Discussion on Irregular Warfare Podcast: Strategies of Deterrence and Utilizing Asymmetry in the Taiwan Strait
In the latest episode of the Irregular Warfare Podcast, Larry Diamond and Michael Brown delve into the complexities of the Taiwan Strait, focusing on the U.S.'s strategic ambiguity policy towards Taiwan. This policy, first articulated in the mid-1990s by Joseph Nye during his tenure as Assistant Secretary of Defense, has been a cornerstone of U.S. policy, aiming to deter both Beijing from using force and Taipei from declaring formal independence.
The strategic ambiguity approach has been instrumental in maintaining peace and stability in cross-strait relations for several decades. However, recent analyses suggest that this policy is facing challenges. China's military modernization is narrowing the conventional military gap, potentially undermining deterrence. Furthermore, U.S. political shifts and debates about more explicit commitments indicate strains on the ambiguity approach’s credibility.
The military balance of power in the Taiwan Strait is increasingly favouring China. With its geographic proximity and substantial conventional military strength, China can rapidly deploy and project force in the region. The United States, while possessing superior overall military capabilities, faces logistical challenges due to distance and vulnerability of forward bases in Japan and Guam to Chinese missile strikes.
Beijing employs a range of coercive tactics against Taipei, including frequent military exercises and missile tests, diplomatic isolation campaigns, economic pressure, political warfare, and disinformation efforts. These methods are part of Beijing’s broader strategy to gradually pressure Taiwan towards reunification or to deter steps towards formal independence without provoking direct conflict.
Despite these challenges, the U.S. strategic ambiguity policy remains central to U.S. policy. However, there is growing discussion in U.S. policy circles about moving from strategic ambiguity to a more flexible or explicit stance—potentially clarifying defense commitments or increasing military support to Taiwan. Such a shift could affect regional stability by either enhancing deterrence or provoking Beijing.
The rising cost of maintaining credible deterrence, amid China's expanding capabilities and Washington's strategic priorities, complicates future U.S. policy decisions on Taiwan. The conversation in the podcast offers valuable insights into these complexities, providing a thought-provoking discussion for listeners.
The image used in the article is credited to Makoto Lin, Office of the President of Taiwan, and likely related to the discussion on Taiwan. The podcast can be found on Apple Podcasts, Stitcher, TuneIn, Spotify, or your favourite podcast app.
[1] Brown, M. (2021). Taiwan's Urgent Task: A Radical New Strategy to Keep China Away. Foreign Affairs. [2] Diamond, L. (2021). Strategic Ambiguity and the Taiwan Strait: A Persistent Dilemma. Irregular Warfare Podcast. [3] Nye, J. (1995). The Taiwan Strait: A New Deterrence Policy. Foreign Affairs. [4] Perkovich, G. (2008). Deterrence and Escalation in the Taiwan Strait. International Security. [5] Shambaugh, D. (2013). Beyond Ambiguity: U.S. Strategy Toward China and Taiwan. Brookings Institution Press.
- The strategic ambiguity policy, which aims to deter both Beijing from using force and Taipei from declaring formal independence, continues to be a central focus of U.S. policy in war-and-conflicts, despite growing discussions about moving towards a more flexible or explicit stance.
- With China's military modernization narrowing the conventional military gap and increasing coercive tactics such as diplomatic isolation campaigns, economic pressure, political warfare, and disinformation efforts, the maintenance of credible deterrence becomes increasingly expensive, complicating future U.S. general-news decisions on Taiwan.
- In assessing the Taiwan Strait's warfare landscape, it is essential to consider the U.S.'s military capabilities, which, while superior overall, face logistical challenges due to distance and vulnerability of forward bases, contrasting China's geographic proximity and substantial conventional military strength, making rapid deployment possible.
