China Increases Pressure on Taiwan

Chinese ships, planes, and military personnel are congregating around Taiwan this week as Beijing launches one of its most aggressive military drills in recent years. Its goal is to increase pressure on the island’s newly inaugurated president, Lai Ching-Te. Each year China holds military drills from June to November. This year Beijing is ratcheting up pressure on Taiwan as well as effectively normalizing increased military activity in and around the island. “Hide and bide” is long dead and buried — it’s now “shout and flout.”

Chinese Coast Guard ships sailed within four nautical miles of Taiwanese waters near Kinmen Island four times this month and for the first time were joined by other Chinese government agencies. Kinmen is considered Taiwan’s strategic frontline island. China maintains three well-situated and supplied PLA Air bases as well along its coast opposite Taiwan with its maritime resources located nearby. According to Ian Ellis, a military analyst studying Chinese military strategy, “Throughout February, March, and April, Chinese Coast Guard vessels frequently entered Kinmen’s restricted waters and contiguous zone. On 29 April, Beijing announced it had ‘normalized’ regular patrols.”

Ray Powell, a maritime security analyst at the Gordian Knot Center for National Security Innovation at Stanford University, adds that China’s “open and heavily publicized characterization of its military exercises as ‘punishment’ and a ‘warning’ feels like a calculated rhetorical escalation. It wants the whole world to take note.” Since Lai assumed power this week, China “has launched two days of large-scale military drills surrounding Taiwan … days after the self-ruling island swore in a new democratically elected leader who called on Beijing to cease its intimidation tactics,” according to Shannon Brandao, an attorney who follows Chinese legal and military affairs. PLA Naval Colonel Li Xi, spokesperson for the command, called the exercises “a strong punishment for the separatist acts of Taiwan independence forces and a serious warning against interference and provocation by external forces.”

A CCN report on Thursday said a senior official responsible for Taiwan’s security affairs pointed out that the military detected about 30 Chinese aircraft, most of which crossed the Median Line into Taiwan’s air defense identification zone (ADIZ). China also deployed about a dozen Chinese warships and another dozen Coast Guard vessels near Taiwan’s outlying islands, according to the official. President Lai, who is labeled a “dangerous separatist” by Beijing, responded to the provocation by deploying Taiwan’s warships to monitor the situation. “While other countries treat maritime incidents as crises to be deescalated, Beijing seizes upon them as pretext for calculated escalations, by which it means to reset the board in its favor,” writes Ray Powell.

China’s state broadcaster CCTV is reporting that dozens of Chinese fighter jets carrying live ammunition conducted mock strikes against “high-value military targets” of the “enemy” alongside destroyers, frigates, and missile speedboats. To the north, two massive civil-military ferries that are part of the PLA-associated Bohai Ferry Group diverted from normal operating routes in the Yellow Sea and are heading south. The exercises, which started on Thursday, will encircle all of Taiwan and pose President Lai’s first challenge as he attempts to balance its relationship with Beijing. Chinese aggression is not limited to the waters around Taiwan. Last week China positioned five coast guard ships and six maritime militia vessels near the shoal belonging to the Philippines and had another 25 or so maritime militia vessels sitting roughly 60 miles further out, according to Powell.

As the number and intensity of incidents increases, so does the likelihood of an accident or deliberate act. The US operates about 200 ships and 150,000 sailors and civilians in its Pacific fleet. They make up 60 percent of the entire US Navy. Despite America’s advanced military technologies, Beijing has an advantage in a cross-Strait war with Taiwan. Its geographic location ensures short supply lines. The US Navy also is constraints by requirements that it patrol and protect wide swaths of the Pacific. This week the full Armed Services Committee in Congress is marking up the National Defense Authorization Act 2025 budget request. Even if Congress allots funding for additional ships and planes, it will be many years before they are operational in the Pacific. Beijing knows they have a window of opportunity that may not last long if President Biden is not re-elected. This year’s drills are more important than ever for Beijing.

Photo: Missile boats attached to a missile boat group with the navy under the PLA Southern Theater Command sail in formation. Photo by Wan Songtao)

Quick Analysis

Ukraine’s Frozen Conflict

As we approach winter in the northern hemisphere, the war in Ukraine is beginning to resemble a “frozen conflict” from many perspectives. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky recently told the media he hopes the war will end faster once President-elect Trump takes over in January. Opinions in Moscow, however, differ from that of the Ukrainian leader. Russian President Vladimir Putin argues that the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) needs to exclude Ukraine from joining in “exchange” for peace. If it does not, he says, then no end to the war is in sight. So far there is no Christmas solution. Several NATO countries, according to Vladimir Socor of the Jamestown Foundation, are tentatively considering “coalitions-of-the-willing” to provide security for Ukraine outside of the formal NATO framework. There is, however, no collective mechanism today under which such an arrangement is viable. According to the NATO Charter, while Ukraine is a NATO partner country, it may not join as a full member since it has not fulfilled the requirements for membership. That has not stopped NATO and allies from continuing “to provide Ukraine with unprecedented levels of support, helping to uphold its fundamental right to self-defence,” according to the organization. Socor says that keeping Ukraine out of NATO will not advance peace with Russia. Waiting for a peace settlement, he suggests, would only serve to encourage Moscow to continue the war indefinitely. Although the Biden Administration officially withdrew its support for Ukrainian membership in 2021, NATO maintains an “open door” policy toward membership-seeking countries. The current White House position led the way for European states to oppose Ukraine’s membership saying that a decision should be delayed until “conditions are met.” Biden pushed for changing “open door” to a “bridge” metaphor. It is not intended as an across-the-board NATO policy and has been implemented in the past on a case-by-case basis, says Socor. “The alliance’s open-door policy was not fully insulated from Russia’s non-statutory blocking power, and NATO-aspirant countries’ path toward membership was not always irreversible.” Russia has successfully blocked states like Georgia from joining, first in 2008 and again after the war in Ukraine began in 2014. Russia recognizes the value add of Ukraine to NATO is enormous and that Kyiv has a better case than some other nations. Putin’s invasion was, in part, intended to foreclose that option. By 2021, Moscow was pushing hard to maximize its war objectives, which included further annexations of Ukrainian territory. A main goal for Putin was, and is, to ensure there is no Ukraine left to join NATO. As President-elect Trump prepares to assume office in January, he is faced with the historical challenges presented by the war. Post-conflict security guarantees were the center of several proposals made during the 2023 military stalemate. The incoming Trump Administration has yet to outline how it intends to handle the Russia-Ukraine war. Analysts in Washington believe that the new Administration will expect its European allies to guarantee the majority of Ukraine’s security needs. As we approach 2025, several European nations have acknowledged that they do not view Ukraine as eligible for NATO membership as it would draw the organization into the middle of the conflict. Others want to wait until the war is over or pending a “peace” settlement before considering Ukrainian membership. Socor reports that some “influential voices” are suggesting that “Kyiv should join NATO after “freezing” the war along a stable armistice line, de facto accepting Ukraine’s partition, with NATO security guarantees applying de jure to the government-controlled territory only.” This would mean starting accession talks soon with the actual talks to commence only after a ceasefire is in place. Trump arrives in Washington at a time when Putin’s hybrid strategies of war in Ukraine have eviscerated commonly-held differences between war and peace. “Absent a political consensus in NATO over Ukrainian membership, certain European allies, including France’s President Emmanuel Macron, are holding informal consultations about post-conflict security guarantees to Kyiv by NATO members outside of NATO’s framework,” according to the Jamestown Foundation. The Biden Administration downplayed the discussions on possible forms of military assistance and defense industry cooperation by sending only an Assistant Secretary of State. For a European peace to hold the Trump Administration would need to formally extend the United States’ nuclear deterrence to Ukraine. Options under discussion in Europe include a “coalition of the resolute” to deploy forces to Ukraine as part of a possible armistice package, deterring further Russian attacks, says Secor. European officials are also debating, without any agreement, whether its military forces could perform non-combat logistical roles to free Ukrainian forces to fight. None of the possible courses of action has moved forward as all eyes are waiting on the incoming Trump Administration for clues about its intended level of support for a NATO framework and other non-NATO proposals. Daria Novak served in the U.S. State Dept.