The Taiwan Crisis - PRC Drills Analysis - China Blocks JeM Terrorist's Listing - Yuan Wang 5 to Dock in SL - Wang Yi's Diplomacy - Xi-Biden Meeting - 20th Congress Data - COVID Outbreaks
I. India-China Ties
On Friday, China’s Ambassador to India, Sun Weidong, held a briefing with journalists from key Indian media outlets on Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives Nancy Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan. The Chinese embassy has put out the details of Sun’s comments. In fact, if you scan through the embassy’s website, you can see that they’ve been rather busy engaging with media outlets to shape the discourse around Pelosi’s visit and the situation in Taiwan.
Below, I am listing down the key points that Sun made in his engagement. But it’s worth noting that these are basically the official talking points from Beijing, which I’ve fleshed out in detail later when breaking down the White Paper on Taiwan that was published this week. Sun said:
The visit is just a political farce. The US is the culprit of the crisis
Taiwan belongs to China since ancient times, and has never been a country. Both sides of the Taiwan Strait belong to one and the same China. This has been the status quo of Taiwan since ancient times.
Facing the reckless moves of the US side and the Taiwan DPP authorities, the Chinese side has no choice but to fight back.
Specifically on India, Sun said:
“China and India are important neighbors to each other. The two peoples sympathized with and helped each other cordially in the process of fighting for national independence and liberation. On the occasion to celebrate 75th anniversary of India’s Independence, I would like to pay tribute to Mahatma Gandhi and those sages and leaders of India for their contributions and endless efforts to seek for independence. After the founding of the People's Republic of China and India's Independence, both countries adhere to independence, seek for the path that most suitable to its own national conditions, and achieve new progresses in the journey of pursing national prosperity. China and India jointly initiated the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence, and advocate upholding sovereignty and territorial integrity, and non-interference in each other's internal affairs. The one-China principle is the political foundation of the China-India relations. We have released a series of political documents, stating that “The Indian side recalled that India was among the first countries to recognize that there is one China and its one China policy remains unaltered. The Indian side stated it would continue to abide by its one China policy.” In 1971, India voted to support the People's Republic of China to restore its lawful seat in the United Nations. The Chinese side appreciates the position of the Indian side above. It is hoped that the Indian side can adhere to independent foreign policy, understand and support China's justified position and its efforts to defend sovereignty, security and development interests, and honor the one-China principle. It is also hoped that our Indian media friends could be aware of the instigation by “Taiwan independence” separatist forces, hold an objective, rational and independent position in reporting Taiwan-related stories, and follow the one-China principle commitment made by the Indian government, so as to avoid being misled by anti-China forces and ‘Taiwan independence’ separatist forces.”
In these comments, we see a conflation of the one-China policy (一个中国政策) and one-China principle (一个中国原则). I think it’s worthwhile to highlight here that there is a difference between the two, because I am not sure the Indian side has said anything about adhering to the one-China principle. In fact, even on the one-China policy, it’s been a long, long time that India said anything to reaffirm the policy. In fact, on Friday, in its first remarks on the situation, the MEA did not mention the one-China policy.
The MEA spokesperson said: “Like many other countries, India too is concerned at recent developments. We urge the exercise of restraint, avoidance of unilateral actions to change status quo, de-escalation of tensions and efforts to maintain peace and stability in the region.” HT’s report on the briefing adds:
“A reporter from China’s state-run Xinhua news agency pointedly mentioned Pelosi’s visit to ‘China’s Taiwan region’ and the support received by Beijing from some 170 countries on the ‘one-China’ principle, and asked about India’s position on this matter but the spokesperson was not drawn out on the issue. ‘India’s relevant policies are well-known and consistent. They do not require reiteration,’ Bagchi replied.”
Anyway, back to the difference between the one-China policy and one-China principle.
My understanding of the one-China principle is that this is something that the PRC emphasises. It argues that there is only one China and the PRC government is the legitimate government of that China, with Taiwan being an inalienable part of that China. In contrast, the one-China policy has been a useful diplomatic innovation, which leaves room for some ambiguity. It recognises that there is only one China, but it also acknowledges that both sides across the Taiwan strait have certain claims. This was a work-around, which allowed the US and others to maintain informal relations with Taiwan.
Meanwhile, what the embassy’s readout of the meeting does not mention is the discussion over the listing of Abdul Rauf Asghar, deputy chief of the proscribed terror group Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM) as a UNSC-designated terrorist. Earlier this week, ThePrint’s Nayanima Basu reported that:
“India had Thursday moved a proposal — co-sponsored by the US — at the UN Security Council to get Asghar listed by the group’s 1267 Sanctions Committee, top diplomatic sources told ThePrint. However, China placed a ‘technical hold’ on the proposal while all other 14 member states of the UN Security Council were ‘supportive of the listing proposal’, a source added. ‘It is unfortunate that the sanctions committee has been prevented from playing its role due to political considerations. China’s actions expose its doublespeak and double standards when it comes to the international community’s shared battle against terrorism,’ a top official said on condition of anonymity. ‘Such politically motivated actions by China, in nearly every listing case of a Pakistan-based terrorist, undermine the entire sanctity of the working methods of the UNSC sanctions committees,’ the official added.”
Worth remembering that in June 2022, China had placed on hold a joint proposal by India and the US to list the deputy chief of the Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT), Abdul Rehman Makki, in the sanctions list.
In his engagement with the Indian media, referenced above, Sun Weidong did talk this issue. ANI reports him as having said that:
“‘China takes part in the work of committees in a constructive and responsible manner, according to the committee rules and procedures. Members of the committee can put on hold terrorist designation listing, this is a common practice. The Chinese side needs more time to evaluate and this will be carried out in accordance with relevant rules and procedures’…He, however, added that ‘China is willing to work with all the countries in the world to combat the menace of international terrorism’. Weidong claimed that China ‘strongly opposes’ terrorism in all its forms…In a reply to another question, Weidong said that the situation at the Line of Actual Control (LAC) was stable. ‘China conducts all activity at border in accordance with agreements signed between India and China. I have no specific info of any movement; the situation at the border is stable at the moment,’ he said replying to a question about reports about military and air force activity near the LAC.”
Meanwhile, Indian Foreign Minister S. Jaishankar doesn’t seem to think that the situation is stable. Speaking at an event in Bengaluru this week, he said that the India-China relationship is very “tense” and it could be a “dangerous situation” because of the border issue…While fielding questions, he said the relationship between India and China “cannot be normal” under the present circumstances. “Despite 16 rounds of commander-level talks between us on the Chinese disengagement along the LAC in Eastern Ladakh, the issue remains unresolved. The Indian Army has been holding its ground for the past two winters, which shows our resolve on standing our ground. We have made some substantial progress in terms of the troops pulling back from places, where they were very close. There are still some places, where they have not,” said the EAM. He added that “India has consistently maintained its position that if China disturbed peace in the border areas it will impact on our bilateral relationship with them.”
Staying on the issue of Ladakh, two interesting developments to note. First this one below regarding the Dalai Lama.
Second, a Nikkei Asia report says that the US and India are preparing to engage in joint drills from October 18 to 31 at an altitude of 10,000 feet in Uttarakhand's Auli. The drills will focus on high-altitude combat training. HT reported:
“US Army Pacific's Major Jonathan Lewis, who handles public affairs, told Nikkei Asia that the strategy for this year's exercise focuses on cold-weather operations, and at high-altitude, an environment that poses distinct challenges. Auli is about 95 km from the Line of Actual Control (LAC), the disputed border between India and China. The drills will take place as part of the 18th edition of an annual joint exercise known as ‘Yudh Abhyas’ (War Practice).”
Next, Bloomberg reported this week that the Indian government is “seeking to restrict Chinese smartphone makers from selling devices cheaper than 12,000 rupees (S$208) to kickstart its faltering domestic industry.” The report informs that: “Smartphones under 12,000 rupees, or US$150, contributed to a third of India's sales volume for the quarter through June 2022, with Chinese companies accounting for up to 80 per cent of those shipments, according to market tracker Counterpoint.”
The Chinese foreign ministry responded to the report this week.
We have noted relevant reports and I would refer you to competent Chinese authorities for the specifics. I want to stress that the trade and economic cooperation between China and India is mutually beneficial in nature. We urge the Indian side to earnestly fulfill its commitment of openness and cooperation, and provide an open, fair, just and nondiscriminatory investment and business environment for Chinese companies. China will firmly support Chinese companies in defending their lawful interests and rights.
I recommend reading through my colleague Pranay Kotasthane’s thread on why this policy is likely to hurt Indians more than the CCP.
Finally, AFP reports that the Sri Lankan government on Saturday granted permission for the controversial Chinese research vessel Yuan Wang 5 to visit the island despite India’s concerns that it could spy on New Delhi's military installations.
HT reported that:
“The Yuan Wang 5 was originally due to call at Sri Lanka’s Chinese-run Hambantota port on August 11, only for Colombo to ask Beijing to indefinitely defer the visit following India’s objections. But Sri Lanka's harbour master, Nirmal P Silva, said he had received foreign ministry clearance for the ship to call at Hambantota from August 16 to 22. ‘The diplomatic clearance was received by me today. We will work with the local agent appointed by the vessel to ensure logistics at the port,’ Silva told AFP.”
Economic Times reports that “India will discuss matter with the Sri Lankan establishment, according to people aware of the matter. India had earlier expressed concern over the presence of the ship, which it had termed a challenge to its security infrastructure.”
The report added: “India on Friday rejected China's statement that it influenced Sri Lanka to deny entry to the vessel. ‘We reject insinuations in the statement about India. Sri Lanka is a sovereign country and makes its own independent decisions," external affairs ministry spokesman Arindam Bagchi said in response to Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson's charge earlier this week, without naming any nation, that the opposition to the visit was ‘senseless’, while urging Sri Lanka to ‘not disturb normal exchanges’.
Also Read:
India, China likely to have Air Force to Air Force hotline to prevent possible flare ups on LAC
The nuclear arsenals of China, India and Pakistan are growing - But the countries are not in an arms race—yet
II. Taiwan White Paper & US Policy
This week, China published a new White Paper on Taiwan (English report). The document says that resolving the Taiwan question “is indispensable for the realization of China's rejuvenation. It is also a historic mission of the Communist Party of China (CPC).”
The first section of the paper makes the point that “Taiwan has belonged to China since ancient times.” It argues that this statement “has a sound basis in history and jurisprudence.” The paper talks about archeological discoveries, research findings and historical records and annals, which it says make this point. After going way back into the past, the document says:
“As a result of the civil war in China in the late 1940s and the interference of external forces, the two sides of the Taiwan Straits have fallen into a state of protracted political confrontation. But the sovereignty and territory of China have never been divided and will never be divided, and Taiwan's status as part of China's territory has never changed and will never be allowed to change.”
Then the document talks about Resolution 2758, which it says is “a political document encapsulating the one-China principle whose legal authority leaves no room for doubt and has been acknowledged worldwide. Taiwan does not have any ground, reason, or right to join the UN, or any other international organization whose membership is confined to sovereign states.”
Then the document says:
“In recent years some elements in a small number of countries, the US foremost among them, have colluded with forces in Taiwan, to falsely claim that the resolution did not conclusively resolve the issue of Taiwan's representation. Puffing up the illegal and invalid Treaty of San Francisco and disregarding the Cairo Declaration, the Potsdam Proclamation and other international legal documents, they profess that the status of Taiwan has yet to be determined, and declare their support for ‘Taiwan's meaningful participation in the UN system’. What they are actually attempting to do is to alter Taiwan's status as part of China and create ‘two Chinas’ or ‘one China, one Taiwan’ as part of a political ploy - using Taiwan to contain China. These actions in violation of Resolution 2758 and international law are a serious breach of political commitments made by these countries. They damage China's sovereignty and dignity, and treat the basic principles of international law with contempt. The Chinese government has condemned and expressed its resolute opposition to them. The one-China principle represents the universal consensus of the international community; it is consistent with the basic norms of international relations. To date, 181 countries including the United States have established diplomatic relations with the PRC on the basis of the one-China principle.”
The second section of the paper talks about the CCP’s efforts to realise “complete reunification.” It says that under Xi Jinping, the Party has taken “a holistic approach to cross-Straits relations in keeping with changing circumstances, added substance to the theory on national reunification and the principles and policies concerning Taiwan, and worked to keep cross-Straits relations on the right track. The CPC developed its overall policy for resolving the Taiwan question in the new era, and set out the overarching guideline and a program of action.”
In January 2019, Xi “proposed major policies to advance the peaceful development of cross-Straits relations and the peaceful reunification of China in the new era.” These are:
working together to promote China's rejuvenation and its peaceful reunification
seeking a Two Systems solution to the Taiwan question and making innovative efforts towards peaceful reunification
abiding by the one-China principle and safeguarding the prospects for peaceful reunification
further integrating development across the Straits and consolidating the foundations for peaceful reunification
forging closer bonds of heart and mind between people on both sides of the Straits and strengthening joint commitment to peaceful reunification
The third section tells us that China’s “complete reunification is a process that cannot be halted.” It makes the following points:
Complete Reunification Is Critical to National Rejuvenation: “Unification brings strength while division leads to chaos. This is a law of history. The realization of complete national reunification is driven by the history and culture of the Chinese nation and determined by the momentum towards and circumstances surrounding our national rejuvenation…The Taiwan question arose as a result of weakness and chaos in our nation, and it will be resolved as national rejuvenation becomes a reality.” — (Quick thought: Essentially, the point being made is that the intent for “reunification” is clear; what matters in achieving this goal is national power. At the same time, I wonder if there is also a bit of a note of caution in there. Since “reuinifcation” is “determined by the momentum towards and circumstances surrounding our national rejuvenation,” then if the forceful reunification fundamentally undermines the rejuvenation project, then is it a viable option?)
National Development and Progress Set the Direction of Cross-Straits Relations: This subsection makes part of the argument that I has suggesting above. It says that “China's development and progress are a key factor determining the course of cross-Straits relations and the realization of complete national reunification…China's development and progress, and in particular the steady increases in its economic power, technological strength, and national defense capabilities, are an effective curb against separatist activities and interference from external forces. They also provide broad space and great opportunities for cross-Straits exchanges and cooperation.”
It further adds: “the mainland is committed to applying the new development philosophy, creating a new development dynamic, and promoting high-quality development. As a result, the overall strength and international influence of the mainland will continue to increase, and its influence over and appeal to Taiwan society will keep growing. We will have a more solid foundation for resolving the Taiwan question and greater ability to do so. This will give a significant boost to national reunification.
Any Attempt by Separatist Forces to Prevent Reunification Is Bound to Fail: Here, the paper attacks the DPP, saying that they have adopted a “separatist stance,” have “colluded with external forces,” have “refuse(d) to recognize the one-China principle,” “proclaim(ed) a new ‘two states’ theory,” “press(ed) for ‘de-sinicization’ and promote(d) ‘incremental independence’,” “incite(d) radical separatists…to lobby for amendments to their ‘constitution’ and ‘laws’,” “built up their military forces with the intention of pursuing ‘independence.’” It adds that “these are obstacles that must be removed in advancing the process of peaceful reunification.”
External Forces Obstructing China's Complete Reunification Will Surely Be Defeated: This section basically criticises US policy with regard to Taiwan. Basically, it characterises US policy as duplicitous and one of “using Taiwan as a pawn to undermine China's development and progress, and obstruct the rejuvenation of the Chinese nation.” It terms “freedom, democracy, and human rights and upholding the rules-based international order” as “smokescreens”
The fourth section talks about the “reunification” policy in the new era. It says that “national reunification by peaceful means is the first choice of the CPC and the Chinese government.” It adds that “Peaceful reunification and One Country, Two Systems are our basic principles for resolving the Taiwan question and the best approach to realizing national reunification.”
“We maintain that after peaceful reunification, Taiwan may continue its current social system and enjoy a high degree of autonomy in accordance with the law. The two social systems will develop side by side for a long time to come. One Country is the precondition and foundation of Two Systems; Two Systems is subordinate to and derives from One Country; and the two are integrated under the one-China principle.” — (I cannot think of anyone in Taiwan buying this argument after the developments in Hong Kong over the past few years. Of course the CCP is cognisant of this. Therefore, the white paper frames the changes in Hong Kong as “appropriate improvements” to the system.)
That said, there is an offer for dialogue in the paper.
“Peaceful reunification can only be achieved through consultation and discussion as equals. The long-standing political differences between the two sides are the fundamental obstacles to the steady improvement of cross-Straits relations, but we should not allow this problem to be passed down from one generation to the next. We can phase in flexible forms of consultation and discussion. We are ready to engage with all parties, groups, or individuals in Taiwan in a broad exchange of views aimed at resolving the political differences between the two sides based on the one-China principle and the 1992 Consensus. Representatives will be recommended by all political parties and all sectors of society on both sides, and they will engage in democratic consultations on peaceful development of cross-Straits relations, integrated development of the two sides, and the peaceful reunification of our country.” — (Quick thought: I find this proposal to talk as equals interesting because under one country two systems, it is one country that underwrites two systems. So how does that make the two sides equal? But an interesting point to note.)
The section then offers the carrot of joint development. It promises the setting up of a pilot zone for integrated cross-Straits development in Fujian Province, cooperation in trade, infrastructure, energy and resources, industrial standards, culture, education, and health care, and the sharing of social security and public resources; it talks about creating a common market, protecting the legitimate rights and interests of Taiwanese in the mainland, supporting enterprises from Taiwan in participating in BRI, etc.
The section adds:
“We are ready to create vast space for peaceful reunification; but we will leave no room for separatist activities in any form…We will work with the greatest sincerity and exert our utmost efforts to achieve peaceful reunification. But we will not renounce the use of force, and we reserve the option of taking all necessary measures. This is to guard against external interference and all separatist activities. In no way does it target our fellow Chinese in Taiwan. Use of force would be the last resort taken under compelling circumstances. We will only be forced to take drastic measures to respond to the provocation of separatist elements or external forces should they ever cross our red lines. We will always be ready to respond with the use of force or other necessary means to interference by external forces or radical action by separatist elements. Our ultimate goal is to ensure the prospects of China's peaceful reunification and advance this process.” (Quick thought: Has Beijing defined its red lines? And how does one understand these red lines if precedent is no longer considered relevant? This is the argument that Beijing has made in terms of its response to Pelosi’s visit.)
Also, criticising US policy on Taiwan, the paper says: “Left unchecked, it will continue to escalate tension across the Straits, further disrupt China-US relations, and severely damage the interests of the US itself. The US should abide by the one-China principle, deal with Taiwan-related issues in a prudent and proper manner, stand by its previous commitments, and stop supporting Taiwan separatists.”
The paper then adds:
“Separatist propaganda and the unresolved political dispute between the two sides have created misconceptions over cross-Straits relations, problems with national identity, and misgivings over national reunification among some fellow Chinese in Taiwan. Blood is thicker than water, and people on both sides of the Straits share the bond of kinship. We have great patience and tolerance and we will create conditions for closer exchanges and communication between the two sides, and to increase our compatriots' knowledge of the mainland and reduce these misconceptions and misgivings, in order to help them resist the manipulation of separatists.”
This tweet offers a useful datapoint to share at this moment:
The final section basically says that “reunification” will basically be awesome for Taiwan and the world.
“Peaceful cross-Straits reunification is of benefit not only to the Chinese nation, but to all peoples and the international community as a whole. The reunification of China will not harm the legitimate interests of any other country, including any economic interests they might have in Taiwan. On the contrary, it will bring more development opportunities to all countries; it will create more positive momentum for prosperity and stability in the Asia-Pacific and the rest of the world; it will contribute more to building a global community of shared future, promoting world peace and development, and propelling human progress. After reunification, foreign countries can continue to develop economic and cultural relations with Taiwan. With the approval of the central government of China, they may set up consulates or other official and quasi-official institutions in Taiwan, international organizations and agencies may establish offices, relevant international conventions can be applied, and relevant international conferences can be held there.”
One final point on the white paper is this context provided by Reuters’ report:
“China had said in two previous white papers on Taiwan, in 1993 and 2000, that it ‘will not send troops or administrative personnel to be based in Taiwan’ after achieving what Beijing terms ‘reunification’. That line, meant to assure Taiwan it would enjoy autonomy after becoming a special administrative region of China, did not appear in the latest white paper.”
Do also check out this thread below.
Meanwhile, in a briefing this week, Kurt Campbell, Deputy Assistant to the President and Coordinator for the Indo-Pacific, spoke about the tensions around Taiwan.
“Last week, the PRC used the visit of a U.S. Speaker of the House — a visit that is consistent with our One China policy and is not unprecedented — as a pretext to launch an intensified pressure campaign against Taiwan and to try to change the status quo, jeopardizing peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait and in the broader region. China has overreacted, and its actions continue to be provocative, destabilizing, and unprecedented. China launched missiles into the waters around Taiwan. It declared exclusion zones around Taiwan that disrupted civilian, air, and maritime traffic. It has sought to disregard the centerline between the PRC and Taiwan, which has been respected by both sides for more than 60 years as a stabilizing feature, with historic numbers of military crossings over the last week. It surrounded Taiwan with more than a dozen warships; even today, several warships remain around Taiwan. And it has imposed sanctions on Speaker Pelosi and her family, and taken coercive economic measures against Taiwan…China’s actions are fundamentally at odds with the goal of peace and stability. They are part of an intensified pressure campaign against Taiwan, which has not ended, and we expect it to continue to unfold in the coming weeks and months. The goal of this campaign is clear: to intimidate and coerce Taiwan and undermine its resilience…
We’ll continue to fly, sail, and operate where international law allows, consistent with our longstanding commitment to freedom of navigation, and that includes conducting standard air and maritime transits through the Taiwan Strait in the next few weeks. We will continue to fulfill our commitments under the Taiwan Relations Act. That includes supporting Taiwan’s self-defense and maintaining our own capacity to resist any resort to force or other forms of coercion that would jeopardize Taiwan’s security, economy, or society. We’ll continue, consistent with our One China policy, to deepen our ties with Taiwan, including through continuing to advance our economic and trade relationship. For example, we’re developing an ambitious roadmap for trade negotiations, which we intend to announce in the coming days.”
Also, do check out this piece by Shannon Tiezzi, in which she analyses foreign ministry statements, press releases, and on-the-record comments to media outlets from 33 counties in the Asia-Pacific region on the Taiwan issue. The countries closer to China’s position are marked in shades of red.
Finally, three pieces on the PLA’s drills that I’d like to excerpt. First, the PLA’s Eastern Theatre Command’s statement (English report) announced the conclusion of the drills this week, saying that it had “accomplished all tasks in the series of joint military operations carried out recently in the waters and airspace around the Taiwan Island.”
“The operations involving troops of multiple services effectively tested the armed forces’ integrated combat ability…The Command will closely follow the development of the situation across the Taiwan Strait, continue to carry out military training for war preparedness, and organize normalized combat-readiness security patrol in the Taiwan Strait to defend China's sovereignty and territorial integrity.”
The report adds that:
The rocket force under the Command launched multiple types of conventional missiles targeting designated maritime areas to the east of the Taiwan Island while the army conducted precision strikes on specific areas in the eastern part of the Taiwan Strait,
troops from the Navy, Air Force, Rocket Force, Strategic Support Force and Logistic Support Force under the Eastern Theater Command conducted joint exercises and training in the waters and airspace off the northern, southwestern and southeastern coasts of the island, including operations of joint blockade, assault on ground and sea targets, airspace control, joint anti-submarine drill, and integrated logistics and support.
The armed forces' integrated combat ability has been improved and their readiness in contingency response been tested
New armaments including stealth fighters, multiple launch rocket systems and YY-20 refueling aircraft were applied in the operations
Second, this report from FT:
“Most of the PLA’s manoeuvres around Taiwan over the past week are listed as options for deterrence activity in a 2020 textbook from China’s National Defence University, including showing new weapons in action and changes in force distribution, as well as restricted military moves to constrain the adversary. Taiwanese defence officials and US experts say Beijing deployed a number of actions that met these criteria: seven areas were closed for live-fire drills, blocking some of the region’s busiest flight routes and shipping lanes; the PLA transported military gear around China; it fired the PHL 16, a heavy rocket artillery system unveiled in a parade only five years ago; and it distributed pictures of China’s newest stealth fighter taking off at night. Above all, the PLA’s deterrence playbook calls for forceful messaging to instil fear of war in its adversary, a tool that was used prominently during the recent exercises. Several times a day, the PLA’s Eastern Theatre Command published videos and pictures of fighters, warships and missiles, and described their activity as practising for an attack on Taiwan or denying US forces access to the area.”
Second, from WSJ:
“What the drills demonstrated, military analysts said, is the progress China has made coordinating different branches of its armed services, a hallmark of a modern military. China appeared to lack the military assets to impose a total blockade on Taiwan, they said, but Beijing showed it had enough maritime firepower to severely disrupt the island’s economy…The drills also reaffirmed before the eyes of the world President Xi Jinping’s intent to turn a sprawling military industrial complex into a cohesive fighting force that, one day, might dominate the Asia Pacific. China’s exercises featured fighter and bomber sorties, along with naval maneuvers, and they showcased what is believed to have been the first time China has launched missiles over the Island of Taiwan. The People’s Liberation Army said Sunday it had conducted joint training in waters and airspace near the island to test its capacity for striking ground targets and engaging in long-range aerial combat…”
“A Beijing-backed group, South China Sea Strategic Situation Probing Initiative, said on its Twitter account that the U.S. deployed surveillance and reconnaissance aircraft to the area, including RC-135s, P-8s and E-3s, with KC-135 tankers on hand for midair refueling…Military analysts say that while China deployed some of its latest weapons for the exercises there appeared to be no military hardware that wasn’t already known about. And some said China didn’t use enough ships to show they could impede ship traffic from reaching Taiwan. Instead, it used ships like destroyers and cruisers during its exercise, which aren’t ideal for conducting a blockade, naval observers said. Even though they exercised with as many as 50 ships, the Chinese navy didn’t use enough smaller, more agile ships, like frigates, that could better sustain something like a blockade around Taiwan, said Bryan Clark, a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute…“What we saw during the exercise is that China did not use enough ships to divert those coming in, inspect or hold them and cut off access to Taiwanese ports. They have enough to quickly inspect ships coming in and slow down the Taiwanese economy,” Mr. Clark said. “This was more like a demonstration of a quarantine than showing they can cut off Taiwan. But for China, it would be a good first step.” Christopher Twomey, an associate professor of national security affairs at the U.S. Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey, Calif., said potentially useful intelligence that might be gained from the exercises included assessments of how missile brigades coordinated with each other and conducted evaluations of battle damage from the strikes. Such information could be obtained from intercepted communications, he said…Several close observers of the Chinese military noted that the drills fell far short of a full rehearsal for an invasion of Taiwan…An attempt to seize and control the island would involve an amphibious invasion across the 100-mile wide Taiwan Strait, but there were no signs of the mobilization of amphibious forces during the latest exercises.”
Also Read:
Chinese and Taiwanese warships shadow each other as drills due to end
Analysis: China's Taiwan military drills offer spying opportunity for U.S.
How Pelosi’s trip to Taiwan set off a new wave of US-China electronic warfare
Why Germany won’t get tough on Beijing — even if it invades Taiwan
Xi Sought to Send Message to Biden on Taiwan: Now Is No Time for a Crisis
III. Wang Yi’s Diplomacy
Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi had a busy 10-odd days with engagements in Cambodia, Bangladesh and Mongolia, along with his meetings with counterparts from South Korea and Nepal. The People’s Daily this week published a detailed interview with him, offering the Chinese perspective of the outcomes from these meetings.
The first question relates to the ASEAN meeting in Cambodia. Wang talked about the growth of China-ASEAN trade and development cooperation. He then said:
“The biggest consensus from the meeting was that all parties agreed to uphold the concept of prioritising development, sharing development opportunities, connecting development strategies and establishing an example for development cooperation. ASEAN supports the Global Development Initiative and is willing to take the lead in the region to promote the initiative. All parties agreed to build a high quality BRI, actively participate in the construction of the new land-sea channel, ensure the smooth flow of production and supply chains, safeguard food and energy security, strengthen cooperation in e-commerce and clean energy, and constantly cultivate new growth points for cooperation.” 会议最大共识是各方同意秉持发展优先理念，共享发展机遇，对接发展战略，打造发展典范。东盟支持全球发展倡议，愿推动倡议在本地区率先落地。各方同意高质量共建“一带一路”，积极参与陆海新通道建设，保障产供链畅通，维护粮食和能源安全，加强电商、清洁能源合作，不断培育合作新增长点。
“The biggest highlight of the meeting was the position paper issued by China, which clearly supported the ASEAN-centred regional cooperation framework, which was generally welcomed by ASEAN countries. All parties believe that it is necessary to adhere to open regionalism, carry forward genuine multilateralism, and contribute to the ‘Asian plans/solutions’ and ‘Asian Power’. We should be vigilant of extra-regional forces provoking camp confrontation and safeguard the hard-won peaceful development.” 会议最大亮点是中方发表立场文件，鲜明支持以东盟为中心的区域合作架构，东盟各国对此普遍欢迎。各方认为，要坚持开放的区域主义，弘扬真正的多边主义，贡献“亚洲方案”和“亚洲力量”。要警惕域外势力挑动阵营对抗，维护得来不易的和平发展局面。
On the Foreign Ministers’ Meeting of ASEAN, China, Japan and South Korea, Wang reiterated the proposals that he had made. These were:
China had proposed a new five-year work plan for the 10+3 cooperation
He proposed “a special donation for the RCEP economic and technical cooperation under the framework of the ASEAN-China Cooperation Fund to help ASEAN countries enhance the ability to better implement the pact.” He also said that China “supports the establishment of 10+3 immigration and consular consultation mechanism as well as increasing direct flights between China and other 10+3 countries in an orderly manner.”
He talked about the construction of a 10+3 emergency medical supplies reserve centre and the establishment of a disaster management ministerial-level meeting mechanism.
He also talked about “expanding exchanges and cooperation in digital infrastructure, e-commerce, digital logistics and smart cities to facilitate regional digital transformation, and accelerating green development in the region with efforts towards a 10+3 low-carbon partnership, and strengthening cooperation in poverty alleviation to narrow development gaps in the region.”
The next question is about the South China Sea Code of Conduct; Wang said that China and ASEAN countries have the “capability, confidence and wisdom to properly handle the South China Sea issue.” He added that China is willing to work with ASEAN countries to firmly uphold the principles of the DOC, accelerate consultations on the COC, deepen maritime dialogue and cooperation, firmly grasp the correct direction of properly handling the South China Sea issue, and turn the South China Sea into a sea of peace, friendship and cooperation.” 中国与东盟国家作为全面战略伙伴，经过20年协调磨合，完全有能力、有信心、有智慧处理好南海问题。中方愿同东盟国家一道，坚定维护《宣言》原则、加快推进“准则”磋商、深化海上对话合作，牢牢把握妥善处理南海问题的正确方向，将南海打造成和平之海、友谊之海、合作之海.
The third question is about Nancy Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan. Wang pats himself on the back here. He says that the Chinese side “explained the facts and positions to all parties in a timely manner, effectively responded to unreasonable accusations, firmly defended national sovereignty and resolutely safeguarded legitimate rights and interests.” 此次与会和访问期间，我们向各方及时讲清事实、阐明立场，有力回击无理指责，坚定捍卫国家主权，坚决维护正当权益.
He added that “China’s just and reasonable proposition” received wide support, with Russia, Cambodia, Laos, Indonesia, Brunei, Malaysia, Vietnam, Singapore, Bangladesh, Greece, Turkey and New Zealand making it clear during bilateral and multilateral engagements that they adhere to the One-China policy and hope to maintain a peaceful and stable international and regional environment. ASEAN foreign ministers also issued a statement reaffirming the One-China policy and calling for adherence to the principles of the UN Charter. 中方正义合理主张得到广泛响应支持。俄罗斯、柬埔寨、老挝、印尼、文莱、马来西亚、越南、新加坡、孟加拉国、希腊、土耳其、新西兰等在会议双多边场合明确表示坚持一中政策，希望维护和平稳定的国际地区环境。东盟外长发表声明，重申一中政策，呼吁坚持联合国宪章原则.
He also criticised the G7 for their statement on the Taiwan issue, and says that China has not changed the status quo, rather the US has been trying to use Taiwan to contain China and Taiwan authorities had been trying to seek independence by relying on the US. And then Wang said something that is not new but some serious narrative mumbo-jumbo.
“China's countermeasures are precisely aimed at maintaining peace across the Taiwan Strait and stability in the region. The principle of non-interference in internal affairs is the ‘golden rule’ of state-to-state communication and the ‘magic weapon’ for developing countries. The measures taken by China are also to safeguard the basic norms of international relations and international fairness and justice.” –中方的反制恰恰是为了维护台海的和平，维护地区的稳定。不干涉内政原则是国与国交往的“黄金法则”，是发展中国家的“护身法宝”。中国采取的举措也是在维护国际关系基本准则，维护国际公平正义。--- In other words, he says that PLA exercises in the Taiwan Strait are somehow in the interest of developing countries because they are essentially preserving the international norm of non-interference in internal affairs.
Wang further talked about the threat from the three dangerous trends, which Beijing will be watching for.
Firstly, “it is necessary to be prepared for the United States gathering some accomplices to pour fuel on the fire, enhancing regional military deployments, further escalating the situation and attempting to create a new and bigger crisis.”
Secondly, “we must be wary of ‘Taiwan independence’ forces misjudging the situation, continuing to collude with external forces, and heading further along the path of splitting the country.”
Thirdly, “we must be wary of politicians in some countries ignoring right and wrong, getting caught up in the hype and following suit for political gain. This will seriously undermine the political foundation for relations between China and these countries, and will seriously undermine the UN Charter and the post-World War II international system.”
The next few questions are about China-Cambodia ties, the visits to Bangladesh and Mongolia and the meetings with the foreign ministers of South Korea and Nepal. There’s nothing new in this, so I’ve linked previous coverage above.
I think the meeting with South Korea’s Park Jin is interesting. Xinhua reported that:
“Wang pointed out that the two countries should adhere to independence and freedom from external interference, adhere to good-neighborliness and friendship and take care of each other’s major concerns, adhere to openness and win-win results and maintain stable and smooth production and supply chains, adhere to equality and respect and non-interference in each other's internal affairs, adhere to multilateralism and abide by the purposes and principles of the UN Charter. China is willing to work with the ROK to adhere to the positioning of the strategic cooperative partnership between the two countries and promote the healthy and stable development of bilateral relations, Wang added.”
AP’s report on this is good to note too:
“Commenting on Tuesday’s meeting between Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi and his South Korean counterpart Park Jin, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Wang Wenbin in a briefing on Wednesday reaffirmed Beijing's stance that the Thaad system in South Korea undermines its ‘strategic security interests’. He added that Seoul had committed to a policy of ‘Three Nos and One Limit,’ the latter apparently referring to a pledge to limit the operations of the Thaad battery already in place, something Seoul has never publicly acknowledged. ‘The two foreign ministers had another in-depth exchange of views on the Thaad issue, making clear their respective positions and enhancing mutual understanding,’ Wang said. He added that the ministers agreed to ‘attach importance to each other's legitimate concerns and to continue to handle and control the issue prudently’ to prevent it from becoming a ‘stumbling stone’ in bilateral relations.”
“South Korea's Foreign Ministry said in a statement that it understood that Wang was referring to the policies of the Moon government with the ‘Three Nos and One Limit’ remark. It said the Yoon government had maintained that Thaad was a defensive tool for protecting South Korean lives and property and a national security matter that Seoul wasn't willing to negotiate with Beijing. It also insisted that the ‘Three Nos’ were never a formal agreement or promise.”
On Friday then, the Chinese Foreign Ministry had this to say:
“China has always respected the sovereignty of the Republic of Korea (ROK) and understands its security concerns. However, since the US’s deployment of the THAAD anti-missile system in the ROK undermines China’s strategic security, the Chinese side cannot just look the other way. The Chinese and ROK foreign ministers held in-depth exchange of views on this issue during their recent meeting in Qingdao, where they elaborated on the two sides’ respective positions and agreed to take each other’s security concerns seriously and strive to properly handle the issue to make sure it does not become a stumbling block to bilateral relations. We hope the ROK side will continue to properly handle this issue in accordance with the two sides’ previous understanding and the common understandings reached between the two foreign ministers during their meeting in Qingdao.”
Also Read:
IV. The Long & Short of It…
a. Xi’s Foreign Trip
There were two reports this week talking about what would be Xi’s first foreign trip since the pandemic began. First, The Guardian reported that Xi is expected to visit Saudi Arabia next week, where plans are under way for a gala reception to match that given to Donald Trump on his first trip abroad as president.
And then WSJ reported that “Chinese officials are making plans for Xi Jinping to visit Southeast Asia and meet face-to-face with President Biden in November, according to people familiar with the preparations, in what would mark the Chinese leader’s first international trip in nearly three years and his first in-person meeting with Mr. Biden since the American leader’s inauguration.”
The report added: “Officials involved in the preparations said the Chinese leader is first expected to conclude the party congress, then would likely attend a summit of leaders from the Group of 20 nations on the Indonesian island of Bali on Nov. 15-16. From there, Mr. Xi is expected to travel to the Thai capital of Bangkok to attend the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit two days later, they said. Part of the preparations, which are still at the early stage and could be changed, is to prepare a possible meeting between Messrs. Xi and Biden on the sidelines of one of the two summits, the people said.”
b. COVID Outbreaks
Shanghai and Beijing might have returned to normalcy, but outbreaks in Hainan and Tibet show that neither is COVID going away from China and nor is the zero-COVID policy. This week, more cities in Hainan went into lockdown with tourists facing the brunt of lockdowns. As of now, Sanya, Haikou, Dongfang and Chengmai have imposed lockdowns of varying intensities.
Vice Premier Sun Chunlan on Saturday inspected the province on Saturday. Around 150,000 tourists are believed to be stranded in the province. Global Times reports that:
“Hainan Province reported 594 confirmed local COVID-19 cases and 832 asymptomatic cases on Friday with Sanya city, hit the hardest in the province, registering 472 confirmed cases and 760 asymptomatic ones. Sanya had 2,633 confirmed and 2,826 asymptomatic cases so far in the latest wave. There are 293 high infection risk areas and 94 medium risk areas in the province.”
The report also tells us about what Sun wanted:
“Hainan’s current challenge is insufficient quarantine and treatment places, for which Sun required exploring the potential of hotels and accelerating the building of makeshift hospitals to ensure all close contacts and people who test positive to be put under corresponding facilities. The sample collection, testing, reporting and hospitalizing process should be optimized. Sun raised the requirement of tracking a positive case within 8 hours while guaranteeing residents' basic living needs and medical service needs.”
Meanwhile, in Tibet, the city of Lhasa told residents not to go out unless they have special and urgent matters to attend to between Friday and Monday, as Covid workers carried out disinfection work in main urban areas.
Do check out this article by SCMP’s Wang Xiangwei, who writes about how his family’s “dream holiday rapidly turned into a travel nightmare soon after Sanya reported its first case on August 1. Since then, we have only grown more apprehensive and frustrated – thanks in no small part to the chaos and confusion caused by local officials, who seemed caught off guard by the outbreak. The Covid suppression policies have constantly changed from one day to the next and often contradict one another, as China’s omnipresent and arbitrary network of surveillance using big data and artificial intelligence has only added to our woes.” — Keep this piece handy the next time you read about the efficiency of China’s COVID containment.
Finally, CNBC has this piece on how the zero-COVID policy is hurting economic growth in Hainan. At the same time, this SCMP report tells us that despite the pressures of zero-COVID, “a total of 16 of the nation’s 31 provincial-level jurisdictions, including major municipalities and autonomous regions, have vowed to ensure or strive to achieve their annual socioeconomic development targets that were set earlier this year, according to statements available on their regional websites. Six other provincial regions said they remained mindful of their economic growth targets but did not go as far as outright saying these would be attainable.”
c. 20th Party Congress Data & Analysis
There are a couple of really good data resources that have been published over the past few days. I thought I’d highlight those here.
First, SCMP has this detailed multimedia platform with briefs on the top leadership and rising stars. Great place to start for anyone wanting to track individuals.
Second, if you want to go deeper, then the China Data Lab at US San Diego has a fantastic and incredibly detailed dataset, which allows one to play with different permutations and combinations, going back to the 15th Party Congress.
Finally, do read through this analysis by Willy Wo-Lap Lam.
d. China’s Woes in E. Europe
Beijing’s outreach to Eastern European countries took a serious hit this week as Estonia and Latvia quit what was once the 17+1 grouping. Last year, Lithuania had walked out the grouping too. Politico reports that “the entire +1 diplomatic format has been coming under increasing pressure, however, with China being criticized for playing divide-and-rule games within the EU, and Eastern European countries questioning the economic dividends.”
SCMP’s report on this is also interesting. It says:
“Suspicion of China has grown across the region after Chinese President Xi Jinping declared a ‘no limits’ friendship with Russian leader Vladimir Putin in February. The ensuing war that Putin launched against Ukraine and the more recent military tension in the Taiwan Strait following US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s visit to the island has prompted more countries – like Latvia and Estonia – to ‘establish themselves into particular camps, just like in the Cold War’, said Sarah Kreps, a professor of government and law at Cornell University. ‘The two countries are trying to signal very clearly that they’re in the pro-democracy camp, and they don’t want to be aligned with countries that are seen as acting in opposition to democracy,’ she said. ‘They want to think about ways in which they can express that loyalty … so that down the road, if they’re vulnerable, that [the US and its Western allies] will remember that and make sure to reward them with a strong defence,’ Kreps added.
Other Stories:
China’s internet watchdog receives app algorithm information from Alibaba, Tencent, ByteDance
Property developers in China's Hefei urge curb on 'malicious protests'
Corruption is sending shock waves through China’s chipmaking industry/ China Graft Probes Stem From Anger Over Failed Chip Plans
Five Chinese state-owned companies, under scrutiny in U.S., will delist from NYSE
Hacker offers to sell data of 48.5 million users of Shanghai's COVID app
Chinese envoy to France Lu Shaye doubles down on Taiwan ‘re-education’ aims
