim of foreign transgressions in cyberspace.[5]

Cybersecurity researchers at Microsoft and Recorded Future’s Insikt Group published threat intelligence reports in August 2023 and June that analyze Flax Typhoon’s (also known as RedJuliett) cyber activity and operations.[6] Both reports assessed that Flax Typhoon is a PRC nation-state actor that targeted Taiwanese entities for espionage purposes.[7] Insikt Group identified threat actor IP addresses that geolocated to Fuzhou in the PRC’s Fujian province across the Taiwan Strait, which is home to the PRC’s Taiwan-focused non-kinetic operations center Base 311. Base 311 is responsible for the same categories of operations that the MSS accused ICEFCOM of conducting against the PRC, including cyber, electronic, and informational warfare.[8] A cybersecurity advisory from the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) on September 18 stated that Flax Typhoon is the publicly traded PRC-based company Integrity Technology Group, which the FBI claimed had links to the PRC government.[9] The FBI stated that Integrity Technology Group has operated its botnet since 2021 and it controlled and infected more than 260,000 devices worldwide, almost half of which were in the United States.[10]

The PRC canceled tariff exemptions for 34 Taiwanese agricultural products on September 25.[11] The PRC likely intends for the reinstatement of tariffs to undermine popular Taiwanese support for the DPP through fear of economic repercussions for its cross-strait policy. Taiwan Affairs Office spokesperson Chen Binhua framed the measures as a necessary response to combat the separatist policies of Lai Ching-te’s administration.[12] Chen accused the Lai administration of escalating cross-strait hostility with independence policies and “unilaterally restrict[ing] the import of more than 1,000 agricultural products from the mainland.” Chen claimed that the PRC is committed to cross-strait economic integration and cares about Taiwanese farmers and fishermen. Chen urged Taiwanese farmers and fishermen to recognize the harm that the DPP government inflicts on cross-strait relations by pursuing independence.

Reinstating tariffs across a wide range of Taiwanese agricultural exports aims to generate concern among Taiwanese farmers and fishermen for their livelihoods. Explicitly blaming the measures on the Lai administration aims to direct their frustration to the DPP government and reduce political support for the party by associating its incumbency with turbulence in cross-strait relations. The PRC’s justification for reinstating the tariffs is consistent with that of past coercive economic measures.[13] On the other hand, the PRC attributes reconciliation over economic disputes to successful negotiation with the Kuomintang (KMT), which the CCP favors due to its willingness to pursue closer cross-strait relations.[14]

Taiwan’s Mainland Affairs Council (MAC) criticized the PRC for weaponizing trade as a tool of coercion for political purposes and highlighted how fickle the PRC’s self-proclaimed “goodwill” towards Taiwan is.[15] The PRC is the largest export market for many of the affected goods. Taiwan’s Ministry of Agriculture stated that if paid, the tariffs will only raise costs by approximately USD 1 million across all 34 affected goods, however.[16]

The PRC has previously imposed trade restrictions on Taiwanese exports that disproportionately affect certain constituencies, likely to exert targeted economic pressure against certain stakeholders that collectively hold political influence.[17] The variety in the affected products, which includes a range of fruits, vegetables, and seafood, does not suggest that the measures are geographically focused. The PRC has also previously targeted broad swaths of Taiwanese goods, including reinstating tariffs on 134 different industrial goods in June after Lai’s inauguration.[18] The TAO’s appeal to Taiwanese farmers and fishermen at large, however, indicates a broader target to sway political opinion.

The PRC condemned the latest US arms sale to Taiwan as support for Taiwan’s independence and froze the assets of nine companies in response to the sale. The United States approved a $228 million arms sale for Taiwan last week. The sale is mostly for spare parts and repair packages.[19] Taipei Times reported on September 22 that Biden is close to approving another arms sale package worth $567 million that the Pentagon has already approved.[20] The pending sale would be the largest to Taiwan to date and would support training and multidomain awareness, in addition to drone warfare. The PRC admonished the US not to support “Taiwan independence” and to adhere to the one-China principle.[21] The PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs has already given an official statement condemning the sales, and the PRC will implement property freezes against nine US firms following last week’s announcement of the $228 million arms sale.[22] These military-linked companies — S3 Aerospace, Exovera, and others — will have their assets frozen in China. Further PRC responses, including but not limited to sanctions and asset freezes, could follow the reported $567 million arms sale announcement as well.

China

The PRC test-launched an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) into the Pacific Ocean for the first time since 1980. The People’s Liberation Army launched an ICBM into the Pacific Ocean on September 25 The PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) claimed that the launch was part of routine training.[23] The PRC Ministry of National Defense (MOD) also stated that the training took place in accordance with international law and was not directed at any specific country.[24] PRC Ministry of National Defense spokesman Zhang Xiaogang reiterated this stance on September 26, claiming that the test launch was routine and reiterating the PRC’s no-first-use policy.[25] The PRC claimed that it “informed the relevant countries” and warned the United States before the launch.[26] It also warned the Japan Coast Guard of “space debris.”[27] The PRC did not disclose the launch site or landing location, but Newsweek placed the likely launch site in the southern province of Hainan. The dummy warhead reportedly landed in the ocean north of Tahiti, 7400 miles away.[28]

The circumstances of the ICBM test set it apart from other routine military exercises. The PRC has not launched an ICBM into the Pacific since 1980 and usually conducts missile tests in Xinjiang or the Bohai Sea.[29][30] The PRC did not elaborate on the rationale for conducting the recent test in the Pacific or for the timing of the launch. The timing of the ICBM test aligns with the expansion of the PRC’s nuclear arsenal, however. The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) estimates 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.[31] 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.[32] The PRC has continuously restated its no-first-use nuclear policy and attempted to cast itself as a responsible nuclear power as it expands its nuclear arsenal.[33]

PLA Southern Theater Commander General Wu Yanan attended the Chiefs of Defense (CHODs) conference in Hawaii and met with US Indo-Pacific Command (INDOPACOM) chief Admiral Samuel Paparo. The PRC is increasing its emphasis on military diplomacy likely to stabilize bilateral relations in anticipation of the US administration change in 2025 and amid escalation in the South China Sea. US INDOPACOM hosted the conference from September 18–20 with participation from 28 countries and multinational organizations and a stated aim “to enhance mutual understanding, cooperation, and a consistent operational framework while underscoring international commitment to protecting shared interests across the region.”[34] PLA Southern Theater Command chief General Wu Yanan led the PRC delegation to the conference and met with Paparo two weeks after their video call on September 10.[35] The PRC readout noted that Wu attended the conference at the invitation of the United States and said the two sides “exchanged views candidly and in-depth on issues of common concern,” without mentioning any specific issues. The readout from the Wu-Paparo video call used similarly vague language. Both readouts also said the two sides were implementing the consensus reached by the leaders of both countries, referring to the US-PRC agreement in November 2023 to resume high-level military-to-military talks.[36]

Official PRC government statements and state media coverage about the Paparo-Wu refrained from criticizing the United States or mentioning PRC grievances. PRC state-owned tabloid Global Times quoted PLA expert Zhang Junshe as saying that General Wu’s participation in CHODs “is conducive to reducing misunderstandings and misjudgments of the frontline forces at sea and in the air in the South China Sea as well as risks of maritime and aerial accident.” It cited an unspecified PRC military expert who said Wu’s visit to Hawaii “showed China's sincerity in managing and controlling differences through talks,” and that the United States' invitation “showed that the US does not want to have unintended military frictions with China either.” The Global Times reporting struck a positive tone and refrained from criticizing the United States even though the outlet is well-known for its jingoistic views.[37]

The tone of the PRC readouts differs from many previous high-level bilateral engagements, including US National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan’s meetings with PRC Foreign Minister Wang Yi and Central Military Commission Vice Chair Zhang Youxia in late August. Wang raised a range of grievances on Taiwan, the Philippines, trade, and sanctions, while Zhang warned that the United States must not cross the PRC’s “red line” on Taiwan.[38] A similar tone shift was evident from the readouts of the 18th US-PRC Defense Policy Coordination Talks (DPCT) in Beijing on September 15. The PRC readout simply said the two sides “exchanged in-depth views on the relationship between the Chinese and U.S. militaries, the next stage of exchanges between the two militaries, and issues of common concern,” while the US readout mentioned US concerns about several topics including PRC behavior in the South China Sea and its support for Russia’s defense industrial base.[39] The tone and level of detail in the readout sharply contrasted with the equivalent from the 17th DPCT in January 2024, which stressed that the US side needs to take PRC concerns seriously, “demanded” the United States abide by the One China Principle and stop arming Taiwan, urged the United States to “reduce military presence and provocation in the South China Sea” and “strictly discipline troops on the ground,” and other strongly-worded grievances.[40]

The different tone of the Wu-Paparo meetings and DPCT also reflects a change in how the PRC views military-to-military communication with the United States. PRC has previously used military-to-military talks as a bargaining chip to influence US behavior, most notably when it suspended such talks in August 2022 in response to then-US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan. By contrast, PLA Lieutenant General He Lei told Global Times before the Beijing Xiangshan Forum on September 13 that the relationship between the PRC and US militaries is “the stabilizer and the ballast stone of bilateral ties” and that “any communication is better than no communication.” He said that defense talks are “constructive for strengthening strategic communication, avoiding miscalculations, and managing divergences and risks.”[41] MOD spokesperson Zhang Xiaogang said on September 26 that US-PRC military relations are “stabilizing,” though he urged the United States to “correct its strategic perception of China.”[42]

The high frequency of high-level defense talks in September and the PRC rhetoric surrounding them shows that the PRC likely is worried about unintentional conflict escalation with the United States, especially in the South China Sea, and wishes to prevent such escalation. The PLA Southern Theater Command is responsible for the South China Sea.

The PRC may also fear major US policy changes after the upcoming US presidential election. PRC authorities have consistently declined to comment on US elections and do not appear to have a clear preference between the two current presidential candidates, having strongly criticized the policies of both the Trump and Biden administrations toward the PRC.[43] The PRC showed anxiety about sudden US policy shifts late in the 2020 election, however. Global Times speculated in October 2020 that the Trump administration might try to “play the Taiwan card” as part of an “October Surprise” to boost its reelection chances.[44] Former Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff General Mark Milley revealed that PRC military leaders were “worried about an attack” from the United States shortly before and after the US election. Milley made two phone calls to PLA General Li Zuochang, then chief of the Central Military Commission’s Joint Staff Department, in the last months of the Trump administration to reassure the PRC that the United States had no plans for a surprise attack.[45]

The recent change in the PRC’s engagement with US defense officials and how it frames military-to-military meetings suggests that the PRC seeks to mitigate the risks of a change in US policy. Building strong relationships with US military leaders who will remain in their current positions through the transition and into the next US administration could ensure that the PRC maintains lines of communication with the United States.

The PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) called the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue a tool for the United States to “contain China and maintain US hegemony.” US President Joe Biden hosted Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida, and Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese in Wilmington, Delaware, for a Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (Quad) leaders’ summit. Biden told the other leaders in comments unintentionally overheard by the press that the PRC is behaving aggressively in the South China Sea, East China Sea, and other places to “test” the United States and its partners.[46] MFA spokesperson Lin Jian dismissed US claims that the Quad does not target the PRC as a “lie with open eyes,” saying that the PRC was the “first topic of the summit.” Lin urged the United States to “let go of its obsession with maintaining hegemony and containing China, stop using regional countries as tools, [and] stop whitewashing the strategic intentions of various ‘small circles,’” rather than “seeking selfish interests at the expense of the strategic security interests of other countries and the well-being of the people in the Asia-Pacific region.” Lin criticized the Quad’s announcement that it would begin coast guard cooperation including a joint coast guard mission involving all four countries in 2025. He said cooperation between countries should be “conducive to promoting regional peace, stability and prosperity, rather than forming closed and exclusive ‘small circles’ that undermine mutual trust and cooperation among regional countries.” Lin also described the situations in the South and East China Seas as “generally stable” in response to concerns raised by Quad leaders at the summit.[47] The South China Sea has been the site of dramatic confrontations between the PRC and the Philippines over disputed territories like Sabina Shoal and Second Thomas Shoal throughout 2024, with the PRC employing aggressive means like ramming to block Philippine supply missions and force the Philippines out of disputed areas. MOD spokesperson Zhang Xiaogang defended the PRC’s actions as legitimate, accused the Quad of “smearing” the PRC in its joint statement, and claimed the United States was the one guilty of “coercion and bullying” in the region due to its deployments of “offensive weapons” and joint exercises with allies in the region.[48]

PRC state media likewise portrayed the Quad as a destabilizing and hegemonic force in the region that is targeting the PRC.[49] Editorials in English-language state media Global Times and China Daily portrayed the partnership as ineffective, however. They claimed that the Quad has made little concrete progress to address “global challenges” in the last three years due to a lack of unity among the four member countries, which all have their own national interests and major trade relationships with the PRC.[50]

Northeast Asia

Japan

A PLA aircraft carrier sailed through Japan’s contiguous zone for the first time. The transit may be part of a pattern of the PRC testing Japan’s military response. The PLA Navy (PLAN) aircraft carrier Liaoning sailed through a passage between Japan’s Yonaguni and Iriomote islands on the way to carry out drills in the Western Pacific Ocean on September 18.[51] The ship and two destroyers that accompanied it passed through Japan’s contiguous zone during its transit.

Japan's Deputy Chief Cabinet Secretary Hiroshi Moriya said the incident was “totally unacceptable from the perspective of the security environment of Japan and the region.”[52] PRC Ministry of National Defense (MOD) Spokesperson Zhang Xiaogang said the carrier was on its way to conduct “routine training” and that there is no need to “over-interpret” its transit.[53]

The Liaoning’s transit was the first time a PLA aircraft carrier sailed through the narrow passage but part of a pattern of PLAN ships increasingly sailing to the Pacific Ocean through waterways other than the Miyako Strait. The Miyako Strait is the widest waterway through Japan’s Ryukyu Islands, between the East China Sea and the Pacific Ocean. Statistics from Japan’s Joint Staff show that a majority of PLA ships passed through the Miyako Strait when traveling to the Western Pacific Ocean from 2018 to 2023, but only 43 percent of them used that route in 2024. The PLAN began using the Yonaguni Channel, which is between Yonaguni and Taiwan, in 2021. The route accounted for over 26 percent of total PLAN transits from the East China Sea to the Western Pacific between January and August 2024.[54] PRC state-owned tabloid Global Times cited PLA expert Fu Qianshao who said the transit demonstrated that the PLAN can break through the First Island Chain through multiple routes besides the Miyako Strait.[55] Yonaguni and Iriomote are Japan’s southwesternmost islands and the closest Japanese islands to Taiwan. The capability to sail through multiple waterways in the Ryukyu island chain could be important to the PLA’s ability to land on Taiwan’s east coast and disrupt Western supply lines in a potential war.

The Liaoning’s passage through Japan’s contiguous zone may be part of a pattern of the PRC testing Japan’s military response. A PLA reconnaissance aircraft briefly flew into Japan’s territorial airspace on August 26 for the first time since World War II. The PRC claimed the airspace violation was a “regrettable” accident.[56] A PLAN survey ship sailed through Japan’s territorial waters off Kagoshima Prefecture on August 31 in an incident that the PRC justified as a “completely legitimate” transit under the UNCLOS provision for “innocent passage.” The transit was the tenth time in the past year that a PLAN survey ship entered Japan’s territorial waters, or the 13th if including submarines and other intelligence-gathering ships.[57] A Russian reconnaissance plane also breached Japan’s territorial airspace near Hokkaido three times on September 23, a day after Russia and the PRC conducted joint naval exercises in the Sea of Japan.[58]

A contiguous zone is a region of water between 12 and 24 nautical miles from a country’s coast in which the country can conduct some law enforcement actions. A contiguous zone is not part of a country’s sovereign territory under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), however, and countries cannot block the passage of foreign ships through their contiguous zone. The PRC itself has often protested the passage of foreign military vessels through waters in which it claims jurisdiction but does not have internationally recognized sovereignty, however, including the middle of the Taiwan Strait and waters between the disputed Paracel Islands. Beijing also protested an intrusion by a Japanese destroyer on July 4 that sailed into PRC territorial waters within 12 nautical miles of Zhejiang Province. Japan’s Maritime Self-Defense Force said on September 22 that the intrusion was a “serious error” and that it fired the naval officer responsible, but maintains that even military vessels have a right of “innocent passage” through territorial waters of other countries.[59]

The PRC warned the United States and Japan not to proceed with a tentative US plan to deploy intermediate-range missiles to Japan for the first time. US Secretary of the Army Christine Wormuth stated on September 4 that the United States is interested in seeing the Multi-Domain Task Force operate in Japan through exercises. The Multi-Domain Task Force is a new US Army unit that hosts the mid-range Typhon missile system. Wormuth said the United States is especially interested in being able to move equipment and soldiers to Japan’s southwest Ryukyu Islands, which are located very close to Taiwan.[60] MFA spokesperson Lin Jian said on September 18 that the United States is promoting the deployment of weapons including intermediate-range missiles in the Asia-Pacific region to seek “absolute military superiority.” He claimed the deployment would intensify regional arms races and tensions and threaten regional peace. He urged the United States to abandon the deployment plan and advised Japan to “be aware of the real intentions of the United States.”[61] MOD spokesperson Zhang Xiaogang made similar comments and warned Japan “not to invite wolves into the house or cater to the United States, otherwise it will only push itself into danger.”[62]

The PRC is likely worried that a US deployment of missiles near PRC territory through exercises will become a permanent deployment. The PRC repeatedly protested the deployment of the Typhon missile system to the Philippines for training exercises, using similar rhetoric. Philippine officials initially said the missiles were part of a temporary training program and would be removed in September, but later said on September 20 that there is no timeline to remove the missiles.[63] Wormuth said the missile system’s monthslong deployment to the Philippines would be a model for future deployments. The Typhon system can launch the Tomahawk cruise missile, which can strike targets more than 1,600 km away, and the Standard Missile-6 multipurpose interceptor, which has a range of up to 370 km.[64] Tomahawk missiles deployed on Japan’s southwest islands east of Taiwan could strike deep into PRC territory, while the short-range SM-6 missiles could hit targets throughout most of the Taiwan Strait.

Southeast Asia

Philippines

The Philippine Coast Guard (PCG) has resumed its patrol of Sabina Shoal, fulfilling its promises to return to the disputed territory and ensure that the shoal does not fall under PRC control. The CCG may deny Philippine resupply missions access to Sabina Shoal to compel the PCG to withdraw from the shoal. On September 22 the PCG deployed an unnamed vessel to Sabina Shoal to replace the recently withdrawn BRP Teresa Magbanua.[65] The PCG withdrew the BRP Teresa Magbanua from Sabina Shoal on September 15, citing medical concerns, a lack of essential supplies, and incoming bad weather.[66] The BRP Teresa Magbanua had been deployed to Sabina Shoal for five months, during which the CCG harassed the PCG vessel and blocked resupply missions from delivering supplies to Coast Guard personnel aboard. While some media outlets interpreted the PCG’s withdrawal from Sabina Shoal as a sign of their acquiescence to PRC demands, the PCG maintained that their decision to withdraw was neither a sign of them ceding territory to the PRC nor an indication of a diplomatic agreement being signed between the two states.[67] PRC MOD spokesperson Zhang Xiaogang addressed the situation in Sabina Shoal in a September 26 press conference, saying that the withdrawal of PCG vessels from the Shoal is the only way to restore peace and stability to the disputed waters.[68] The PRC asserted its sovereignty over Sabina Shoal and Second Thomas Shoal and emphasized that the PRC will counter any infringement into PRC territory to protect its maritime rights.

The PRC has maintained a significant and sustained presence at Sabina Shoal.[69] These ships included CCG ships, PLA Navy warships, and Chinese maritime militia vessels. The highest number of PRC vessels were reported in Sabina Shoal and Second Thomas Shoal, where the grounded BRP Sierra Madre is located.

Russia

The PRC and Russia launched the second phase of the PRC-led joint naval exercises “Northern Interaction 2024” in Vladivostok on September 21.[70] The exercises will take place in the Sea of Japan and will involve air defense and anti-submarine drills, according to the Russian state-owned news outlet RIA Novosti.[71] The second phase of Northern Interaction 2024 was the latest in a spate of PRC-Russia joint exercises that started on September 10. The PRC and Russia completed the first phase of the joint military exercises on September 15, before initiating other drills as part of the large-scale Russian-led Ocean 2024 military exercises in the Pacific and Arctic Oceans on September 16.[72]

The PRC and Russia are conducting increasingly frequent joint military exercises in recent years and expanding the scope of their cooperation. The two countries have now held joint exercises in at least five different parts of the world since July, including naval exercises in the South China Sea, Gulf of Finland, Sea of Japan, Sea of Okhotsk, and Northern Pacific.[73] PRC and Russian bombers entered the US air defense identification zone near Alaska for the first time together on July 24.[74] PRC and Russian naval vessels sailed together in the United States’ EEZ in international waters near Alaska in September 2022 and August 2023.[75] PRC naval ships and Russian naval ships sailed separately into the United States’ EEZ near Alaska on July 10 and September 16, respectively.[76]

The PRC and Russia are also increasing coast guard cooperation. The PRC announced on September 13 that PRC and Russian coast guard fleets will conduct joint patrols in the Northern Pacific, which lasted from September 16–20.[77] PRC state media claimed that the joint patrols aim to improve coordination and organization between the two countries and enhance their ability to “jointly respond to various maritime security threats.”[78] The China Coast Guard (CCG) and Russia’s Federal Security Service (FSB) first announced a memorandum of understanding regarding coast guard cooperation in April 2023 to strengthen maritime law enforcement.[79]

Middle East

The PRC voiced concerns about Lebanon’s sovereignty in response to the escalation of the war in the Middle East. PRC MFA spokesperson Lin Jian said the PRC is “highly concerned” about the detonation of Hezbollah communication equipment and said the PRC opposes any infringements on Lebanon’s sovereignty and security. He expressed concern that the incidents may escalate regional tensions and called on “all parties concerned” to maintain peace and stability in the Middle East.[80] The MFA avoids making similar statements on sovereignty when attacks occur in Israel, typically urging general de-escalation and advocating for a two-state solution.[81]

Taiwanese news reported PRC “cognitive warfare” and a “smear campaign” against Taiwan in connection with the pager explosions that occurred in Lebanon last week. US media reported that the Taiwanese firm Gold Apollo produced the pagers.[82] Gold Apollo denied producing the pagers and said that the firm that manufactured these pagers, the Budapest-based company BAC Consulting KFT, had been licensing its brand.[83] Gold Apollo released a statement saying that the company only provided brand trademark authorization for BAC to sell the products in certain regions. Gold Apollo stated that it was involved neither in the design nor the production of the pagers. Taiwan’s Ministry of Economic Affairs also gave a statement on the event, saying that Gold Apollo had no records of exporting directly to Lebanon in recent years and that Taiwanese-made products would not explode. The ROC Ministry of Foreign Affairs also gave a statement on the pagers, saying that “from 2022 to August 2024, the company exported 260,000 sets of pagers, mainly to European and American countries, and there were no explosions in related products reported by the media.”[84]

Taiwan’s Central News Agency (CNA) cited unnamed officials who reported that national security investigations blamed Beijing for cognitive operations attempting to pin the blame for the pager explosions on Taiwan. CNA cited rumors on Chinese social media networks that Israel and Taiwan had colluded and that “although no Chinese official media has yet directly intervened, these accounts participating in the smear campaign have long been publishing posts to cooperate with the Chinese government’s anti-Western and anti-democracy and touting China’s characteristics.”[85] The PRC declined to comment on accusations of Taiwanese involvement.[86]

China-Taiwan Weekly Update, September 20, 2024

click here to read the full report

Authors: Matthew Sperzel, Daniel Shats, and Alison O’Neil 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: September 17, 2024

Key Takeaways

• The CCP framed the corruption case against Taiwan People’s Party founder Ko Wen-je as part of a “Green Terror” campaign by Taiwan’s ruling Democratic Progressive Party to persecute “dissidents.”
• Four Chinese Coast Guard ships intruded into Taiwan’s “restricted waters” around Kinmen on two consecutive days in a continuing effort to assert PRC jurisdiction over the waters.
• The 2024 Beijing Xiangshan Forum points toward an increase in the PRC’s international security cooperation, most notably with Russia.
• The PRC used the BRICS high-level meeting of representatives for security affairs in St. Petersburg to promote the forum as the voice of the Global South.
• The Philippines withdrew the BRP Theresa Magbanua from Sabina Shoal following four weeks of the CCG blocking Philippine resupply missions to the Shoal. The CCG could replicate this strategy against other PCG ships, such as the BRP Sierra Madre in the Second Thomas Shoal.

Cross-Strait Relations

Taiwan

The CCP framed the corruption case against Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) founder Ko Wen-je as part of a “Green Terror” campaign by Taiwan’s ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) to persecute “dissidents.” Taipei authorities detained Ko Wen-je incommunicado on September 5 in connection with a corruption case from his time as mayor of Taipei in 2014–2022. Prosecutors allege that Ko and members of his mayoral administration accepted bribes to approve the expansion of a shopping mall, which dramatically increased the property’s value.[1] Ko is the founder of the TPP, Taiwan’s third-largest political party, and was the party chair until August 29 when he announced a three-month leave over an unrelated campaign finance scandal from his 2024 presidential run.[2] CCP Taiwan Affairs Office (TAO) spokesperson Chen Binhua responded to a question about Ko’s arrest by claiming that Taiwanese public opinion believes President Lai Ching-te has been perpetrating a “Green Terror” and “using judicial means to suppress dissidents for his political interests.” “Green Terror” is a reference to the DPP’s color, green, and the “White Terror” period of martial law in Taiwan from 1947–1987.[3] The CCP is connecting the two to undermine popular support for the DPP administration by portraying the DPP as corrupt and tyrannical.

The CCP is framing the Ko case as part of the “Green Terror” likely to capitalize on sentiments among a minority of Taiwan’s population that the case against Ko Wen-je is political persecution. Support for Ko is far more mainstream in Taiwan than support for the pro-reunification activities that the CCP typically claims are being “persecuted.” The TPP accused the DPP government of politically persecuting Ko and framed the case against him as a crisis of judicial integrity. It maintains that Ko is innocent.[4] A recent poll by the Taiwan Public Opinion Foundation (TPOF) found that 28.6% of respondents agreed with the statement that the case against Ko is political persecution by the ruling party, while 54.6% disagreed.[5]

Chen also used the “Green Terror” allegation in the context of two other cases. Taiwan’s Pingtung District Court sentenced two local leaders of the fringe Reunification Alliance Party to four and a half years in prison for colluding with the CCP to interfere in Taiwan’s 2024 elections. The two men recruited people to go on “free” trips to the PRC with funding from the TAO, took the trip participants to meet with PRC officials, and urged them to vote for certain candidates outside their party.[6] Taiwan is also investigating retired general Tsang You-hsia for standing for the PRC national anthem while attending a pro-reunification event in Hong Kong. Tsang is a former chairman of the now-defunct Huang Fuh-hsing department of the Kuomintang (KMT), Taiwan’s main opposition party.[7] Chen condemned both cases as evidence of the DPP’s “Green Terror” and abuse of power. He claimed that “anyone may be the next victim” of the DPP’s “plot” to persecute supporters of “cross-strait exchanges.”[8]

The CCP reiterated that its measures against Taiwanese “separatism” target only a very small minority of “‘Taiwan independence’ diehards” and will not affect the vast majority of the Taiwanese people who live, work, or travel in the PRC. The PRC issued new legal guidelines on the punishment of Taiwanese “separatists” on June 21 which recommended severe punishments up to the death penalty for activities that promote Taiwan’s independence.[9] It established an email mailbox for reporting such “separatist” activities on August 7.[10] TAO spokesperson Chen Binhua said on September 11 that PRC authorities would carefully verify and identify any tips it receives through the mailbox and crack down on the “very small number of ‘Taiwan independence’ diehards and their separatist activities.” Chen denied Taiwanese media reports that some Taiwanese businessmen in the PRC were reported through the mailbox and harassed and that many of them left the PRC. He claimed the media reports had “ulterior motives” to deceptively conflate the vast majority of Taiwanese people with separatist “diehards” and “muddy the waters.” He encouraged more Taiwanese people to visit the PRC and claimed that the 2.6 million Taiwanese who visited the PRC from January to August of 2024 were a repudiation of the “lies and rumors” of the DPP.[11]

Four Chinese Coast Guard (CCG) ships intruded into Taiwan’s “restricted waters” around Kinmen on two consecutive days in a continuing effort to assert PRC jurisdiction over the waters. Four CCG ships simultaneously entered four different locations in the restricted waters around Taiwan’s Kinmen island group on September 13 and again on September 14. They entered at 8:50 am and left at 11 am on both days. The CCG did not announce the incursions. Taiwan’s Coast Guard Administration (CGA) accused the PRC of deliberately carrying out these incursions on the eve of the Mid-Autumn Festival, a major holiday on both sides of the Taiwan Strait that occurs on September 17. The CGA said the incursions were the first in September and the 39th and 40th of 2024.[12]

Kinmen is located less than two miles from the PRC mainland city of Xiamen. Taiwan does not claim any territorial waters around Kinmen but maintains concentric “prohibited” and “restricted” zones around the islands that are functionally equivalent to territorial waters and a contiguous zone. This means that Taiwan reserves the exclusive right to conduct law enforcement activities there. The PRC largely respected these maritime boundaries before 2024 even if it did not officially acknowledge them.

The CCG has normalized incursions into the restricted waters around Kinmen since February 2024 to erode Taiwan’s control over the waters and establish the PRC’s legitimate right to enforce its laws there. The CCG has conducted incursions into the waters an average of five times per month. Some of the patrols ventured into Kinmen’s prohibited waters as well. The PRC began these efforts in response to an incident in February in which two PRC fishermen died in a boat collision while fleeing a CGA pursuit in Kinmen’s prohibited waters. The number of monthly incursions peaked in May around Taiwan President Lai Ching-te’s inauguration, and the PRC has gradually increased the duration of each incursion from around one hour to over two hours. The PRC has also expanded the patrol scope from fixed-line patrols in formation to a broad patrol area where individual CCG ships can patrol freely. PRC officials have repeatedly denied the existence of restricted or prohibited waters around Kinmen since February, most recently during a TAO press conference on September 11.[13] PRC state-affiliated social media account Yuyuan Tantian suggested that the “Kinmen model” of normalizing “law enforcement” patrols can be applied to other Taiwanese outlying islands in the future, such as Matsu and Penghu.[14]

 

The PRC objected to the transit of German warships through the Taiwan Strait on September 13. The PRC claims jurisdiction over the entire Strait and denies the existence of “international waters” in the Strait. The German naval frigate Baden-Wuerttemberg and the supply ship Frankfurt am Main transited the Taiwan Strait en route from South Korea to Indonesia. This was the first time German warships transited the Taiwan Strait in 22 years. German Minister of Defense Boris Pistorius said the Taiwan Strait is an international waterway and was the shortest and safest way to the ships’ destination.[15] The PLA Eastern Theater Command (ETC) organized air and naval forces to monitor the ships’ transit. PRC officials framed the transit as a provocation. PRC Ministry of National Defense (MOD) Spokesperson Col. Wu Qian said that “freedom of navigation does not mean freedom to run rampant and it cannot be used to provoke and endanger [the PRC’s] sovereignty and security.”[16] Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) Spokesperson Mao Ning said that the Taiwan issue is not about freedom of navigation but about the PRC’s “sovereignty and territorial integrity.” She said that the PRC respects “the navigation rights enjoyed by all countries in relevant waters in accordance with Chinese law and international law, including the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea” (UNCLOS), but firmly opposes “provocation and endangerment of China's sovereignty and security under the banner of freedom of navigation.”[17]

The PRC claims varying levels of jurisdiction over the entire Taiwan Strait and denies the existence of “international waters” in the Strait. It frequently protests foreign military transits through the Taiwan Strait but has not physically impeded them. The MFA claimed on September 9 that the Taiwan Strait is “China's internal waters, territorial sea, contiguous zone and exclusive economic zone in that order" when moving from either shore toward the middle.[18] This characterization includes Taiwan and its maritime jurisdictions as part of the PRC.

PRC officials have denied that the Taiwan Strait constitutes “international waters” and stressed the PRC’s jurisdiction over the entire strait, which may be intended to imply that foreign military ships should not sail there without Beijing’s permission.[19] States, including the PRC, do not have sovereign rights to deny passage to foreign ships within their contiguous zone or Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), however. Such regions therefore are informally called “international waters” because any ship has a right to navigate freely in those waters. States can only restrict passage in their internal or territorial waters, which extend up to the country’s territorial baseline and 12 nautical miles beyond it, respectively.

 

Pro-Russian hackers targeted many Taiwanese government and financial websites with DDoS attacks in retaliation for ROC President Lai’s comment about the PRC taking back parts of the Russian Far East. Lai argued in an interview on September 1 that the PRC’s intention to annex Taiwan is not truly about territorial integrity, otherwise “why not reclaim the land ceded to Russia in the Treaty of Aigun during the Qing Dynasty?”[20] The pro-Russia hacker group NoName057(16) framed Lai’s comments as a suggestion that the PRC should “take away Russia’s land in the Far East” and retaliated by launching large-scale Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attacks on Taiwanese government and financial websites beginning on September 9.[21] The group took down at least 45 websites by September 14. It continued to claim attacks through September 17. The group’s targets included the websites of Taiwan’s Supreme Court, the Ministry of Justice, government departments of many cities and counties, the Taoyuan city metro, Taipei International Airport, several major banks, the Taiwan Stock Exchange, and various local financial firms.[22]

NoName057(16) is a pro-Russian cyber collective that emerged in March 2022 and initially targeted Ukrainian government and media sites but has since expanded to target Western government, economic, and logistical entities, including in NATO member states.”[23] NoName057(16) relies on volunteers to conduct its cyberattacks and previously published its own crowdsourced botnet, "DDoSia," along with Russian and English language instructions for using DDoSia to conduct DDoS attacks.[24]

China

The PRC used the BRICS high-level meeting of representatives for security affairs in St. Petersburg to promote the forum as the voice of the Global South. PRC Foreign Minister Wang Yi stated during the meeting that the Global South has gained momentum in the 21st century and that it “should bravely stand at the forefront, take the initiative, and contribute positive forces to building a world of lasting peace and universal security.” Wang stressed that the PRC has always been a “natural member” of the Global South and pointed to last week’s Forum on China-Africa Cooperation (FOCAC), which the readout stated sent out a loud call for the Global South to forge ahead. Beyond the original and new members of BRICS, the meeting also featured representatives from Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Belarus, Cuba, Kazakhstan, Laos, Mauritania, Nicaragua, Serbia, Turkey, Uzbekistan, Venezuela, and Vietnam.[25]

The PRC has long styled itself as an ally of the developing world and since 2023, frequently refers to itself as a member of the Global South.[26] The PRC’s frequent use of the phrase in official rhetoric portrays the PRC as a champion of the Global South that takes the lead in advocating for and advancing cooperation.[27] The PRC framed the expansion of BRICS in 2023 as making progress in strengthening the representation of the Global South and rebuking a hegemonic world order in favor of multilateralism.[28] The expanding membership of BRICS and attendance from non-BRICS members at the PRC’s encouragement signals interest from countries that possibly view the forum as a way to increase their own participation in matters of international importance.

Wang called for advancing a multipolar world and enhancing the representation and voice of the Global South in a proposal for BRICS countries to cooperate to solve security threats.[29] Wang linked the PRC’s advocacy for political solutions to highlight the PRC-Brazil six-point consensus to resolve the war in Ukraine, which it claimed received a “wide range of positive responses.” Wang welcomed more BRICS partners to participate in the international conversation to form a consensus on how to reach a political solution for the war.

The PRC seeks for Global South countries to align with it on international security issues. PRC Special Representative for Eurasian Affairs Li Hui traveled to Brazil, South Africa, and Indonesia, countries that the PRC referred to as “important members of the Global South,” to generate support for its six-point consensus with Brazil, which the two countries released in May. The plan, which stipulates that Russia must participate in peace talks, has failed to gain traction with Ukraine, the United States, and most European countries, despite claims from the PRC to the contrary.[30] The PRC skipped a June peace summit in Switzerland in protest because Russia was not invited.[31]

Li’s trip came after statements on June 21 from then-Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba and Deputy Head of the Office of the President Igor Zhovkva that Ukraine is interested in having a “Global South” country host a second peace summit, which Ukraine aims to hold before the end of the year.[32] Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy repeated Ukraine’s interest in hosting the next peace summit in a Global South country during an interview on August 25.[33] The PRC’s interest in generating support for its mediation of the war in Global South countries is possibly aimed at gaining recognition as a qualifying member of the Global South that is capable of hosting the summit. Alternatively, hosting the summit in a Global South country that the PRC has won favor with would extend the PRC’s influence over the next peace summit.

The 2024 Beijing Xiangshan Forum points toward an increase in the PRC’s international security cooperation, most notably with Russia. The Xiangshan Forum is a multilateral summit focused on security cooperation that began on September 13 and brought together Chinese defense leaders and their international counterparts. Over 1,800 guests from over 100 countries attended.[34] According to Xinhua, the number of participants at this year’s Xiangshan Forum has reached a new high, drawing representatives from NATO, the EU, and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization. Approximately one-third of the participants hailed from the United States or Europe, reflecting the PRC’s global reach in matters of security cooperation.[35] The sessions of the forum followed the themes of “Security Cooperation and Prosperity and Stability in the Asia-Pacific Region," "Multipolarization and the Direction of International Order," "'Global South' and World Peace and Development," and "International Mechanisms and Global Security Governance.”[36]

The meeting between PRC Defense Minister Dong Jun and Russian Deputy Defense Minister Fomin highlighted trends in PRC-Russia defense messaging — namely the growing alignment between their messaging on the Pacific. According to the South China Morning Post (SCMP), Fomin used his platform at the Xiangshan Forum to accuse the United States of fomenting instability in the Taiwan Strait. He lauded the PRC-Russia partnership but accused the US of militarization in East Asia. Russian news site TASS’ Telegram reported that “The plan for military cooperation between Russia and China includes more than 100 events this year, and their number will grow,” according to Fomin.[37] Moreover, Fomin's statements linked Russia and the PRC’s shared grievances against the West and legitimized overt collaboration. Fomin reportedly said that the Ukraine war has "reinvented modern warfare” and that Russia is "ready to share its unique experience of Western weapons with partners."[38]

Joint military exercises are one way Russia could share such information with China. Russia and China are comprehensive strategic partners and have participated in an increasing number of joint exercises during the last several years.[39] The number of PRC-Russia joint exercises has increased from 2 in 2018 to 10 in 2024. Most of the joint exercises are naval and occurred in places including the East China Sea and South China Sea.[40]

Southeast Asia

Philippines

The Philippines withdrew the BRP Theresa Magbanua from Sabina Shoal following four weeks of the CCG blocking Philippine resupply missions to the Shoal. The CCG could replicate this strategy against other Philippine Coast Guard (PCG) ships, such as the BRP Sierra Madre in the Second Thomas Shoal. The PCG withdrew the BRP Theresa Magbanua from Sabina Shoal on September 15.[41] PCG spokesperson Jay Tarriela stated that the ship left Sabina Shoal to evacuate personnel in need of medical care and concerns over bad weather and a lack of essential supplies.[42] The BRP Theresa Magbanua maintained a presence in the Shoal for five months due to concerns over the CCG presence in the area. Constant PCG presence has allowed it to monitor PRC land reclamation and island-building attempts. The PRC has repeatedly called for the PCG to withdraw its ships from Sabina Shoal. The PRC has accused the Philippines of violating PRC sovereign rights and the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea, an agreement signed by the PRC and ASEAN member states in 2002. Despite the withdrawal of the BRP Theresa Magbanua, the PCG says that it will continue to deploy vessels to Sabina Shoal and assert its territorial claims.[43]

The PCG has clearly stated that its withdrawal from Sabina Shoal is not an indication that it is abandoning territory or ceding the shoal to the PRC.[44] There is no indication that the Philippines’ actions were a result of discussions with the PRC.[45] The PRC MFA and CCG have not responded to the PCG's claims that it will deploy additional vessels to the Sabina Shoal. Various PRC media outlets have published articles advocating for continued vigilance by the CCG in case of future “provocations” by the PCG, however.[46] The CCG has maintained its presence in Sabina Shoal following the PCG’s withdrawal.[47] Maintaining a presence in Sabina Shoal is advantageous for the PRC, as the Shoal’s location allows the PRC to assert its claim over the nearby Second Thomas Shoal and more easily intercept Philippine vessels attempting to access or establish a presence around other features in the South China Sea. Blocking resupply missions to PCG vessels in the South China Sea has resulted in the CCG forcing the withdrawal of foreign vessels. They could replicate this strategy against other PCG ships, including the BRP Sierra Madre in the Second Thomas Shoal, who attempt to maintain a more permanent presence in the South China Sea.

 

 

Russia

 

The PRC participated in joint naval and air exercises with Russia from September 10–16. The PRC Ministry of National Defense (MOD) announced on September 9 that Russia would send naval and air forces to participate in the PRC-led Northern Joint 2024 exercises in the Sea of Japan and Sea of Okhotsk.[48] Two PRC guided missile destroyers, a PRC guided missile frigate, a supply ship, and three ship-borne helicopters participated in the exercises. MOD stated that the PRC forces will also participate in its fifth joint maritime cruise with Russia as part of the Russian-led Ocean-2024 exercises, which will take place throughout the Pacific and Arctic Oceans.[49] Russian President Vladimir Putin stated that representatives from 15 “friendly” nations would observe its wide-ranging exercises during Ocean-2024, which the Russian government claims is the largest of its naval exercises in 30 years.[50]

The PRC and Russia are also increasing coast guard cooperation. The CCG announced that it signed a memorandum of understanding with Russia’s Federal Security Service (FSB) in April 2023 to strengthen maritime law enforcement.[51] The PRC announced on September 13 that PRC and Russian coast guard fleets will conduct joint patrols in the Northern Pacific, which aim to improve coordination and organization between the two countries and enhance their ability to “jointly respond to various maritime security threats.”[52]

The PRC and Russia are conducting increasingly frequent joint exercises in recent years and expanding the geographical scope of their cooperation. The two countries have now held joint exercises in at least five different parts of the world since July, including naval exercises in the South China Sea, Gulf of Finland, Sea of Japan, Sea of Okhotsk, and Northern Pacific.[53] PRC and Russian bombers entered the US air defense identification zone near Alaska for the first time together on July 24.[54] PRC and Russian naval vessels sailed together in the United States’ EEZ in international waters near Alaska in September 2022 and August 2023.[55] PRC naval ships and Russian naval ships sailed separately into the United States’ EEZ near Alaska on July 10 and September 16, respectively.[56]

China-Taiwan Weekly Update, September 13, 2024

click here to read the full report

Authors: Matthew Sperzel, Daniel Shats, and Alison O’Neil of the Institute for the Study of War;

Alexis Turek and Liam Karr of the American Enterprise Institute

Editors: Dan Blumenthal and Frederick W. Kagan of the American Enterprise Institute

Data Cutoff: September 11, 2024

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 People's Republic of China (PRC) convicted Taiwanese political activist Yang Chih-yuan of secessionism on August 24 and sentenced him to nine years in prison. Yang’s conviction is a threat from the PRC to Taiwanese people not to advocate for policies that promote Taiwanese sovereignty or statehood.
• The PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs protested the anticipated passage through the Taiwan Strait of two German naval ships.
• PLA Southern Theater Commander General Wu Ya’nan had a call with US Indo-Pacific Command Commander Admiral Samuel Paparo as part of a trend of restoring US-PRC high-level military communication.
• The PLA and Russian military will participate in two military exercises and a joint Pacific patrol in close succession in September.
• The PRC is trying to forcibly expel the Philippine presence from Sabina shoal to degrade the Philippines’ military and coast guard operations in the South China Sea.
• The PRC elevated ties with Africa during the Forum on China-Africa Cooperation. The PRC's bilateral relationships with African countries now take the form of strategic partnerships or comprehensive strategic partnerships, signifying China's interest in cooperating with African nations across a variety of economic and security sectors.

Cross-Strait Relations

Taiwan

The People's Republic of China (PRC) convicted Taiwanese political activist Yang Chih-yuan of secessionism on August 24 and sentenced him to nine years in prison. Yang’s conviction is a threat from the PRC to the Taiwanese people not to advocate for Taiwan’s statehood or policies that support Taiwanese sovereignty. The PRC arrested Yang in August 2022 during his trip to the mainland to visit family and held him in detention until April 2023, when PRC authorities “approved” Yang’s arrest on suspicion of secessionism.[1] Yang helped found the Taiwanese National Party in 2011, which advocated for an independence referendum.[2] Yang also was a legislative candidate for the Taiwan Action Party Alliance, a short-lived political party that promoted Taiwanese statehood and participation in the United Nations.[3] Yang’s conviction marks the first instance of the PRC prosecuting an ROC national for secessionism.

Taiwan’s Mainland Affairs Council (MAC) called for Yang’s immediate release on September 5 and Yang’s conviction proved that the PRC’s 22 guidelines on punishing “separatism” endangers all Taiwanese people who travel to the PRC, not just “a very small number of Taiwan independence die-hards,” as the PRC claims.[4] Spokesperson for the PRC’s Taiwan Affairs Office (TAO) Chen Binhua accused Taiwan’s governing Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) of attempting to intimidate people from Taiwan and prevent them from participating in normal cross-strait exchanges by distorting the nature of the legal guidelines.[5]

Yang’s punishment is an example of the type of behavior that the PRC aims to deter under the new legal guidelines that it released in June, which outline punishment for “Taiwan independence diehards.” The PRC regards expressions of support for policies that promote Taiwan’s sovereignty as separatist, such as Taiwan’s accession to international organizations and adopting a Taiwanese identity over a Chinese one. These policies are core objectives of the DPP, which the PRC accuses of separatism, despite the fact that the DPP does not advocate for declaring Taiwanese statehood. Imprisoning Yang, who shares similar positions on Taiwan’s sovereignty, discourages Taiwanese people from supporting policies that are associated with the DPP.

The PRC has repeatedly attempted to assuage concerns about the heightened risk of arbitrary detention for ordinary Taiwanese people who are in the PRC while simultaneously taking greater steps to root out separatists, such as sharing contact information on the TAO website to report people for separatist activities.[6] The TAO also advertised a list of 10 mostly DPP politicians, including Vice President Hsiao Bi-khim and Defense Minister Wellington Koo, who the PRC deemed “Taiwan independence diehards.”[7] The MAC has maintained that going to the mainland is dangerous for all Taiwanese people and to reconsider travel there unless absolutely necessary.

The PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) protested the anticipated passage through the Taiwan Strait of two German naval ships.[8] German media outlet Der Spiegel reported on September 7 that the German frigate Baden-Württemberg and the supply ship Frankfurt am Main will sail through the Taiwan Strait on their route from South Korea to Jakarta in mid-September.[9] Der Spiegel stated that the German government would not notify the PRC to demonstrate that it views transit through the strait as a matter of freedom of navigation. Germany deployed the Baden-Württemberg and the Frankfurt am Main in May on a so-called “foreign training cruise,” which can entail training with partner navies in the Indo-Pacific. Their voyage is not a formal military operation or a freedom of navigation operation.[10] The transit will be the first passage through the Taiwan Strait by German naval ships in over 20 years.[11]

PRC MFA spokesperson Mao Ning called the would-be transit a provocation against the PRC on September 9. Mao stated that both sides of the Taiwan Strait were the PRC’s territory, but did not clarify whether the Taiwan Strait is a space that countries can freely navigate.[12] Chairman of the Bundestag’s Committee on Foreign Affairs Michael Roth expressed on Twitter his support for the transit, which he stated was in accordance with international law. Roth denied that the transit is a provocation simply because it does not suit the CCP.[13] Roth stated his support for Canada and the Netherlands, whose naval ships traversed the strait in July and June, respectively.[14]

The PRC’s claim to sovereignty over the Taiwan Strait  conflicts with the international consensus on the Taiwan Strait and attempts to revise its legal status. The PRC MFA first claimed in June 2022 that the PRC has full sovereignty and jurisdiction over the Taiwan Strait and denied that the Taiwan Strait qualified as international waters.[15] Bloomberg cited an anonymous source who stated that PRC officials began privately asserting this claim in meetings with US counterparts in 2022.[16] TAO spokesperson Chen Binhua repeated in March that the PRC held sole sovereignty over the strait and denied the existence of international waters.[17] The claims contradict the PRC’s long-held position that the Taiwan Strait is an “international waterway.”[18] Convincing other countries of the PRC’s sovereignty over the Taiwan Strait effectively turns the waterway into an inland sea that the PRC can deny access to, which would enable the PRC to conduct military operations or a blockade against Taiwan without the threat of obstruction from other navies.

Taiwan’s National Security Bureau (NSB) warned in a written report to the Legislative Yuan that the CCP uses pop culture and cross-strait exchanges to promote cross-strait integration with and unification under the CCP-led PRC.[19] The NSB stated that the CCP’s United Front work against Taiwan is diverse and targets Taiwanese religious communities, artists, media professionals, students, and more. The report mentioned that the CCP attempts to attract Taiwanese youth to the mainland and engage in cultural and creative activities, such as art and film, to promote the PRC’s soft power and strengthen a common Chinese identity. The United Front is a whole-of-government and society effort to advance the CCP’s ideology and interests by co-opting non-government segments of Chinese society. United Front activities against Taiwan aim to inculcate in the Taiwanese public CCP notions that the PRC is the only legitimate government of China and Taiwan is a part of that China.

Spokesperson for Taiwan’s Executive Yuan Julia Hsieh stated on September 5 that the government was aware of a campaign by the PRC to recruit Taiwanese influencers to visit Xinjiang Province and promote a more positive narrative about Beijing's rule there.[20] MAC Deputy Minister Liang Wen-chieh stated on September 5 that Taiwanese people should exercise caution and beware not to violate the Anti-Infiltration Law, which bans the spread of false information by hostile foreign forces. Liang stated that the wave of “Beautiful Xinjiang” propaganda aims to dispel notions of human rights there.[21]

Taiwanese internet celebrities called attention to CCP efforts to recruit them to facilitate United Front work in June. YouTuber Potter King claimed that the CCP is spending considerable resources to lure Taiwanese internet celebrities to the PRC under the pretense of traveling to film content.[22] 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.[23] 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.[24]

The CCP’s influence within creative industries is extensive. PRC-based gaming company Hero Games provided popular overseas streamers with a list of topics not to speak of while playing the new popular Chinese game Black Myth: Wukong, which Hero Games manages the marketing for.[25] The topics included issues of sensitivity to the CCP that it enforces censorship of, such as COVID-19, quarantines, “feminist propaganda,” and “other content that instigates negative discourse.”

China

PLA Southern Theater Commander General Wu Ya’nan had a call with US Indo-Pacific Command Commander Admiral Samuel Paparo as part of a trend of restoring US-PRC high-level military communication. A US readout of the call said that Paparo urged the PLA to “reconsider its use of dangerous, coercive and potentially escalatory tactics in the South China Sea and beyond.” He also stressed the importance of maintaining lines of communication between the two militaries to reduce the risk of misperception and miscalculation. Paparo said he hoped his conversation with General Wu would be the first of many, both with Wu and with other PLA theater commanders. The Southern Theater Command is responsible for the South China Sea.[26] The PRC readout of the call offered no detail except that the two sides had an “in-depth exchange of views on issues of common concern.”[27]

The Paparo-Wu call is the first US-PRC theater commander-level conversation since US President Joe Biden and CCP Secretary-General Xi Jinping agreed to resume high-level military talks in November 2023. The PRC cut off military talks with the United States after then-US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi visited Taiwan in August 2022.[28] The US and PRC militaries will have several other interactions in September. Both militaries are participating in Brazil’s Formosa-2024 Exercise.[29] The United States will send Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for China Michael Chase to the Beijing-hosted Xiangshan Forum on September 12-14.[30] General Wu Ya’nan will attend the Chiefs of Defense Conference that the US Indo-Pacific Command will host in Hawaii and will meet Paparo in person.[31]

The US House of Representatives passed two bills that restrict the access of PLA-affiliated tech companies to US markets and supply chains as part of a broader legislative effort to limit CCP influence within the American economy. The US House of Representatives has begun voting on a series of National security legislation to reduce CCP influence in several domains as part of “China Week.” The bills discussed have focused on identifying and reducing military, ideological, economic, and technological threats posed by the CCP to the American people.

One of the bills passed was the Countering CCP Drones Act, which would prohibit new drones from the PRC company DJI from operating in the United States and accessing its communication infrastructure.[32] DJI was placed on the United States Treasury Department’s investment blacklist in 2021,its role in biometric surveillance, tracking of the Uyghur population in Xinjiang, and ties to the PLA.[33] DJI has denied any involvement in human violations or surveillance operations. Following the passage of this bill, DJI released a statement saying that Congress’s actions would undermine American interests and have negative impacts on federal agencies, law enforcement, emergency responders, and small businesses that utilize their technology.[34]

The House of Representatives also passed the Biosecure Act, a bill that would restrict the federal government from contracting with PRC biotechnology firms with ties to the CCP and PLA.[35] The legislation would target five companies, BGI Group, Complete Genomics, MGI, WuXi AppTec, and WuXi Biologics, and establish an inter-agency process for identifying additional companies that pose a threat to national security. BGI is a PRC genomics company with reported ties to the PLA that was placed on the Bureau of Industry and Security’s entity list in 2020.[36] MGI and Complete Genomics are BGI subsidiaries in the PRC and California, respectively. WuXi AppTec and WuXi Biologics are PRC-based pharmaceutical companies that have been targeted by the US Government for their connections with PLA under the military-civilian fusion strategy.[37] All of these companies have denied having ties to the PLA or posing any threat to US National Security.

Southeast Asia

Philippines

An authoritative People’s Daily commentary accused the Philippines of violating PRC sovereignty at Sabina Shoal and infringing on the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea. The PRC is trying to forcibly expel the Philippine presence from the disputed shoal to degrade the Philippines’ military and coast guard operations in the South China Sea. The article in the CCP official newspaper People’s Daily was published under the pseudonym “Zhong Sheng,” a homophone for “voice of China” in Mandarin that People’s Daily uses to denote authoritative commentary articles on foreign affairs. The article claimed that the Philippine Coast Guard (PCG) deliberately “stranded” its flagship Teresa Magbanua at Sabina Shoal to justify “humanitarian” resupply missions to the area, portraying itself as a victim while aiming to establish a long-term presence at the shoal. It claimed the Philippines “violated the law and provoked first” by intruding into what the PRC claims is its territory, while the PRC “defended its rights in accordance with the law. The article also claimed that the Philippines violated Article 5 of the 2002 PRC-ASEAN Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea, which stipulated that all parties would refrain from occupying any presently uninhabited maritime features. It said all parties should keep Sabina Shoal uninhabited and without facilities. It also insinuated that the Philippines was “provoking” the PRC at the behest of “some non-regional countries” that wish to “sow discord” in the region. The article concluded that PRC-Philippines relations were at a “crossroads” and the Philippines had to choose dialogue and consultation over conflict and confrontation.[38]

The PRC claims nearly all land features in the South China Sea within its “Nine Dash Line” territorial boundary, including Sabina Shoal. Sabina Shoal is an uninhabited low-tide elevation located within the Philippine Exclusive Economic Zone. The Philippines uses Sabina Shoal as a staging ground for resupply missions to the nearby Second Thomas Shoal, where the Philippines maintains a military garrison aboard a grounded warship. The PCG deployed the Teresa Magbanua to the shoal in April to monitor PRC activity there, in response to Philippine reports that crushed coral found at the shoal was evidence the PRC was preparing to build infrastructure there.

The PRC has deployed dozens of Chinese Coast Guard (CCG), PLA Navy (PLAN), and Chinese Maritime Military (CMM) vessels to block Philippine resupply missions and prevent it from establishing a permanent presence at Sabina Shoal. A CCG ship rammed the Teresa Magbanua three times on August 31, causing damage to the hull, while up to 71 CMM, CCG, and PLAN vessels swarmed around Sabina Shoal. The PRC has accused the Philippines of ramming its ships in confrontations despite video footage showing otherwise. PRC state media has accused the Philippines of preparing to build infrastructure on the shoal and likened the anchored Teresa Magbanua to the grounded Sierra Madre on Second Thomas Shoal. CCG vessels have also engaged in aggressive maneuvers against Philippine vessels resupplying the Sierra Madre, including a violent confrontation on June 17 in which the PRC rammed, boarded, towed Philippine boats to thwart a resupply mission.

The PRC is framing the Philippines as an aggressor and a violator of the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea as a form of legal and public opinion warfare to justify its own aggression against Philippine vessels in the region. It is framing its actions to force out the Philippine presence as enforcing the Declaration’s stipulation against occupying currently unoccupied features, even though the Philippines has not constructed any facilities on Sabina Shoal and “occupies” it with coastguard vessels in the nearby waters, the same manner in which the PRC “occupies” the disputed Scarborough Shoal..

The PRC is sending CCG and CMM vessels to the disputed Reed Bank in the Spratly Islands, likely to assert its control over oil and gas reserves in the area. A CCG vessel conducted 24-hour “intrusive patrols” of Reed Bank on August 29 and September 2. Reed Bank is a large undersea tablemount in the Spratly Islands between 90 and 170 miles from the Philippine province of Palawan. It is part of the Philippine Exclusive Economic Zone.[39] The Philippine Navy also reported 58 CMM vessels and one PLAN ship in the vicinity of Iroquois Reef from September 3-9, which has steadily climbed from 36 CMM vessels in the previous week and 17 the week before.[40] Iroquois Reef is an uninhabited reef at the southwestern end of Reed Bank.

The PRC is likely using Coast Guard and maritime militia vessels to assert control over Reed Bank and its copious energy resources. A 2013 report from the US Energy Information Administration estimated that untapped underwater reserves at Reed Bank may contain as many as 5.4 billion barrels of oil and 55.1 trillion cubic feet of natural gas. The Philippines began oil and gas exploration in Reed Bank in the 1970s but ceased drilling in 2015 because the PRC contested its claim. A decision by the Permanent Court of Arbitration in 2016 ruled that Reed Bank is part of the seabed within the Philippine Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), which means that the Philippines has the exclusive right to exploit the resources there. The PRC rejects the 2016 decision, however, and claims Reed Bank along with most of the South China Sea. The Philippines did not resume energy extraction there despite the Court of Arbitration ruling in its favor.[41]

The Philippine Navy also reported CMM or PRC fishing vessels “swarming” Iroquois Reef in July 2023 and December 2022. It said the vessels were loitering in the area and not fishing.[42] The PRC often uses CMM vessels to maintain a presence in disputed parts of the South China Sea. Maritime militia vessels are often repurposed fishing boats. The PRC uses them because their connection to the PRC government is difficult to prove, their presence is less likely to trigger conflict escalation than CCG or naval vessels, and they can be deployed quickly in far greater numbers than official ships.

Russia

The PLA and Russian military will participate in two military exercises and a joint Pacific patrol in close succession in September. The PRC Ministry of National Defense (MOD) announced on September 9 that Russian air and naval forces will join PLA forces in the Northern/Interaction-2024 exercise in the Sea of Japan and Sea of Okhotsk. It did not specify the exact dates of the exercise but said participating Russian and PRC forces assembled in the Sea of Japan on September 9. The exercise will last until late September.[43] The participating PRC and Russian air forces include more than 20 fixed-wing aircraft and helicopters, including the PRC’s KJ-500, J-16, J-10, and Z-20, and Russia's Il-38, Su-30, and MiG-31. The participating PLA naval forces include the guided missile destroyers Xining and Wuxi, the guided missile frigate Linyi, the comprehensive supply ship Taihu, and three ship-borne helicopters. The Russian naval forces include the frigate Marshal Shaposhnikov, destroyer Admiral Panteleyev, four corvettes, and Ka-27 anti-submarine helicopters. The MOD also announced that the PRC and Russian navies would carry out their fifth joint maritime patrol in the Pacific Ocean on an unspecified date and that the PRC would participate in Russia’s Ocean-2024 military exercise, which is ongoing from September 10-16.[44] The Ocean-2024 is a massive Russian exercise involving 400 ships, 120 aircraft, and 90,000 personnel conducting drills in the Pacific Ocean, Arctic Ocean, Mediterranean Sea, Baltic Sea, and Caspian Sea. Neither country’s defense ministry specified the nature, location, or dates of the PRC’s participation in the exercise.[45]

The PRC and Russia have increased joint naval and aerial exercises and patrols in the Pacific region in recent years, in a sign of their growing geopolitical alignment against the collective West and its Asian allies such as Japan.[46] The two countries held at least seventeen joint patrols or exercises in parts of the Western Pacific Ocean including the East China Sea, Sea of Japan, Yellow Sea, Bering Sea, and South China Sea between 2022 and the present, averaging five to six per year. They had one or no joint military activities in this region each year prior to 2021.[47] The two countries held the Joint Sea 2024 exercise and their fourth joint Pacific patrol in the South China Sea in July. They deployed four bombers in a joint patrol near Alaska’s Aleutian islands the same month. The PRC organized several previous “Interaction”-series exercises with Russia in recent years, including the Northern/Interaction-2023 in the Sea of Japan in July 2023.[48]

Africa

The PRC elevated ties with Africa during the Forum on China-Africa Cooperation (FOCAC), which reflects the greater strategic importance the PRC is giving to the continent. African leaders met with high-ranking Chinese officials from September 4-6 to discuss bilateral ties, development goals, and economic cooperation. The summit resulted in a spate of new PRC-Africa agreements – with the PRC offering almost $50.7 billion in investment – as well as the elevation of PRC-Africa ties to an “all-weather China-Africa community with a shared future in the new era.”[49] The PRC's bilateral relationships with African countries now take the form of strategic partnerships or comprehensive strategic partnerships, signifying China's interest in cooperating with African nations across a variety of economic and security sectors.

For more information on specific cooperation agreements between the PRC and African nations, see the Africa File from the Critical Threats Project at the American Enterprise Institute.

The PRC’s rhetoric affirmed high-level support for Africa in the context of the broader "Global South” and framed China-Africa relations as an equitable partnership, possibly to hedge against accusations of exploitation, neocolonialism, or “debt trap” diplomacy. PRC press releases cast the PRC as Africa's equal partner and emphasized "mutual respect" in PRC-Africa relations. Xi contrasted Western “modernization,” associated with “immense sufferings,” and Chinese modernization, based on inclusivity and equity.[50]  PRC spokesperson Mao Ning stated in a press conference that China seeks “equal” cooperation with Africa and does not promulgate debt traps.[51] As a further sign of its commitment to Africa, the PRC upgraded bilateral ties with African nations.

US officials are concerned that the PRC’s new initiatives in Africa will facilitate the PRC’s military power projection. Bloomberg reported that the PRC may intend to build a base in Gabon following FOCAC security agreements.[52] According to WSJ, rumors around a proposed Chinese base in Gabon have swirled since former Gabonese President Ali Bongo reportedly promised Xi in August 2023 that the PRC could station troops there.[53] US officials reportedly tried to persuade Bongo to retract this statement, but their efforts proved moot after Bongo’s security forces ultimately overthrew him.[54] Interim president Brice Clotaire Oligui Nguema took power in September 2023 and has not indicated his stance on the proposed Chinese base.[55] Nguema seems to hold positive views of the PRC, his country’s top trading partner and the provider of loans that backed three vocational training centers in Gabon.[56]

African leaders also declared their support for the one-China principle across high-level meetings during the forum. PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesperson Mao Ning referenced Africa’s broad adherence to the one-China principle and issued a statement on Swaziland, the one African country noticeably absent from FOCAC. She said that Swaziland's diplomatic support for Taiwan was not in its best interests and that China believes Swaziland will soon switch its allegiance to the PRC.[57] By “naming and shaming” Swaziland, while publicly elevating the status of nations that adhere to the one-China principle, the PRC signaled that development assistance and economic cooperation may be linked to diplomatic consensus on the PRC’s Taiwan policy.

China-Taiwan Weekly Update, September 6, 2024

click here to read the full report

Authors: Matthew Sperzel, Daniel Shats, and Alison O’Neil 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: September 4, 2024

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 People’s Republic of China (PRC) announced that it will lift restrictions on PRC tourism to Kinmen and Taiwanese pomelo imports, likely to economically reward Kuomintang-leaning regions and legitimize the Kuomintang as a negotiating partner on behalf of Taiwan.
• The PRC maintained a high number of air incursions of Taiwan’s Air Defense Identification Zone in August.
• Network analysis firm Graphika identified PRC state-operated accounts on Twitter and TikTok that posed as Americans to undermine US political institutions and stability ahead of the 2024 US presidential elections. PRC information operation narratives have evolved to focus on sowing political division and undermining faith in the US electoral process.
• PRC state broadcaster CCTV ran a segment on August 27 that publicized a People’s Liberation Army air defense exercise to counter enemy drone swarms. The PLA’s focus on countering drone swarms is likely a reaction to Taiwan’s evolving defense strategy that emphasizes asymmetric defense.
• The China Coast Guard rammed a Philippine Coast Guard vessel near Sabina Shoal as part of its broader intimidation efforts to decrease the Philippine presence in the South China Sea. This is the third time that the CCG rammed a PCG ship near the Shoal during the last two weeks.

Cross-Strait Relations

Taiwan

The PRC announced that it will lift restrictions on PRC tourism to Kinmen and Taiwanese pomelo imports, likely to economically reward Kuomintang (KMT)-leaning regions and legitimize the KMT as a negotiating partner on behalf of Taiwan. The PRC Ministry of Culture and Tourism announced on August 30 that it would allow residents of Fujian Province to resume travel to Kinmen “in the near future.” The ministry said it was lifting the ban at the request of a visiting delegation from Kinmen.[1] A Kinmen delegation led by KMT legislator Jessica Chen Yu-jen met with PRC Taiwan Affairs Office (TAO) Director Song Tao in Beijing on August 22 and requested that the PRC lift the travel ban for Kinmen. Kinmen is a Taiwanese island group located two miles from the coast of Fujian. The PRC suspended independent travel to Taiwan in August 2019, citing poor cross-strait relations, and banned group travel to Taiwan in 2020 due to the Covid-19 pandemic.[2] Chen said 800,000 tourists from the PRC visited Kinmen annually prior to the ban, bringing in US$199.9 million each year.[3]

TAO spokesperson Chen Binhua announced on September 2 that the PRC would lift its ban on imports of Taiwanese Wendan pomelos that come from orchards and packaging plants registered with the PRC. He made the announcement two weeks before the Mid-Autumn Festival, a Chinese cultural holiday during which pomelo is traditionally eaten.[4] The PRC banned Taiwanese pomelo imports in August 2022 following then-US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan but claimed that the ban was motivated by biosecurity concerns. Chen directly credited Taiwan’s KMT legislative caucus leader Fu Kun-chi and his district, Hualien County, for expressing their “strong desire” to resume pomelo imports and organizing the industry to “make rectifications.” Hualien is a major producer of pomelo in Taiwan and contains most of Taiwan’s pomelo plants that are registered with the PRC.[5] Fu led a KMT delegation to the PRC in late April, meeting with high-level PRC TAO, United Front, customs, and travel officials. The meetings resulted in announcements that the PRC would lift bans on imports of Taiwanese food products including pomelos and resume Fujian tourism to Taiwan’s outlying Matsu Islands.[6] The first PRC tour group arrived in Matsu on August 9.[7]

The PRC likely lifted these import and travel bans to legitimize KMT officials as negotiating partners on behalf of Taiwan and to economically benefit KMT-leaning constituencies. Hualien, Kinmen, and Matsu are all solidly pan-Blue (KMT-leaning) regions. TAO spokesperson Chen commented when announcing the lifting of the pomelo import ban that “as long as we adhere to the ‘1992 Consensus’ and oppose ‘Taiwan independence,’ the two sides of the Taiwan Strait are one family, and family matters can be discussed and resolved easily.”[8]

TAO Director Song Tao met with KMT Vice Chair Andrew Hsia on August 28 and stated that the CCP was willing to work with the KMT on the common political basis of the 1992 Consensus and opposing Taiwanese independence. Hsia stated that the KMT was also willing to cooperate on the same political basis and that both sides of the Taiwan Strait belong to the “Chinese nation.”[9] Hsia was in Lushan, PRC for the 19th Jiangxi-Taiwan Economic, Trade and Cultural Cooperation and Exchange Conference.[10] It is unclear whether Hsia’s visit resulted in any concrete agreements.

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” as the People’s Republic of China, while the KMT interprets it as the Republic of China. Taiwan’s ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) does not recognize the 1992 Consensus and considers the ROC and PRC to be mutually non-subordinate. The PRC suspended exchanges with Taiwan’s government in 2016 after the election of DPP president Tsai Ing-wen. It insists that the 1992 Consensus must be the common political basis for all cross-Strait negotiations.

The PLA carried out amphibious landing drills with dual-use roll-on/roll-off (ro-ro) ships off the coast of Fujian Province. Taiwan’s Ministry of National Defense (MND) said it detected PLA combat aircraft, helicopters, drones, amphibious ships, and ro-ro freighters loaded with ground troops carrying out "joint landing exercises" around Dacheng Bay in the PRC’s Fujian Province, which is directly across the Taiwan Strait from Taiwan.[11] The PRC did not announce the drills. The PLA has conducted amphibious landing drills in the same area in 2023 and in previous years, often around September.[12] The PRC has also previously conducted training with ro-ro boats to carry troops and vehicles.[13] Ro-ro boats are cargo vessels with ramps that can be used to drive vehicles onto and off the ship instead of loading them with cranes. The PLA currently lacks sufficient sealift capability to execute a full-scale invasion of Taiwan and is working to integrate commercial ro-ro ships into its operations to fill this gap.[14]

The PRC maintained a high number of air incursions of Taiwan’s Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) in August. Taiwan’s MND reported that PLA aircraft crossed the median line of the Taiwan Strait and entered Taiwan’s ADIZ a total of 399 times in August, including at least one incursion every day of the month. This is the third highest monthly total on record, surpassed only by 446 incursions in August 2022 and 439 incursions in July 2024. The high number of incursions in August 2022 coincided with a massive spike in PLA activity around Taiwan following then-US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan. The PLA incursions into Taiwan’s ADIZ in 2024 did not spike but instead rapidly climbed month-on-month from January to July, following Lai Ching-te’s victory in Taiwan’s January 2024 presidential election. Lai took office in May.[15] The ADIZ incursion numbers do not include aerial activity around Kinmen and Matsu, which are west of the median line.

The PRC has normalized a much higher volume of ADIZ incursions against Taiwan than in previous years as part of an intensified PRC pressure campaign against 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.

Taiwan’s Ministry of Justice Investigation Bureau (MJIB) accused eight PRC companies of “illegally poaching” talent and trade secrets from Taiwan’s computer chip industry. A joint investigation by the prosecutors’ offices of Hsinchu, Taipei, and New Taipei found that the PRC companies hid their backgrounds to poach Taiwanese semiconductor engineers and other high-tech personnel to acquire high-end technologies. The MJIB also suspects that companies stole trade secrets. It said that these illegal practices “seriously affect the competitiveness of Taiwan’s high-tech industry.” The accused companies are iCommsemi, Shanghai New Vision Microelectronics Co, NJAVC, Emotibot Technologies Ltd, Tongfang Co, ACTT, Naura Technology Group Co. and Hestia Power Inc.[16]

Tongfang is a large technology company that makes civilian electronics and supplies military end-use products to the People’s Liberation Army (PLA). The products that it provides to the PLA include wireless communications, satellite navigation equipment, information security software, and electronic countermeasure equipment. Tongfang is a subsidiary of China National Nuclear Corp (CNNC), a state-run enterprise that oversees military nuclear programs, information technology, and energy and environmental projects.[17] MJIB found that Tongfang set up a Taiwanese company to recruit nearly 100 people while hiding its source of funding. Naura is a supplier for the PRC’s biggest chipmaker, the partially state-owned Semiconductor Manufacturing International Corp (SMIC). MJIB found that Naura illegally recruited engineers who worked on chip-related equipment. It found that Hestia Power set up shell companies to move capital to Taiwan with funding from the PRC Ministry of Finance’s China Integrated Circuit Industry Investment Fund and the Small and Medium Enterprise Development Fund. MJIB found that ACTT, a supplier of integrated circuit patents and product design, tried to cover up its illegal business in Taiwan by telling staff to register their health insurance at other places.[18]

Taiwan is a high-tech power that produces around 90% of the world’s most advanced semiconductors, microchips that are used in computers, cell phones, cars, and many other commercial and military technologies. Taiwan’s globally dominant semiconductor industry is sometimes referred to as its “Silicon Shield” because the world’s reliance on Taiwanese semiconductors incentivizes other countries to defend Taiwan.[19] The PRC has invested billions of dollars to build its own semiconductor industry. It set up the third phase of the China Integrated Circuit Industry Investment Fund in May with a registered capital of 344 billion yuan (US$47.5 billion). The PRC seeks to reduce Taiwan’s competitive advantage and make the PRC more self-sufficient in advanced technologies.[20] Taiwan previously accused PRC companies of illegally poaching to acquire semiconductors and other advanced technology from Taiwan in May 2024, 2022, and other years.[21]

China

Network analysis and social media intelligence firm Graphika identified PRC state-operated accounts on Twitter and TikTok that posed as Americans to undermine US political institutions and stability ahead of the 2024 US presidential elections.[22] Spamouflage is a PRC state-sponsored information operation that operates on over 50 social media platforms.[23] Graphika reported that Spamouflage has become more aggressive in its efforts to spread divisive narratives and is seeding content to denigrate both Democratic and Republican candidates, including President Joe Biden, Vice President Kamala Harris, and former President Donald Trump. The 15 Twitter accounts and 1 TikTok account identified in the report use a range of personas to impersonate US voters and AI-generated audio, video, and images are increasingly present in Spamouflage content.

Spamouflage narratives have evolved over time to focus on sowing political division and undermining faith in the US electoral process. Analysis from Graphika and ASPI in 2020 showed that criticism of US policies and response to crises were dominant themes in Spamouflage content, including the United States’ response to the Covid-19 pandemic compared to the PRC’s, police brutality and the government’s handling of protests, and US foreign policy.[24] Research from the Microsoft Threat Analysis Center that identified and analyzed over 2,000 assessed Spamouflage Twitter and YouTube accounts over 11 months in 2021 showed that most of the accounts were created during the six-month period from September 2020 to March 2021, peaking in November.[25] The surge in accounts created during the US election season indicates that Spamouflage operators were directing content at the US public.

Graphika reported that Spamouflage began to explicitly engage with election-related topics before the 2022 US midterm elections. In 2023, Spamouflage content started directly criticizing US election candidates, sowing doubt in the legitimacy of the US electoral process, and propagating divisive narratives about polarizing political and social issues. Spamouflage’s evolving focus is consistent with findings from the Institute for Strategic Dialogue (ISD), a UK-based research nonprofit. ISD reported in February that suspected Spamouflage accounts focused on creating a sense of dismay in the United States by portraying the election as a high-stakes showdown and symbol of a divided United States. Themes at this time also included doubt over election integrity, social problems, and direct criticisms of President Biden.[26] ISD and Graphika, both identified inauthentic accounts posing as American conservatives and Trump supporters.[27] Graphika noted, however, that the content is more representative of efforts to exacerbate social divisions and portray the United States as a country in decline.[28]

A Washington Post investigation revealed that PRC diplomats and pro-PRC diaspora groups in the United States coordinated and participated in violent actions against anti-Xi Jinping protesters during his visit in November. Pro-CCP rival protesters violently assaulted Chinese anti-CCP protesters during demonstrations from November 15-17 as CCP General Secretary Xi Jinping visited San Francisco to participate in the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum. The pro-CCP protesters instigated violence against anti-Xi protesters, including attacks with flagpoles, chemical sprays, and physical assaults, as documented in verified videos. PRC diplomats from the Los Angeles and San Francisco consulates were present among the pro-CCP protesters.

The Washington Post obtained WeChat messages that show that the Los Angeles PRC Consulate paid for the hotels and meals of counter-protesters as an incentive to participate in the demonstrations. The Washington Post reported that PRC diplomats hired at least 60 private security guards to “protect” the pro-CCP diaspora groups that gathered to welcome Xi Jinping, according to seven individuals involved in the arrangement. At least 35 pro-CCP diaspora groups from various states—including New York, Pennsylvania, and Washington—mobilized for the protests. Washington Post stated that a number of the participating pro-CCP diaspora groups have links to the PRC’s United Front Work Department, which aims to co-opt civilian Chinese groups to align with CCP interests.

This is not the first instance of PRC officials’ involvement in the violent suppression of dissident protesters. The PRC Manchester Consul General Zheng Xiyuan and consulate staff were recorded in October 2022 dragging a Hong Kong pro-democracy protester inside the consulate grounds and beating him.[29] Six PRC diplomats, including Zheng, left the UK after they were wanted for questioning by the police for their involvement in the incident.[30]

The PRC is involved in a range of unauthorized transnational repression activities throughout the world. The Spain-based human rights NGO Safeguard Defenders investigated in 2022 over a hundred alleged overseas police stations in countries across the world, which operate under the guise of providing consular services such as renewing passports and driver’s licenses.[31] The stations intimidate and coerce dissidents to return to the PRC as part of a Ministry of Public Security (MPS)-run repatriation campaign. One of the organizers of the pro-CCP demonstrations in San Francisco is the self-described “backbone” of an overseas consular assistance volunteers program that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs established in 2013.[32]

The US Department of Justice (DOJ) indicted two PRC nationals in April 2023 on charges of acting as agents of the PRC for operating a “secret police station” on behalf of the PRC Ministry of Public Security (MPS) that conducted monitoring and intimidation of Chinese dissidents living in the United States.[33] The DOJ also indicted 40 MPS officers for using inauthentic social media accounts to harass PRC dissidents living in the US.[34] DOJ also charged the officers with attempting to recruit US nationals who were sympathetic to CCP narratives as “unwitting” agents of the PRC.

New York authorities arrested former New York Governor Kathy Hochul's aide Linda Sun and her husband Chris Su on federal charges of acting as unregistered foreign agents for the PRC. The DOJ-issued indictment alleges that Sun “used her position of influence among executives to covertly promote PRC and CCP agendas.” Sun’s activities extended to preventing meetings with Taiwanese government representatives; changing high-level New York State officers’ messaging regarding issues of importance to the PRC and the CCP, including eliminating references to Taiwan and Uyghurs from state communications; and obtaining official New York State proclamations for PRC government representatives without proper authorization.[35] The indictment states that Sun actively concealed that she took actions at the direction of the PRC. Sun and Su also allegedly laundered millions of dollars for the PRC and used the monetary benefits of this scheme to buy luxury vehicles and property in New York, according to the IRS.

Governor Hochul stated that her office fired Sun as soon as it had discovered her misconduct.[36] Sun served for 15 months in Hochul’s administration as her deputy chief of staff and had worked for the NY governor’s office for years prior under Governor Andrew Cuomo as a liaison to the Asian-American community and deputy chief diversity officer.[37] The New York Times cited anonymous NY lawmakers who stated that Cuomo’s office was sensitive to Taiwan issues during Sun’s time there, including expressing resistance to pro-Taiwan resolutions in the State Legislature.[38]

Hochul called for the expulsion of the New York PRC consul general in response to Sun’s alleged activities.[39] US Department of State spokesperson Matthew Miller stated on September 4 that the consul general had already “rotated out” of his position at the end of August.[40]

The PRC Ministry of Defense (MOD) accused the United States of threatening global nuclear stability by expanding its arsenal and signing nuclear submarine deals with the UK and Australia. The PRC aims to weaken US credibility on nuclear and non-proliferation issues. US President Joe Biden approved a nuclear weapons strategy in March that reoriented the focus of US nuclear deterrence to the PRC’s expansion of its nuclear arsenal and ordered US forces to prepare for coordinated nuclear confrontations with the PRC, Russia, and North Korea. A US official further said that the United States may expand its nuclear arsenal after the US-Russia New START arms control treaty expires in 2026.[41] MOD spokesperson Wu Qian responded to these developments by criticizing the United States for “using the non-existent ‘China nuclear threat theory’ as an excuse to expand its nuclear arsenal and shirk its nuclear disarmament responsibilities.” He claimed that the PRC “firmly pursues a nuclear strategy of self-defense” and maintains its nuclear forces at the “minimum level required for national security.” He urged the United States to “substantially reduce its nuclear arsenal” and to stop engaging in “nuclear sharing,” “extended deterrence,” and “nuclear alliances.”[42]

Wu also claimed that an Australia-UK-US (AUKUS) deal to sell nuclear-powered submarines to Australia “seriously undermined the international nuclear non-proliferation system, seriously stimulated the nuclear arms race, and seriously endangered regional peace and stability.” He said the agreement allowed the nuclear-armed United States and United Kingdom to transfer nuclear reactors and highly enriched uranium to a non-nuclear state, Australia.[43] The PRC made the same criticisms of the AUKUS deal before and raised them at the International Atomic Energy Agency in May.[44]

PRC state broadcaster CCTV ran a segment on August 27 that publicized a People’s Liberation Army (PLA) air defense exercise to counter enemy drone swarms.[45] The PLA’s focus on countering drone swarms is likely a reaction to Taiwan and the United States’ defense strategies that emphasizes asymmetric defense. The CCTV report stated that the group’s first round of anti-aircraft artillery only achieved 40 percent damage against a drone swarm. A representative from the PLA Ground Force’s 77^th Group Army Duan Xiaolong stated that hitting the drones was challenging due to their small size, speed, and ability to change flight trajectories, which made it easy for gunners to lose the targets.[46] Another representative, Cui Yang, acknowledged the problems and stated that the unit would focus on practicing and improving air defense capabilities.[47]

The PRC recognizes the challenges that drone swarms would pose in the event of an amphibious invasion of Taiwan. A 2023 article from a PRC military periodical explored the lessons that military strategists gleaned from observing both Russia and Ukraine’s successful use of kamikaze drones.[48] The analysis highlights the effectiveness of low-cost drones in destroying high-value targets. The article points out that the PRC must be wary of these drones entering Taiwan, which it can employ against a potential PRC landing force.

Taiwan’s asymmetric defense strategy, formally known as the Overall Defense Concept (ODC), aims to maximize the military’s lethality under resource constraints to compensate for the disparity in military power with the PRC. The ODC focuses in part on exploiting “a large number of small things,” according to former ROC Chief of General Staff and ODC architect Lee His-min.[49] The PLA air defense training follows a June announcement by the Taiwanese Ministry of National Defense to procure 1,000 AI-enabled drones and the development of a US Department of Defense initiative that aims to field large drone swarms.[50]

The PRC is taking note of the United States’ development of its own asymmetric capabilities. TAO spokesperson Zhu Fenglian warned the United States on June 26 against sending “dangerous signals” that expose its intention to “destroy Taiwan to safeguard its own interests.”[51] Zhu’s comments were a response to Indo-Pacific Commander Admiral Samuel Paparo’s statements in a June interview that spoke of a defense concept called “Hellscape,” which would deploy a high volume of unmanned systems to the Taiwan Strait and disrupt an amphibious invasion.[52] Deputy Secretary of Defense Kathleen Hicks announced in August 2023 the Replicator Initiative, which aims to develop the United States’ capability to field large drone swarms to counter the PRC’s numerical advantage in military assets.[53] Hicks called for the United States to leverage platforms that are “small, smart, cheap, and many” against the PRC’s overwhelming mass. The program will likely be a keystone of the Hellscape defense strategy.

Southeast Asia

Philippines

The China Coast Guard (CCG) rammed a Philippine Coast Guard (PCG) vessel near Sabina Shoal as part of its broader intimidation efforts to decrease the Philippine presence in the South China Sea. This is the third time that the CCG rammed a PCG ship near the Shoal during the last two weeks. A CCG ship rammed the PCG BRP Theresa Magbanua near Sabina Shoal on August 31.[54] Commodore Jay Tarriela accused the CCG of deliberately colliding with the anchored PCG ship and emphasized that there was no provocation from the PCG.[55] CCG spokesperson Liu Dejun accused the PCG of intentionally ramming the CCG vessel and accused the Philippines of illegally anchoring in PRC territory.[56] This incident follows the previous deliberate CCG ramming of a PCG vessel near Sabina Shoal on August 19 and 25.[57] The PRC deployed 40 vessels on August 26 to block PCG vessels from delivering necessary supplies to PCG personnel aboard the BRP Theresa Magbanua, which has been anchored in Sabina Shoal since April.[58] The Philippine military has reported a significant increase in the number of PRC ships around Sabina Shoal. Philippine Navy spokesperson Admiral Roy Vincent Trinidad reported that from August 27 to September 2 the Philippine Navy saw 203 PRC vessels in the West Philippine Sea, a 24% increase over the past two weeks.[59] 71 of the PRC vessels were monitored at Sabina Shoal. The PRC vessels were comprised of 53 maritime militia boats, nine PLAN ships, and nine CCG ships.[60]

Sabina Shoal is about 110 nautical miles north of the Philippine island of Palawan. It serves as the main staging ground for supply missions to Second Thomas Shoal, where the BRP Sierra Madre has been intentionally grounded since 1999. The PRC and the Philippines have both accused one another of attempting to assert control over Sabina Shoal. The PCG has committed to maintaining a presence at the Shoal to monitor PRC land reclamation and artificial island building attempts.[61] A PRC-controlled Sabina Shoal would improve the PRC’s ability to assert its claim over the Second Thomas Shoal. Controlling the Shoal would also enable the PRC to more easily intercept Philippine vessels attempting to access or establish a presence around other disputed features in the South China Sea.

The PRC’s presence near Sabina Shoal could continue to make Philippine resupply missions dangerous, making it more difficult for the Philippines to maintain a permanent presence in the Sabina and Second Thomas Shoals. CCG ramming has thus far not coerced the PCG into leaving the Shoals, despite the damages inflicted on PCG ships. The PRC could continue to normalize these ramming incidents around the Sabina Shoal and other disputed features and escalate matters further if they believe it is necessary to protect their territorial claims. Continued CCG escalation could result in the PCG asking for help from the United States.

US Indo-Pacific Command chief Admiral Samual Paparo has suggested providing escorts to Philippine ships completing resupply missions and stated that the United States would come to the aid of its ally if the Philippines invoked the Mutual Defense Treaty.[62] Armed Forces of the Philippines chief General Romero Brawner Jr. told Paparo that the Philippines could still defend itself against the PRC, but would ask for assistance from the United States if it decided that United States assistance was necessary. The PRC has condemned previous joint US-Philippine activities in the South China Sea, and a more significant United States presence in the South China Sea could elicit a stronger response from the PRC.

Cambodia

The PRC will gift Cambodia two Type 056A missile corvettes possibly/likely in exchange for access to the Ream naval base in Sihanoukville. The PRC has trained Cambodia in the operation of the ships and will soon give the Cambodian Navy two new warships, the Type 056A missile corvettes 630 and 631.[63] This comes as the PRC has outfitted the naval base with a new pier.  Around 100 Chinese workers have been preparing the base for transfer to Cambodian control likely in September, according to Radio Free Asia.[64] Cambodian personnel have been barred from accessing the new part of the base.[65] Cambodia's constitution forbids the construction of foreign military bases on its soil, but Cambodia can circumvent this by merely giving the PLA preferred or exclusive access to the base. Only PLAN vessels have been able to use the port's new pier. Cambodia rerouted two Japanese destroyers to Sihanoukville’s other port in February; more recently, it rerouted an Australian frigate to the same place. PRC corvettes, on the other hand, docked at the pier in December and have been there "on and off."[66] These corvettes are the same type that the PRC will transfer to Cambodia.

The PRC’s military diplomacy in Cambodia supports its efforts to grow PRC economic and diplomatic influence in Southeast Asia, as well as its efforts to expand its naval power projection. The PRC likely deems a naval port in Cambodia a strategic interest because it could provide a more forward position near the Malacca Strait, a critical energy chokepoint through which most of the PRC’s overseas oil imports must pass.[67] Cambodia is also one of the PRC’s major economic partners. The PRC has constructed airports, roads, hotels, and other properties in the country. The PRC’s interests in Cambodia reflect its interests in Southeast Asia more broadly: expansion of economic interests tied to geopolitical goals.

Oceania

The Pacific Islands Forum removed an affirmation of Taiwan’s “development partner” status in its joint communique following backlash from the PRC. It did not bar Taiwan’s participation in the forum despite PRC pressure, however. The annual Pacific Islands Forum (PIF) took place in Nuku’alofa, Tonga from August 26-30. The PIF released a joint statement on its website after the forum that “reaffirmed the 1992 Leaders decision on relations with Taiwan/Republic of China," which gave Taiwan “development partner” status in the forum. The development partner status is equivalent to a limited observer role in other organizations. Taiwan is the only country that holds development partner status with the forum. Nikkei Asia reported that PRC special envoy to the Pacific Qian Bo was visibly angry about the communique and confronted PIF Secretary-General Baron Waqa, calling the statement “unacceptable.” Qian then told reporters that "Taiwan is part of China. Taiwan is not a dialogue partner of PIF, so China has the representation on behalf of the whole of China, including Taiwan and the mainland.” He claimed that the statement “must be a mistake," as 15 of the 18 PIF members "have categorically stated they abide by the 'One-China' principle."[68] PIF members Palau, Tuvalu, and the Marshall Islands maintain diplomatic relations with Taiwan. The PIF removed the communique from its website the same evening and posted a new version on August 31 that omitted the reference to Taiwan. A forum spokesperson denied that the forum had bowed to PRC pressure and said the draft that mentioned Taiwan was uploaded by mistake. The spokesperson said “PIF would never have taken down the document if the leaders had agreed to it,” suggesting that some PIF members did not agree to the language about Taiwan.[69]

The PIF did not remove Taiwan’s participation in the forum, however, despite Australian media reporting that the PRC pressured the Solomon Islands to put forth a motion to strip Taiwan of its “development partner” status. The Solomon Islands has been one of the PRC’s closest partners among the Pacific Islands since it broke ties with Taiwan in 2019 and recognized the PRC. It will host the next PIF in 2025.[70] The PRC often pressures countries to bar or restrict Taiwan’s participation in international organizations to reduce Taiwan’s international status and voice. Taiwan signed a three-year financial cooperation agreement with the PIF Secretariat after the forum ended, indicating its continued involvement.[71]

 

 

China-Taiwan Weekly Update, August 30, 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 People's Republic of China (PRC) flew 32 military aircraft over the Taiwan Strait median line while ROC President Lai Ching-te was in Kinmen County to commemorate the Second Taiwan Strait Crisis. The PRC possibly used the flights to signal its opposition to Lai attending the commemoration ceremony.
• The PRC signaled its interest in permitting Fujian residents to resume tourism to Kinmen County while meeting with KMT officials. Restoring tourism to Kinmen after negotiation with the KMT would advance the PRC’s goals of economic integration and engendering support in Taiwan for KMT policies.
• PRC Foreign Minister Wang Yi met with US National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan for a round of strategic talks in Beijing to help stabilize the bilateral relationship. The PRC did not signal any policy change on issues of US concern but agreed to future military talks and a call between heads of state Xi Jinping and Joe Biden.
• The PRC deployed Chinese Coast Guard, PLA Navy, and Maritime Militia vessels to Sabina Shoal as part of an effort to block resupply missions and dislodge the Philippine Coast Guard’s long-term presence at the shoal.
• A PLA reconnaissance plane breached Japanese airspace for the first time on August 26. The PRC released a statement calling the violation accidental and “extremely regrettable.”
• The PRC conducted military drills along the PRC-Myanmar border likely to deter further escalation of fighting between the military junta and rebels along the border and spillover into its southwestern territory.

Cross-Strait Relations

Taiwan

The People's Republic of China (PRC) flew 32 military aircraft over the Taiwan Strait median line while ROC President Lai Ching-te was in Kinmen County to commemorate the Second Taiwan Strait Crisis. The PRC possibly used the flights to signal its opposition to Lai attending the commemoration ceremony. Kinmen is a group of Taiwan-controlled islands with a large military garrison roughly 3 kilometers from the coast of the PRC. Lai gave a speech in Kinmen County on August 23 during a commemoration ceremony on the 66th anniversary of the Second Taiwan Strait Crisis in 1958, when the PRC unleashed a heavy artillery barrage against Kinmen. The PRC flew 32 aircraft across the median line for two consecutive days from August 22-23, marking the largest number of PLA aircraft median line crossings in August.[1] The PRC also flew two military drones around Taiwan on August 23. The PRC has used similar flights to signal its disapproval of political developments that express or support Taiwan’s sovereignty, including PLA sorties into Taiwan’s de facto Air Defense Identification Zone.

Four China Coast Guard (CCG) ships also sailed into Kinmen’s restricted waters on August 21, marking the second incursion into Kinmen’s waters that week.[2] Kinmen has been a focus of cross-strait tension since February when the China Coast Guard (CCG) and other official vessels began aggressively asserting their presence in waters under Taiwan’s jurisdiction. The timing of the incursions suggests a connection between the CCG activities and Lai’s visit.

The PRC Taiwan Affairs Office (TAO) criticized ROC President Lai Ching-te on August 23 for highlighting the growing threat that the PRC poses to Taiwan. TAO spokesperson Zhu Fenglian called Lai’s separatist policies the biggest threat to peace in the Taiwan Strait and ridiculed the Lai administration’s portrayal of the PRC as a threat as an exaggeration.[3] Zhu accused Lai of militarism and wasting the money of Taiwanese citizens with weapons purchases. Zhu stated that “Taiwan independence” and peace in the Strait are incompatible. The PRC’s criticism aims to portray the Lai administration’s policies as responsible for escalating cross-strait tensions and shift blame to the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) for the PRC’s aggression.

The PRC signaled its interest in permitting Fujian residents to resume tourism to Kinmen County while meeting with KMT officials. Restoring tourism to Kinmen after negotiation with the KMT would advance the PRC’s goals of economic integration and engendering support in Taiwan for KMT policies. Director of the Taiwan Affairs Office Song Tao met with Kinmen County Council Chairman Hung Yun-tien and Kinmen’s representative in the LY Jessica Chen Yu-jen on August 22 in Beijing to discuss strengthening exchanges between the mainland and Kinmen County. The discussions focused on the possibility of resuming tourism to Kinmen by Fujian residents, which Chen has outspokenly advocated for.[4] The PRC suspended individual tourism to Taiwan in 2019, citing poor cross-strait relations.[5] 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.[6] The PRC recently resumed tourism to the Matsu Islands, another Taiwan-controlled territory close to the mainland, indicating a willingness to meet the demand for economic engagement in Taiwan’s economically vulnerable outlying islands. The TAO noted in the readout from Song’s meeting with Chen that Kinmen’s tourism sector and the wider economy have suffered from the suspension of tourism.[7] The readout stated that Kinmen would benefit from “integrated development” that restoring tourism would bring.

The engagement with Kinmen KMT officials is consistent with the CCP’s efforts to legitimize the KMT as a good-faith partner that is capable of stabilizing cross-strait relations to the benefit of the citizens of Taiwan. The PRC has a track record of making conciliatory gestures in cross-strait relations after meetings with KMT officials. The PRC announced its decision to resume tourism for Fujian residents to Matsu while receiving a KMT Caucus Whip Fu Kun-chi’s delegation in April.[8] The PRC severed contact with the governing Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) in 2016 for its alleged separatist policies.

Taiwan’s Ministry of Justice Investigation Bureau (MJIB) is investigating former PC manufacturing executive Chen Yu for potentially poaching IT workers to work for a joint venture with a PRC state-owned enterprise (SOE). MJIB has evidence that Chen offered high salaries to more than 100 computer engineers, designers, and technicians from his former employer Shuttle Inc. to work for Uniwill, a gaming laptop company that Chen co-owns and operates with PRC SOE Tsinghua Tongfang Co.[9] Tsinghua Tongfang is a large technology company involved in the production of goods whose applications span security, military industry, internet applications, digital TV operations, LED, and system integration.[10] Tsinghua Tongfang is also a supplier of military end-use products to the People’s Liberation Army (PLA), including wireless communications, satellite navigation equipment, information security software, and electronic countermeasure equipment.[11]

China National Nuclear Corporation (CNNC) became the controlling shareholder of Tsinghua Tongfang Co. in 2019.[12] CNNC is a state-owned and managed enterprise that oversees the PRC’s civilian and military nuclear programs.[13] CNNC is “a leading element of national strategic nuclear forces and nuclear energy development” and “undertakes missions to ensure national security and facilitate domestic economic development,” according to its mission statement.[14]

The Taipei District Prosecutor’s Office stated that Chen circumvented the law that requires PRC investments and companies to apply for approval with the Ministry of Economic Affairs. Poaching Taiwanese talent to help PRC SOEs research and develop products from Tsinghua Tongfang undermines Taiwan’s security, according to the prosecutors. If found guilty, Chen’s activities would constitute a violation of the Cross-strait Act, which regulates exchanges between the PRC and ROC to uphold national security.

The Taiwan High Prosecutor’s Office Kaohsiung Division charged three members of Taiwan’s Chinese Unification Promotion Party for acting as agents of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).[15] The Prosecutor’s Office found evidence that Taiwanese businessman Wen Long acted on behalf of the United Front Work Department to recruit two retired ROC military officers to provide the CCP with intelligence on Taiwan’s military and advance United Front causes in Taiwan.[16] Prosecutors claim that Wen persuaded the retired military officers to develop networks to recruit other military personnel and join the Chinese Unification Promotion Party. The Chinese Unification Promotion Party is a minor far-right that does not have any representation in the government or legislature.

The United Front is a whole-of-government and society effort to advance the CCP’s ideology and interests. United Front work is pervasive throughout the CCP’s political strategy. Overt United Front work entails public alliance building and soft power initiatives to win the hearts and minds of Chinese-ethnic people and encourage ideological alignment between the CCP and the rest of society.[17] United Front work can also support covert and clandestine activities, such as infiltration, manipulation, co-optation, and intelligence gathering on target groups.[18] In June, a series of Taiwanese YouTubers and online celebrities confessed that the CCP contacted them and published contract letters that outlined goals to influence Taiwanese politics[19]. YouTuber Ba Jiong revealed that the contract he received discussed a plan to establish a “Taiwan Support Party” that artists and celebrities would join as honorary members to shape the future of PRC-Taiwan relations.[20] 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. 

China

PRC Foreign Minister Wang Yi met with US National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan for a round of strategic talks in Beijing to help stabilize the bilateral relationship. The PRC did not signal any policy change on issues of US concern but agreed to future military talks and a call between heads of state Xi Jinping and Joe Biden. This was Sullivan and Wang’s fifth meeting and Sullivan’s first trip to the PRC under the Joe Biden administration. The two sides agreed to plan a leader-level call “in the coming weeks,” a theater commander telephone call “in the near future,” and a second round of US-PRC talks on artificial intelligence “in due course.” A US readout said the two discussed a wide range of issues including the implementation of commitments on counternarcotics, military-to-military-communications, and AI safety that US President Joe Biden and CCP General Secretary Xi Jinping agreed to during their meeting in San Francisco in November 2023. Sullivan raised continued concerns about the PRC’s unfair trade policies and “non-market economic practices.” He also raised US concerns about tensions in the Taiwan Strait, the PRC’s support for Russia’s defense industrial base, and the PRC’s “destabilizing actions” against lawful Philippine maritime operations in the South China Sea.[21]

According to a PRC readout of the meeting, Wang Yi said that peaceful and smooth US-PRC relations required mutual respect, abiding by the three US-PRC joint communiques, and establishing a “correct understanding” of the PRC’s development priorities. Wang claimed that Taiwan belongs to China and urged the United States not to support “Taiwan independence,” which he called the biggest threat to peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait. Wang also said the United States should stop “suppressing China” in trade, science, and technology, and stop using "overcapacity" as an excuse to engage in protectionism. He said the United States must not use bilateral treaties to undermine the PRC’s “sovereignty and territorial integrity” in the South China Sea and must not condone the Philippines' “infringing actions." He claimed the PRC has always been committed to promoting peace, dialogue, and a political solution to the “Ukrainian crisis” and said the United States should not “abuse illegal unilateral sanctions.”[22] The two also discussed shared concerns about North Korea, Myanmar, and the Middle East.

This is the first time since 2016 that a US National Security Advisor has visited the PRC. Wang and Sullivan have met before on several occasions, however, including three “secret” meetings in Vienna, Malta, and Bangkok since May 2023. Financial Times reported that the low-profile meetings were part of a “strategic channel” that US President Joe Biden and CCP General Secretary Xi Jinping agreed to establish when they met in Bali, Indonesia for the G20 summit in November 2022. The strategic channel held its first meeting in Vienna months after the US military shot down a PRC spy balloon that flew over the United States in February 2024.[23]

Sullivan met with CMC Vice Chair Zhang Youxia, the PRC’s highest-ranked uniformed officer, on August 29. Sullivan and Zhang agreed to continue military-to-military communication.[24] A PRC readout said Zhang stressed that the “Taiwan issue” is an “insurmountable red line” in US-PRC relations. He said the PLA has a mission to oppose “independence” and promote “reunification.” He demanded that the United States stop “military collusion” with Taiwan, stop arming Taiwan, and stop “spreading false narratives” involving Taiwan.[25]

Sullivan also had a surprise meeting with CCP General Secretary Xi Jinping on August 29. A US readout said the two discussed many of the same issues as in the Sullivan-Wang meeting but did not offer much detail.[26] A PRC readout largely focused on Xi’s comments about the US-PRC relationship in general and struck a conciliatory tone, with little mention of specific issues. Xi said the United States and PRC must clearly answer the question of whether they are rivals or partners, presenting this as a binary choice. He said he hoped the United States would “work in the same direction as China” and view the PRC’s development in a “positive and rational light.”[27]

The United States placed sanctions and trade restrictions on hundreds of PRC companies for ties to the Russian military. The United States State Department imposed sanctions on August 23 on more than 400 PRC entities and individuals for their support for Russia’s defense industrial base and war efforts in Ukraine.[28] PRC companies shipping microelectronics and machine tools were of particular concern in this round of sanctions. The State Department previously warned Beijing against supporting the Russian military and taking actions that could assist Russia in averting Western sanctions. That same day the United States Treasury Department reported that it has been targeting transnational networks assisting with the procurement of ammunition and other essential equipment for the Russian military.[29] Additionally, 42 PRC entities were added to the United States Department of Commerce’s Bureau of Industry and Security Entity List on August 23.[30] The Entity List compiles individuals, companies, and organizations that pose a national security risk to the United States. Entities on this list are subject to trade restrictions for certain technologies and goods.[31]

The PRC Ministry of Commerce released a statement on August 25 opposing US sanctions. The Ministry accused the United States of disrupting international trade and preventing normal economic exchanges.[32] The PRC stated that it would take steps to safeguard the rights of its companies operating internationally. PRC special envoy for Eurasian affairs Li Hui also commented on the sanctions saying that “a particular country” was attempting to place blame on countries with economic ties to Russia for extending the war in Ukraine.[33] Li’s statement drew a clear distinction between PRC efforts promoting peace in Ukraine and the United States’s efforts to sow division in the international community.

Northeast Asia

Japan

A PLA reconnaissance plane breached Japanese airspace for the first time on August 26. The PRC released a statement calling the violation accidental and “extremely regrettable.” The Y-9 reconnaissance plane flew over Japan’s Danjo Islands west of Kyushu.[34] The Japanese defense ministry scrambled jets in response and issued a strong protest against Beijing. Japanese Vice Foreign Minister Masataka Okano summoned a senior Chinese official from the embassy in Tokyo to lodge a complaint against the violation and prevent this action from occurring again. The Japanese Defense Ministry released a map of the Y-9’s flight path and reported that the aircraft remained in Japanese territorial airspace for about two minutes.[35] This is the first confirmed instance of a PLA military aircraft entering Japanese territorial airspace. The Japanese Self-Defense Force scrambled jets 479 times in response to sightings of Chinese aircraft in international airspace around Japan last year.[36] Chinese Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Lin Jian stated in a regular press conference that the event was “extremely regrettable” and that the PLA had not intended to intrude into Japanese airspace.[37] Apologies for PLA actions are relatively uncommon. This indicates that the violation is likely a genuine mistake or miscalculation by the PLA, and not indicative of a shift in PLA behavior towards Japan.

Southeast Asia

Philippines

The PRC deployed Chinese Coast Guard, PLA Navy, and Maritime Militia vessels to Sabina Shoal as part of an effort to block resupply missions and dislodge the Philippine Coast Guard’s (PCG) long-term presence at the shoal. Philippines NTF-WPS spokesperson Jay Tarriela said that eight PRC vessels engaged in “aggressive and dangerous maneuvers” around the Philippine BFAR vessel BRP Datu Sanday as it traveled between Half-Moon Shoal and Sabina Shoal to resupply Philippine fishermen with fuel, food, and medical supplies on August 25. Tarriela said that CCG vessels encircled and rammed the Datu Sanday, blasted horns, and deployed water cannons against the BFAR ship until the ship’s engine failed and it was forced to end the resupply mission.[38] The CCG and PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) accused the Philippine ship of intruding into PRC waters near Sabina Shoal and deliberately colliding with a CCG vessel.[39] PRC state media Global Times cited Ding Duo, the deputy director of the Institute of Maritime Law and Policy at the PRC’s state-funded National Institute for South China Sea Studies, who claimed that the Philippine ship was trying to supply the BRP Teresa Magbanua, the Philippine Coast Guard’s (PCG’s) largest vessel, which has been anchored at Sabina Shoal since April.[40] The CCG also claimed to have rescued Philippine personnel who fell overboard during the confrontation, a claim that Tarriela denied as “groundless” misinformation.[41

Tarriela said that the PRC deployed 40 vessels on August 26, the following day, to block the PCG vessels BRP Cabra and BRP Cape Engaño from delivering food and supplies to Philippine personnel aboard the Teresa Magbanua at Sabina Shoal. The PRC vessels included six CCG ships, three PLAN ships, and 31 maritime militia vessels that swarmed waters near the shoal and successfully obstructed the resupply mission.[42] The Philippines originally dispatched the Teresa Magbanua on a long-term deployment at Sabina Shoal in response to what it claimed was evidence of early-stage PRC island reclamation activities at the shoal.[43] CCG ships also rammed and damaged the BRP Cape Engaño and another PCG ship, the BRP Bagacay, near Sabina Shoal on August 19.[44]

Sabina Shoal is about 110 nautical miles north of the Philippine island of Palawan and serves as the main staging ground for Philippine supply missions to nearby Second Thomas Shoal, which is 35 nautical miles to its west, and other places in the South China Sea. Half-Moon Shoal is located approximately 60 nautical miles north of Palawan.[45] The Philippines has de facto control of Sabina, Half-Moon, and Second Thomas Shoals including a grounded warship on Second Thomas Shoal that serves as a Philippine military outpost. All three features are within the Philippine Exclusive Economic Zone. The PRC also claims these features, however, as it does with the rest of the Spratly Islands archipelago.

The PRC is drawing parallels between the PCG presence at Sabina Shoal and the “illegally grounded” Philippine warship at Second Thomas Shoal to justify its aggressive actions against the Philippines. The Philippines deliberately grounded its warship BRP Sierra Madre on Second Thomas Shoal in 1999 and has used the ship as a military outpost on the shoal since then. MFA spokesperson Lin Jian said on August 26 that the Philippines’ long-term stationing of the Teresa Magbanua at Sabina Shoal and its resupply missions to the ship “seriously violated” PRC sovereignty and the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea.[46] PRC state-owned media Global Times repeatedly referred to the Teresa Magbanua as a “quasi-grounded” ship. It cited the South China Sea expert Ding Duo who speculated that the Philippines may try to air-drop supplies to the ship as it has done at Second Thomas Shoal, now that the PRC blocked three subsequent resupply missions on August 19, 25, and 26.[47] The Philippines successfully used a helicopter to resupply its ship on August 29.[48]

Philippine and PRC officials negotiated a provisional agreement on July 21 to allow for resupply missions to the Sierra Madre. The current status of this agreement is unclear. The Philippines carried out a resupply mission of the Sierra Madre on July 27. Nearby PRC vessels did not interfere.[49] Philippine Undersecretary for Foreign Affairs Maria Theresa Lazaro said Manila would review the agreement after PRC aircraft fired flares near a Philippine military plane over Scarborough Shoal on August 8.[50] The PRC has repeatedly objected to Philippine supply missions to the Sierra Madre, especially shipments of construction equipment that the Philippines could use to reinforce the dilapidated warship.

The PRC fired flares at a Philippine government plane that flew over Subi Reef and Scarborough Shoal in the South China Sea. Subi Reef is a disputed territory in the Spratly Islands that the PRC has occupied since 1988 but the Philippines, Vietnam, and Taiwan also claim. The PRC artificially expanded Subi Reef through island reclamation and built a military base there beginning in 2014.[51] The Philippines released a video showing that the PRC fired flares from the island as a Philippines Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources (BFAR) plane flew in the island’s airspace on August 22. Spokesperson for the Philippines National Task Force on the West Philippine Sea Jay Tarriela said that the BFAR plane was conducting a patrol jointly with the Philippine Coast Guard to monitor and intercept poachers encroaching on the Philippine Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). Tarriela said that PLA aircraft fired flares in the path of the same BFAR plane on August 19 when the plane flew over PRC-occupied Scarborough Shoal.[52] PLA aircraft also fired flares in the path of a Philippine Air Force light transport plane over Scarborough Shoal on August 8, the first aerial confrontation between the two countries since bilateral tensions started rising in the South China Sea in 2023.[53]

Myanmar

The PRC conducted military drills along the PRC-Myanmar border likely to deter further escalation of fighting between the military junta and rebels along the border and spillover into its southwestern territory. Myanmar’s northern Shan state, which borders the PRC, has seen an increase in fighting since last October. Earlier this month rebel armies captured the towns of Lashio and Mogok, which were home to a major junta military headquarters and the center of Myanmar’s gem-mining industry, respectively.[54] The PLA Southern Theater Command announced 3-day live-fire military drills near the PRC-Myanmar border in the vicinity of the cities of Ruili and Zhenkang in the PRC’s southwestern Yunnan province. [55]  The PLA statement said the drills included armed patrols along the border and air-to-ground joint patrols. The Southern Theater Command said that these drills are focused on maintaining stability within the border areas.

The PRC has allied itself with Myanmar’s State Administration Council (SAC) since it took power in a 2021 coup. The SAC has encouraged continued PRC investment in several economic projects including maintaining natural gas pipelines, constructing ports, and mining rare earth minerals. The PRC’s economic investments in Myanmar and worries about its border security have resulted in a number of PRC-led peace efforts between the SAC and rebel armies. Previous peace efforts have been ineffective, resulting in continued fighting along the PRC border. Shelling from across the Myanmar border since the start of the fighting wounded five PRC citizens in January.[56] The PRC recently opened fire into Myanmar following SAC airstrikes as a warning to military forces along their border.[57] The PRC has made it clear that regardless of its alignment with the SAC, any fighting that threatens to extend into its territory will be met with a response.

Russia

The PRC is trying to generate support in the Global South for its Ukraine war peace plan, likely to ensure Russia’s participation in the next round of peace talks. The PRC Special Representative for Eurasian Affairs Li Hui promoted the PRC-Brazil “Six-point Consensus” to deescalate the war in Ukraine on August 27 after a round of shuttle diplomacy to Brazil, South Africa, and Indonesia. Li has traveled to the “important members of the Global South” since July 28 to generate support for the PRC’s efforts to mediate the war and promote peace talks. Li stated during a briefing that all three countries agree to the PRC’s conditions for a peace summit, which includes Russia’s participation.[58] He implied that Brazil, South Africa, and Indonesia would support Russia’s participation by emphasizing that all three “have maintained communication with both Russia and Ukraine and stay committed to a political settlement to the crisis through dialogue and negotiation.”[59]

Li also criticized Western countries’ continuous loosening of conditions for providing weapons to Ukraine for intensifying the conflict.[60]

Readouts from Li’s meetings in all three countries stated that the host country appreciated the PRC’s role in mediating the crisis.[61] The PRC’s peace plans, including its joint statement with Brazil and a 12-point plan from February 2023, have failed to gain traction with Ukraine, the United States, and most European countries, despite claims from the PRC to the contrary.

Li’s trip came after statements on June 21 from Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba and Deputy Head of the Office of the President Igor Zhovkva that Ukraine is interested in having a “Global South” country host a second peace summit, which Ukraine aims to hold before the end of the year.[62] Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy repeated Ukraine’s interest in hosting the next peace summit in a Global South country during an interview on August 25.[63] Zelenskyy also stated on July 15 that Russian representatives should be present at the next peace summit.[64] The PRC did not attend the first peace summit that took place in Switzerland from June 15-16 in protest of Russia’s exclusion.[65]

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:

1. Mutual respect for each other’s sovereignty and territorial integrity;
2. Mutual non-aggression;
3. Non-interference in each other's internal affairs;
4. Equality and cooperation for mutual benefit; and
5. 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 14^th 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]