Search

Begin New Search Topic Foreign Policy Political Geography China

151. Before Zero Day: Taiwan’s Evolving Defense Strategy and the Struggle for Peace

Author:
Eric Lee, Ian Easton, Grace Price, Colby Ferland, Cathy Fang, Mark Stokes, and Alice Cho
Publication Date:
09-2023
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Project 2049 Institute
Abstract:
The invasion of Ukraine has upended long-held assumptions of the liberal international order, and as tensions rise in the Taiwan Strait, Taiwanese leaders are watching Ukraine with their futures in mind. The objective of this report is to provide insights into how Taiwanese policymakers, military officers, diplomats, strategists, and everyday citizens are responding to the evolving threat picture in the Taiwan Strait and offer ideas for the policy debate in Washington. This report examines leadership speeches, strategy reports, military writings, and media articles, as well as recounts findings from interviews with Taiwanese and U.S. government officials, military officers, and civil society.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Defense Policy, Military Strategy, Peace, and International Order
Political Geography:
China, Taiwan, and Asia

152. Taiwan’s Urgent Need for Asymmetric Defense

Author:
Eric Gomez
Publication Date:
11-2023
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
The Cato Institute
Abstract:
Amid deteriorating US-China relations, senior US officials have begun suggesting that a Chinese attack against Taiwan could happen soon. The conventional wisdom in Washington is that this urgent threat requires an urgent response, but too much attention has focused on the US-China military balance and too little on Taiwan’s military efforts. Taiwan’s future would likely be determined in the opening days, if not hours, of a conflict. Taiwan must prevail in two critical military operations: surviving China’s conventional bombardment and preventing the first wave of amphibious ground forces from establishing a beachhead. Taiwan would be fighting these two operations alone, but Taiwan’s military does not have the right mix of equipment, manpower, and strategy to mount an effective defense, despite the fact that the results of these operations could prove decisive for the rest of the conflict. US policymakers must press Taipei to focus on improving Taiwan’s ability to execute this narrow set of military missions and to reorient its overall strategy to one of asymmetric defense to counter Chinese advantages. If Taiwan does not or cannot do so, it is unlikely that any amount of potential US assistance or intervention could salvage the island’s position in the event of a conflict. Because these shortfalls are so important, Washington should create a sense of urgency in Taipei through security assistance measures such as conditional arms sales and limited joint training. The United States should also take care not to back Beijing into a corner where it concludes that using force is its only viable option to achieve unification with Taiwan. American assurances to China are a tough sell given Washington’s bipartisan hawkishness on China, but keeping time on Taiwan’s side is essential for the success of Taipei’s self-defense transformation.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Defense Policy, and Asymmetric Relations
Political Geography:
China, Taiwan, Asia, and United States of America

153. Enhancing Australia’s Taiwan ties

Author:
Benjamin Herscovitch and Mark Harrison
Publication Date:
12-2023
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Lowy Institute for International Policy
Abstract:
Australia should articulate and pursue a disciplined Taiwan strategy that uses the flexibility of its one-China policy to increase engagement with Taipei in service of Australian economic and security interests. Canberra should support Taipei’s bid for entry into the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership and start negotiations for a bilateral free trade agreement. It should also establish regular ministerial exchanges with Taiwan. The Taiwan strategy advocated in this paper is likely to be a net negative for Australia’s relations with China. But it strikes a reasonable balance between Australia’s interests and the stabilisation of the Australia–China relationship.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Trans-Pacific Partnership, Regional Politics, and Strategic Engagement
Political Geography:
China, Taiwan, Asia, Australia, and Australia/Pacific

154. The New Domestic Politics of U.S.-China Relations

Author:
Evan S. Medeiros
Publication Date:
12-2023
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Asia Society
Abstract:
The U.S.-China relationship has come to largely define geopolitics in the 21st century, and the bilateral relationship is today often conceived primarily in terms of geopolitical tensions and great power jockeying on the global stage. However, there is more to U.S.-China strategic competition than the geopolitical level. In particular, the influence of domestic political dynamics in both countries is a widely underappreciated factor driving both U.S. and Chinese foreign policy decision-making, including vis-à-vis each other. What are these shifting domestic forces in both countries that are most influencing the relationship, in what ways, and to what effect? In this groundbreaking new report, The New Domestic Politics of U.S.-China Relations, Asia Society Policy Institute's Center for China Analysis Senior Fellow for Foreign Policy Evan S. Medeiros conducts an in-depth investigation and analysis of these questions. He finds substantial new dynamics at play in both countries that have had an increasingly negative impact on U.S.-China ties. In the United States, Congressional activism, electoral politics, public opinion, and shifting roles for interest groups are all influencing U.S. debates, policymaking, and actions — governmental and nongovernmental alike. In China, centralization of decision-making processes, constraints on formerly key actors, shifting national-level priorities, and other structural political and personnel changes are today directly and indirectly influencing Chinese perceptions, policies, and behaviors toward the United States.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Bilateral Relations, Geopolitics, and Domestic Politics
Political Geography:
China, Asia, North America, and United States of America

155. Why does Germany maintain its rapprochement with China?

Author:
FARAS
Publication Date:
10-2023
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Future for Advanced Research and Studies (FARAS)
Abstract:
During a meeting with Chinese Vice Premier He Lifeng in Frankfurt in early October 2023, German Finance Minister Christian Lindner emphasized the importance of developing economic ties between Berlin and Beijing and enhancing joint cooperation on some critical issues, particularly poverty alleviation and climate change.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Climate Change, Economics, Poverty, and Bilateral Relations
Political Geography:
China, Europe, Asia, and Germany

156. Making Collective Deterrence and Defense Work in the Indo-Pacific

Author:
David Santoro and Brad Glosserman
Publication Date:
04-2023
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Pacific Forum
Abstract:
The Indo-Pacific security architecture is undergoing fundamental transformation to address rising challenges, most notably those posed by an increasingly confident, assertive, and capable China. Pacific Forum has started a multi-year unofficial dialogue with experts and officials from the United States and key allies and partners to share views of this evolving regional security environment and identify common interests and concerns as well as areas of divergence. The inaugural Pacific Forum Defense and Deterrence Dialogue, which included participants from the United States, Australia, Japan, South Korea, and the United Kingdom, took place in Tokyo on February 2-3, 2023. It was run at the Track 2 level, although diplomatic officials and military officers from each country also attended as observers. Pacific Forum’s goal is to identify ways to shape this evolution to ensure that it meets U.S. national security needs, particularly integrated deterrence of, and defense against, regional adversaries—with China as the foremost concern. Responses to these changes have taken several forms. Bilateral alliances are being modernized. Other security relationships are being strengthened, such as those between Japan and Australia and Japan and the United Kingdom. There is also talk of new coordination among Five Eyes and other partners. In other cases, new initiatives have been launched, such as the Australia-United Kingdom-United States “enhanced trilateral security partnership” (AUKUS) or the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue. Recent developments, such as the election of conservative Yoon Yuk-soul as president in South Korea, are hopeful signs of the revitalization of currently moribund defense and security arrangements, notably U.S.-Japan-South Korea cooperation. There is also reportedly talk of renewed interest in the Trilateral Security Dialogue that includes the United States, Australia, and Japan. All these initiatives are designed to better compete with, deter, and, if necessary, defend against adversaries determined to rewrite the regional order in ways that align with their interests. While the notion of an Asian equivalent to NATO is out of sync with regional needs (and there is broad recognition of that fact among key allies), current momentum could herald the emergence of an Indo-Pacific defense community reminiscent of the one created by trans-Atlantic nations after the Second World War. That community was forged to defend against the Soviet Union. Today, the nascent group in the Indo-Pacific is focused on China, although it is not the only threat. Understanding how regional governments see and rank those diverse threats is a critical step in ensuring that the new arrangements are most effective. One thing is certain: the current situation—in which there is no coordination mechanism among the existing and emerging arrangements—is not tenable in view of the mounting China challenge. To succeed, this process must be nurtured. The United States must better understand the forces at play and the views driving national action, and it must work to ensure that those changes are effective to counter China and other challenges. Work is needed to understand how all these pieces fit together in a coherent regional deterrence and defense architecture, particularly to deal with strategic conflict. This is not easy. The above- mentioned initiatives and relationships are new and evolving. It is difficult to appreciate each on its own, much less the overlap between them, and their convergences and divergences. Plus, in some cases, governments are also focused on other ways to deter. DTRA’s chief concern is the warfighter, who must be prepared to address a range of threats that extends from “strategic” military problems (including those related to nuclear weapons, other weapons of mass destruction, conventional weapons, and other domains) to gray zone issues, but some regional initiatives also address other issues, notably climate change, vaccine diplomacy, and emerging technologies. It is critical that the United States understand how allies and partners see this menu of items and their goals and priorities, even as the focus of our proposed effort is strengthening regional deterrence and defense. Plainly, a cumulative, comparative assessment is critical because effective deterrence and defense demand a comprehensive analysis and there needs to be shared understanding of how these mechanisms can be coordinated to ensure that needs are met and that participating governments maximize and make the most efficient contributions. From a U.S. perspective, building a collective deterrence and defense architecture in the Indo-Pacific is urgent and the only realistic way to compete effectively against China. As a landmark report from the U.S. Studies Centre at the University of Sydney has found, “a strategy of collective defence is fast becoming necessary as a way of offsetting shortfalls in America’s regional military power and holding the line against rising Chinese strength.”1 Failure to build an effective Indo-Pacific deterrence and defense architecture would shift the regional balance of forces to the detriment of the United States as it addresses the China challenge.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Defense Policy, Deterrence, and Regional Security
Political Geography:
China, United States of America, and Indo-Pacific

157. Stark Choices Confront Taiwan Voters

Author:
David J. Keegan and Kyle Churchman
Publication Date:
09-2023
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Comparative Connections
Institution:
Pacific Forum
Abstract:
Taiwan’s presidential election campaign has begun. Lai Ching-te, Taiwan’s vice president and Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) candidate, Hou Yu-ih from the Nationalist (Kuomintang, or KMT) Party, Ko Wen-je of Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), and independent Terry Gou offer Taiwan voters four different visions of Taiwan’s future relationship with China. As senior US and Chinese officials resumed long-stalled face-to-face meetings, China warned once again that it has no room for compromise or concession on Taiwan. Yet, when Lai completed almost invisible transits through the US en route to Paraguay and back, China’s military response seemed almost pro-forma. When US, Japanese, and South Korean leaders reiterated at the trilateral Camp David summit their staunch opposition to China’s intimidation, China chose to interpret their words as one more promise to support Taiwan. The US accelerated weapons deliveries to Taiwan and expanded training for Taiwan’s military, and Taiwan announced that its defense budget will increase by 7.5% in 2024. Taiwan’s TSMC moved forward on constructing its Arizona factory despite some hiccups, and the US and Taiwan signed a long-awaited trade deal—the first part of their 21st Century Trade Initiative. As Taiwan’s presidential and legislative election campaigns enter the home stretch, the DPP’s Lai continues to lead the race. How will Beijing respond? Will Taiwan voters choose caution and vote for the KMT, or will they again interpret Chinese intimidation as one more reason to give four more years to the DPP with its insistence on de-facto independence?
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Sovereignty, Domestic Politics, Voting, and Presidential Elections
Political Geography:
China, Taiwan, and Asia

158. New Leaders Challenged by US-China Rivalry

Author:
Catharin Dalpino
Publication Date:
09-2023
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Comparative Connections
Institution:
Pacific Forum
Abstract:
Over the summer three Southeast Asian nations—Thailand, Cambodia, and Indonesia—conducted political contests or prepared for them, with Washington and Beijing watching closely for shifts in alignments or opportunities to make inroads with new leaders. Despite this, and possibly because of it, China made bold moves in the South China Sea and caused outcry in the region with the release of a map supporting its claims to the “Nine-Dash Line.” Beijing also showed signs of worry about Russian inroads into Southeast Asia and the Indo-Pacific region. The high-profile visit to Washington of Philippine President Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos, Jr. enabled both countries to reconfirm the US-Philippines alliance publicly, although it gave little indication of where the broader relationship may be headed. ASEAN continued to make little headway in helping to resolve the conflict in Myanmar; and the 2023 chair, Jakarta attempted to redirect the group toward economic goals and a common approach to looming food insecurity in the region. However, Jakarta may be set to swim in deeper waters: Indonesia was among 20 countries invited to join the BRICS group of “middle powers,” and the only one from Southeast Asia. Jakarta deferred membership for two years in order to “consult” with regional leaders, leaving the new president to make a decision on entering the BRICS, but Indonesia is not likely to turn down the opportunity to play a greater role on the world stage.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Strategic Competition, BRICS, Rivalry, and Regional Security
Political Geography:
China, Indonesia, Cambodia, Thailand, Southeast Asia, and United States of America

159. Arabia Saudita ante una disyuntiva, ¿Occidente u Oriente?

Author:
Federico Franceschini
Publication Date:
03-2023
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Argentine Council for International Relations (CARI)
Abstract:
La reciente visita en diciembre de 2022 del presidente Xi Jinping a Riad ha sido motivo de intensos y preocupados análisis por parte de politólogos y analistas, que leyeron en la bienvenida otorgada al mandatario chino la culminación del alejamiento de Arabia Saudita de su alianza con Washington. Inmediatas fueron las comparaciones con el viaje en julio del presidente norteamericano Joe Biden. Los periodistas internacionales buscaron, analizando sonrisas y formas de saludos, encontrar diferencias de trato como elemento discriminante para un eventual favoritismo de una potencia sobre la otra.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Bilateral Relations, and Geopolitics
Political Geography:
China, Middle East, and Saudi Arabia

160. Guyana: Oil, Internal Disputes, the USA and Venezuela

Author:
Raphael Padula, Matheus de Freitas Cecílio, Igor Candido de Oliveira, and Caio Jorge Prado
Publication Date:
01-2023
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Contexto Internacional
Institution:
Institute of International Relations, Pontifical Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro
Abstract:
Guyana has a strategic geographic position in the Amazon and the Greater Caribbean area, as revealed in the strategic thinking and military presence of the United States (USA). Its territory also possesses abundant natural resources, especially after the recent and significant oil discoveries, having the American company ExxonMobil as protagonist. Meanwhile, the country is characterised by a domestic political and ethnic cleavage. In addition, Venezuela and Guyana are in a historical dispute for the Essequibo area, which is potentially endowed and surrounded by areas with strategic resources. The main argument of the paper is that the oil discoveries in Guyana are leading to geopolitical and geoeconomic impacts regarding the intensification of domestic and foreign disputes, involving American and Venezuelan interests and recent state actions. More broadly, it points out that the north of South America has become one of the stages of the global power strife, in view of the Sino-Russian and American presences, in a context of Brazil’s absence. To survey and evaluate the actors’ actions resulting from the oil findings in Guyana, the paper is based on geopolitical and geoeconomic concepts, energy data, specialised academic and journalistic bibliography.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Oil, Geopolitics, Strategic Competition, and Geoeconomics
Political Geography:
China, Latin America, Venezuela, Guyana, and United States of America