As the United States reportedly prepares for a summit of the Quadripartite Security Dialogue, an Australian think tank called on the country’s policymakers to “make every effort to understand the complexity of Taiwan‘s unresolved political status” as an issue over which the People’s Republic of China and the United States could come into military conflict, and in the event of war “Washington would take Australia’s involvement for granted” and Canberra would have to decide what role it would play in it.
The Kyodo News reported Sunday that the U.S. has proposed to Japan, India and Australia to hold a summit of the Quadripartite Security Dialogue (QUAD) at a Time when the Chinese Communist Party‘s regional influence is growing, and the success of which will depend on the attitude of India, which has been very cautious about the QUAD, the only one of the four members It is the only country among the four members that shares a common border with the Chinese Communist Party.
Strengthening Indo-Pacific Security through the Quadripartite Dialogue
According to a White House statement, President Joe Biden spoke with Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Monday (Feb. 8) and both agreed to continue to work closely together to advance a free and open Indo-Pacific region, including support for freedom of navigation, territorial integrity and a stronger regional security mechanism through the Quadripartite Dialogue mechanism.
The State Department also said Secretary of State Blinken spoke Tuesday with India’s foreign minister and both sides look forward to expanding regional cooperation, including through the Quadripartite Dialogue, to address the challenges of the new pandemic and climate change.
On the question of whether a summit of the Quadripartite Dialogue is in the works, State Department spokesman Bryce said at a regular press conference Tuesday that he has nothing to announce at this time, but that the United States views the Quadripartite Talks as a mechanism with significant potential and will therefore use them as a basis for deepening cooperation with partners, including in the traditional area of maritime security, but also on issues such as the new crown Epidemic, climate change, and democratic resilience.
Price also addressed the border dispute between India and the Chinese Communist Party, saying the United States is very concerned that Beijing is trying to intimidate its neighbors and that the United States will stand with its allies to advance each other’s shared prosperity, security and values in the Indo-Pacific region.
Taiwan Strait changes relevant to Australia
Ahead of the summit, an Australian think tank also recommended that Australia and its allies fully discuss how to respond to the Taiwan Strait change, as the Chinese Communist Party is using various non-war tactics to force Taiwan to reunite with it, and Canberra must decide what actions and positions it will take in the event of a conflict.
“Why should Australia be concerned about the growing tensions in the Taiwan Strait?” is the question posed by the Australian think tank China Matters in a policy brief.
In its latest briefing released Tuesday, the think tank’s founder, Linda Jakobson, said there are many reasons why Australia must be concerned about the issue, such as the fact that once the Chinese Communist Party gains control of Taiwan, the strategic balance in East Asia will change dramatically, with Communist forces no longer confined to the “first island chain” and instead This will change the U.S. defense posture in the region to the detriment of Australia’s strategic environment. Other developments that Australia must be concerned about include Taiwan’s democratic and free society, its impact on regional trade and the supply of semiconductors.
Despite Beijing’s frequent threats to use force against Taiwan, Jacobson argues that lethal war is not a likely route to unification for Xi, and while military conflict cannot be ruled out, it is highly unlikely. She said Australia must watch for escalating tensions in the Taiwan Strait and prepare for a more likely scenario in which Beijing uses “all the tools of war” in a prolonged and intensive campaign to force Taiwan’s leaders to negotiate.
All the tools of war
Jacobson said these “all means short of war” (all means short of war) involve the gradual imposition of coercion on Taiwan to destabilize its society and force it to accept reunification talks. The means Beijing could use include economic pressure or blockade, cyber attacks, subversive operations, assassinations and limited use of force, all aimed at forcing Taiwan’s leadership to agree to political negotiations under Beijing’s “one-China” condition.
Since taking office, the Biden Administration has repeatedly spoken out against Beijing’s coercion of Taiwan, urging the Chinese Communist Party to cease pressure and engage in dialogue with Taiwan’s democratically elected leaders, and emphasizing the United States’ “rock-solid” commitment to Taiwan. In terms of actions, the Biden administration also sent the USS McCain, a guided-missile destroyer, through the Taiwan Strait on February 4, continuing the practice of previous administrations such as Obama and Trump, which was the first freedom of navigation mission in the Taiwan Strait since the Biden administration took office.
Australia has also joined the U.S. in free navigation, crossing the Taiwan Strait with the warship HMS Melbourne in September 2018.
Freedom of navigation may increase tensions
As the Biden administration emphasizes increased cooperation with allies in the Indo-Pacific region to counteract Chinese Communist behavior in a multilateral manner, how do regional countries view the U.S. “rock-solid” commitment to Taiwan and whether to join U.S. “freedom of navigation” operations? Voice of America asked this question to experts at a video discussion on Taiwan and the Indo-Pacific region at George Washington University last week.
Deepa Ollapally, associate director of the Center for Asian Studies at George Washington University, said she knows India has been reluctant to participate in such freedom of navigation operations, but it has to do with how much importance regional countries attach to U.S. policy in support of Taiwan and whether that factor affects the extent of U.S. support for Taiwan.
Mike Mochizuki, a professor of political science and international affairs at George Washington University, said he supports the freedom of U.S. warships to sail anywhere international law allows and that they should perform such missions on a routine basis, but that he personally opposes free navigation as “in-your-face” (in-your-face) behavior. your-face” behavior, because it will only increase tensions.
Australia is under more pressure from China
Global Taiwan Research Center researcher Zhang Yiwei said Biden spoke with Australian Prime Minister Morrison after he took office, and both sides made clear their commitment to the Australia-New Zealand-U.S. treaty, and Morrison supported U.S. freedom of navigation in the South China Sea. Australia’s national interests are extremely important.
Zhang Yiwei said, compared with Australia, New Zealand may be more flexible, it used to take the same position as Australia on the issue of Xinjiang and Hong Kong, also support Taiwan’s participation in the World health Organization, only recently New Zealand’s flexibility is also becoming less and less, “the Chinese Communist Party’s strategy is to divide the two countries, New Zealand is watching Australia to withstand the pressure of the Chinese Communist Party “, she argued that the alliance between Australia, New Zealand and the U.S. must be further strengthened, as the CCP has penetrated deeply into New Zealand, creating cracks in the continuity and consistency of the U.S. position on the region.
She said the CCP’s retaliation against Australia is not only directed at Australia, it also has to signal to U.S. allies in the region, such as Japan and India, that “if you choose to stand with the U.S., often in criticizing the CCP and trying to encircle it, there are consequences.”
Zhang Yiwei said that this approach of the Chinese Communist Party can succeed because Australia’s economic dependence on China has increased over the past years, and the Chinese market accounts for thirty percent of its exports, so Beijing’s retaliation against Canberra is a major blow to its economy, no matter how Biden’s policy goes after taking power, Australia is actually trapped between two major powers, and for its national interests, the best case scenario is that the U.S. and China can resolve their For its national interests, the best scenario is for the US and China to resolve their differences, otherwise any demand from the US for Australia to take a stand, or for Australia to join the US camp, such as free navigation in the South China Sea, will increase the risk of Australia facing pressure from the Chinese Communist Party.
The West has no counterweight
In the China Matters briefing, Jacobson mentioned that of the various “all but war tactics” that Beijing could use against Taiwan, the most intense phase would be the intensification of Beijing’s disinformation campaign and the launch of a series of sophisticated cyber attacks designed to disrupt and cut off Taiwan’s power and communications systems. Such an attack would be accompanied by intensive PLA exercises and Chinese warships sailing into waters near Taiwan, perhaps with missiles fired in the direction of Taiwan in a live-fire exercise, or perhaps one of them going “off course” and causing civilian casualties.
All of these scenarios would be very difficult for the United States and other regional countries, including Australia, to counter, she said, because “none of the individual actions of the Chinese Communist Party would justify a military response,” but the combination of these actions would allow Beijing to achieve its goals, “and that’s This is the approach it has been taking in the South China Sea.”
Jacobson said there are a myriad of tricky situations that require a quick policy response, such as what position should Canberra take once Beijing cuts power to Taiwan’s communications network? Will Australia ban iron ore exports to the Chinese Communist Party? Will Canberra, which must decide how important Taiwan is as an independent entity, be willing to endure greater retaliation than the Chinese Communist Party is now inflicting on it?
Since there is a significant possibility that China could use this “all means short of war,” Jacobson argues that Australia must also incorporate new thinking about possible developments in the Australia-New Zealand-United States Security Treaty (ANZUS) with the United States and New Zealand, and that Australia should also discuss with other allies for specific hypothetical scenarios possible responses.
Recent Comments