By Lau Siu-kai

The conflict between Russia and Ukraine has been viewed by many as a “proxy war” instigated by Washington against Moscow.

The United States and its allies do not directly participate in the conflict. However, they have provided Ukraine, their “proxy”, with funds, weapons, intelligence, and logistical support, as well as imposing tough financial, economic, political, diplomatic, and cultural sanctions on Russia. At the same time, officials, politicians, and experts from the US and the West have repeatedly warned China not to exploit the conflict to settle the Taiwan question through non-peaceful means, and repeat Russia’s mistakes.

Such Western warnings are meant to indirectly trumpet themselves as bona fide defenders of peace across the Taiwan Strait.

As a result, many people — be it in the mainland, Taiwan, Hong Kong, Macao or overseas Chinese communities — are worried or even believe that the US will launch a similar proxy war against China, using Taiwan region as a proxy by prodding “Taiwan independence” forces to provoke Beijing and force the latter to use non-peaceful means to attain national reunification. They believe that Washington will sell Taiwan many advanced weapons, and provide the island with defense facilities, military training, and strategic guidance in the event of a conflict.

While the US will not send its own troops during any cross-Strait war, it will try hard to maintain Taiwan’s combat power to the greatest extent possible. More importantly, the US will encourage or even impel its allies, such as Japan, South Korea, the Philippines, and Australia, to send troops to defend Taiwan.

The wishful thinking of the US is that it can take advantage of such a proxy war against China to advance its hegemonic interests. Even if China is not defeated in the proxy war, such thinking goes, its economic and military power will be severely damaged, and chaos and instability will erupt in the country.

China’s modernization and national rejuvenation process will also encounter significant setbacks.

Michael Whitney, an international affairs analyst, is among those who are convinced that the US has such sinister intentions.

Based on his analysis of the US’ rhetoric and actions, Whitney concluded, “The Biden administration is implementing a plan to draw Tai- wan into a direct military confrontation with the People’s Republic of China … Beijing is expected to react to mounting challenges to its territorial integrity by US proxies and their political allies operating in Taiwan.”

Their ultimate objective “is to arm, train and provide logistical support for (Taiwan) separatists who will spearhead Washington’s proxy war on China”.

“In truth, the United States is laying the groundwork for a proxy war on China, and Taiwan has been designated as the front line in that war. The independence movement is merely the cover Washington has chosen to conceal its real objectives,” Whitney added.

Even if the US political elites use Taiwan and US allies to instigate a proxy war against China, they will not admit or announce it. However, if the US deems it can contain China’s rise through a proxy war at a limited cost, it will likely go ahead.

Nevertheless, such a US-instigated conflict will not only fail but will also see Washington being sucked into a maelstrom with no exit due to several reasons.

First, China’s longstanding position is that it hopes to achieve national reunification peacefully and is unwilling to see compatriots on both sides of the Strait fighting each other.

“Taiwan independence” advocates have become increasingly provocative, with the US encouraging and shielding them in every possible way. However, China has not given up the policy of peaceful reunification and will only go to war when there is no other alternative.

Article 8 of the Anti-Secession Law of the People’s Republic of China, enacted in 2005, stipulates, “If the ‘Taiwan independence’ secessionist forces should act under any name or by any means to cause the fact of Taiwan’s secession from China, or that major incidents involving Taiwan’s secession from China should occur, or that possibilities for a peaceful reunification should be completely exhausted, the state shall employ non-peaceful means and other necessary measures to protect China’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.”

Accordingly, if the US and the “Taiwan independence” forces can create a situation that violates the Anti-Secession Law, such as the Taiwan authorities officially declaring Taiwan’s de jure “independence”, then China will have to recover Taiwan in a non-peaceful way.

Richard Cullen, an adjunct professor in the law faculty at Hong Kong University, asserted that there are solid grounds, based on international laws, to support the view that Taiwan has long been and remains part of China. This means that Beijing may enjoy a right supported by international law to secure unification (internally) by using force as a last resort.

Today, all countries that recognize the People’s Republic of China or the “Republic of China” agree that Taiwan is an inseparable part of China. Hence, if China uses force against Taiwan because it declares independence, these countries, including the US and its allies, will have no legal and moral grounds for going to war against China to defend Taiwan.

It follows that launching a war against China with Taiwan region and some of its US allies as proxies is not legitimate according to international law. After all, Taiwan’s status as part of China differs from Ukraine’s status as a sovereign state.

Second, US allies, apart from feeling that there is no legal basis for military intervention in China’s internal affairs, also lack enough incentives to go to war with China or impose various sanctions on it.

Instead, these allies have more solid reasons to stay out of it. They believe that, after recovering Taiwan, China will be more assertive and pose a more significant strategic “threat” to them. Still, they do not fear an “existential threat” from China. All of them have very close economic ties with China, and a war would cause unbearable harm to their economic interests.

More importantly, without the participation of the US, its allies have no chance to defeat China militarily. Fighting against China is just hitting a stone with a pebble, and only fools who ignore national interests will do so. Furthermore, even if the US were to join the war, China will not necessarily be defeated, and it will only bring about a protracted war that is not good for the world.

However, once the US participates in the battle, it will no longer be a proxy war.

Third, if the US declares that it will not go to war with China because of Taiwan, the “Taiwan independence” forces will not be willing or bold enough to “excessively” provoke the mainland and force it to take military action against Taiwan. No matter how much military and economic support the US gives Taiwan, its military strength is far inferior to that of the mainland. The will of Taiwan residents to fight is relatively weak.

US military experts generally believe that Taiwan lacks thorough, sufficient, and wise military planning and training to push back the mainland’s military “invasion”. Its weapons and equipment rely too much on heavy weapons that have limited use in a cross-Strait war.

An Independent Task Force Report on Taiwan by the Council on Foreign Relations noted that “indirect US support in the form of weapons and intelligence will not be enough; absent direct US military intervention, Taiwan’s military likely does not have the ability to resist a Chinese invasion”.

Furthermore, “Taiwan’s military conducts largely scripted exercises, its junior leaders are not empowered to make battlefield decisions, and its training is inadequate”. The reality, the report said, “is that only sustained US attention, training, and pressure can change these dynamics”.

Suppose the strategic purpose of the mainland’s use of force is not to occupy Taiwan for a long time immediately but to attack the “Taiwan independence” forces severely to punish the “Taiwan independence” elements.

In that case, the mainland can damage Taiwan’s infrastructure and military facilities in a very short period. Severe damage and the cross-Strait war can be ended quickly without the mainland incurring a hefty price.

Once the mainland imposes an all-round and long-term blockade of Taiwan, the island’s combat effectiveness will collapse abruptly, and it will be unable to conduct a proxy on behalf of the United States.

Fourth, although many Taiwan residents today are not enthusiastic about national reunification, they are increasingly worried about a cross-Strait war. Their confidence in the US coming to Taiwan’s defense is also minimal.

Some people in Taiwan who have a greater awareness of the situation have publicly opposed the use of Taiwan by the US to launch a proxy war against China. Therefore, even if the “Taiwan independence” forces were to provoke the mainland into a cross-Strait war under US’ auspices, they would not be able to garner the support of most Taiwan residents. Without the US ready to intervene militarily, the “Taiwan independence” elements will not dare to go to war against the mainland. Such elements are worried that losing the proxy war — and hence losing Taiwan — will allow the mainland to hold them accountable for “treason”.

Fifth, the US has already used many resources in its “proxy war” in Ukraine. Although Russia has suffered heavy losses from the conflict, Ukraine has still failed to regain Russian-occupied areas.

Since the US still needs to achieve its strategic goal of destroying Russia and the Vladimir Putin regime, the conflict is bound to be a long battle of attrition.

If the US loses in Ukraine and still needs to invest resources in Europe for a long time, the incentive to launch a proxy war against China will be greatly reduced.

Finally, even if the US can induce or force Taiwan and its allies to launch a proxy war against China, the allies will be no match for China, and China may take the opportunity to recover Taiwan. Thus, the US will be faced with the dilemma of whether to go to war with China.

American defense and foreign policy analyst Emma Ashford maintained that US public opinion strongly opposes fighting China directly over Taiwan. War games have suggested that such a choice could be disastrous for the US.

Many US military experts have said that the current state of US armaments and industrial production capacity are both in deplorable conditions, so there is no certainty of defeating a rival like China.

All things considered, using Taiwan region to wage a proxy war against China will prove to be the most disastrous, bizarre, and dumb strategic blunder that Washington has ever made.

The author is Emeritus Professor of Sociology with The Chinese University of Hong Kong, and consultant to the Chinese Association of Hong Kong & Macao Studies.

The views do not necessarily reflect those of Bauhinia Magazine.

Source: ChinaDaily