On Taiwan, the Communist Party of China is Gaslighting the World

This article was originally published by Global Taiwan Institute in its weekly newsletter, The Global Taiwan Brief, Vol. 9, Issue 14. Used with permission. To get the Global Taiwan Brief in your inbox every week, subscribe at globaltaiwan.org/subscribe. Shirley Kan is an independent specialist in Asian security affairs who retired from working for Congress at CRS and serves as a founding Member of GTI’s Advisory Board.

***

It is overdue to counter the Communist Party of China’s (CPC, 中國共產黨) [1] gaslighting the world regarding the Republic of China (ROC, 中華民國)—commonly called Formosa or Taiwan—because that distortion of reality is dangerous political warfare. The CPC employs an abusive pattern of misleading propaganda and controlling behavior to make foreign countries, media, and the United Nations (UN) alter their histories, perceptions, and reality. The ROC still exists, and ironically, President Lai Ching-te’s (賴清德) May 20 inauguration in Taipei displayed more Chinese tradition than any CPC plenum. Radical Beijing is changing both its “One China” Principle and the cross-strait status quo. In Washington, opposition to unilateral changes to the status quo is not sufficient yet. A new presidential or congressional campaign of deterrence and leadership is needed on UN Resolution 2758 and the United States’ “One China” Policy. US urgency is needed as much as Taiwan’s urgency in deterrence and defense.

Getting Away with Gaslighting

The CPC’s narrative is replete with lies, pushed not only by its propaganda machine but also parroted by foreign media. In fact, since 2008, Kuomintang (KMT, 國民黨) and Democratic Progressive Party (DPP, 民進黨) Presidents Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九), Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文), and Lai Ching-te have upheld their positions as the ROC President and the status quo—without undertaking de jure moves for a “Republic of Taiwan.”

It was only an excuse for the CPC to blame Lai’s formal, Chinese-style inauguration for the People’s Liberation Army (PLA)’s Joint Sword-2024A exercise on May 23-24, 2024. After all, the Joint Sword 2024A was a pre-planned exercise, not a reaction to any “provocation.” Nor was it even the first such exercise, since last year saw Joint Sword-2023.

The CPC’s gaslighting is not limited to military tensions but also restricts Taiwan’s participation in international organizations. Ironically, the World Health Organization (WHO) allows the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to participate but not the ROC (Taiwan), despite the fact that the PRC violated the WHO’s International Health Regulations during the COVID-19 pandemic, according to the July report of the Nonpartisan Commission on China and COVID-19.

Messing with the Status Quo

The current strategic context in which the CPC overturns the global rules-based order is different from that of the 1970s, when its “One China” Principle and foreign “One China” Policies were discussed. Today, the CPC’s goal of “national rejuvenation” aims to coerce and defeat others, putting Taiwan, the US, and other countries “out of business.”

The CPC has altered the approach of its “One China” Principle a la the Scarborough Model in the South China Sea, using insidious, incremental changes to achieve a fait accompli with failed US and other foreign deterrence.

In July 1978, before the US diplomatic switch from the ROC to the PRC, Deng Xiaoping (鄧小平) assured a key Congressional delegation about respecting Taiwan’s reality in working toward a peaceful resolution. Instead, the CPC has threatened to use its rising military capability to attack and annex Taiwan. Moreover, since 2020, PLA aircraft have regularly crossed the median line in the strait, reneging on past observation of the demarcation.

The CPC rejects cross-strait dialogue, blaming the DPP, when the KMT likewise insists on the sovereign ROC. The CPC also blames the DPP for the impasse by hyping the “One China”   Principle with a so-called “1992 Consensus.” However, the actual allusion is to an expedient rhetorical cover for functional CPC-KMT talks in 1992 without political agreement, originally called “One China, Different Interpretations (一中各表).” This author spoke to KMT politician Su Chi (蘇起) and explained that he re-phrased the label as “Consensus” in 2000 for an even more ambiguous phrase.

In a subtle shift in the CPC’s message to Taiwan in 2019, Xi Jinping enticed all political parties to send representatives for talks that would cover the “1992 Consensus.” Thus, the CPC departed from the 1979 message that called for dialogue with Taiwanese authorities. Additionally, the CPC’s English-language propaganda applies the fake label of “reunification,” even though Taiwan was never a part of the PRC.

Applying the same strategy in international organizations, the CPC egregiously lectures the UN, distorting General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971 to pull an international cloak over a claim to Taiwan. This propaganda masks political warfare to justify violence. CPC Defense Minister and Admiral Dong Jun (董軍) spoke at the Shangri-La Dialogue on June 2, 2024. Dong threatened “self-destruction” for so-called separatists, falsely citing UN Resolution 2758.

More coercive lawfare threatens Taiwan. Also in June, the CPC announced a Coast Guard Regulation to authorize boarding and holding Taiwan’s vessels, and threatened the death penalty with “Guidelines for Punishing Die Hard Taiwan Independence Separatists.” On July 3, China seized a Taiwanese fishing boat.

Urgency Instead of Business-As-Usual

The CPC increasingly messes with the status quo, escalates tensions, and distorts reality. While twisting narratives and accusing others of changes, the CPC departs from past approaches to its own “One China” Principle and a promised peaceful resolution of cross-Strait disputes.

So, how can we counter the CPC’s gaslighting and defend peace with urgency? Contrary to assumptions, safeguarding the status quo can mean re-setting the United States’ “One China” Policy.

The strategic environment has transformed since the 1970s. President Biden’s National Security Strategy realistically points to the PRC as “the only competitor with both the intent to reshape the international order and, increasingly, the economic, diplomatic, military, and technological power to do it.” The strategy promises to leverage multinational coalitions.

Moreover, former Deputy National Security Advisor Matt Pottinger describes the current context as China’s Cold War against democracies to subvert the US-led global order with an “Axis of Chaos,” explaining in Foreign Affairs in May/June and an interview on PBS on July 12.

Biden’s Equally Significant Points on Jurisdiction and Defense

Washington repeatedly has stated opposition to unilateral changes to the status quo, including in the National Security Strategy. But Beijing is getting away with not only messing with the status quo but also manipulating its “One China” Principle in the world.

In 2022, Biden stated significantly that the United States’ “One China” Policy does not mean that China has the jurisdiction to go in and use force to take over Taiwan, although the media tend to fixate on his equally significant commitments of US forces to help defend Taiwan. In June 2024, he was quoted as not ruling out the use of US military force.

The National Security Council should build on these points with a new presidential statement to correct the narrative on UN Resolution 2758 and re-set or clarify our “One China” Policy, just as former presidents have done to leave their legacies. In issuing the third US-PRC Communique on August 17, 1982, President Reagan issued a US statement about a peaceful resolution and arms sales. In 2000, President Clinton emphasized that a peaceful resolution must come with the assent of Taiwan’s people.

Clarifying UN Resolution 2758

Contrary to the CPC’s lie, the United Nations has never acknowledged or recognized the PRC’s claim over Taiwan. The international community did not determine Taiwan’s status.

For years, this author has called for countering the CPC’s falsehood at the United Nations and reinforcing the truth that UN Resolution 2758 did not settle Taiwan’s status. That resolution never even mentioned Taiwan, only allowing the PRC to join the United Nations as the representative of China. But the Trump Administration did not challenge China’s lie.

The Biden Administration has started to criticize China but is not yet telling the whole story, speaking at senior levels, and exercising the full extent of proactive US leadership of like-minded countries. Information needs to be deployed among the diplomatic, information, military, and economic (DIME) policy tools. Defense strategy relies on integrated deterrence that includes integration across military and non-military domains, including information.

In October 2021, then-Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Rick Waters said that “the People’s Republic of China has misused Resolution 2758 to prevent Taiwan’s meaningful participation” in international organizations.

In April 2024, Deputy Assistant Secretary Mark Lambert said that “the PRC increasingly mischaracterizes and misuses Resolution 2758 to serve its own interests; Beijing mischaracterizes the resolution by falsely conflating it with China’s one-China principle and wrongly asserts that it reflects an international consensus for its one-China principle; and Resolution 2758 has absolutely no bearing on countries’ sovereign choices with respect to their relationships with Taiwan.”

On May 1, Secretary of State Antony Blinken supported Taiwan’s participation at the World Health Assembly (WHA). But like his predecessor, Michael Pompeo, Blinken has failed to counter the CPC’s big lie about Resolution 2758, even in this UN context.

On the same day, the House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on the Indo-Pacific held a hearing on the Taiwan Relations Act (TRA). While Assistant Secretary of State Daniel Kritenbrink criticized China’s mis-use of Resolution 2758, he was not as forthright as the written statement.

Re-setting the “One China”  Policy

It is time to re-think the “One China” Policy although not necessarily to discard it. Biden and State Department officials insist that they are not changing the policy. However, the issues are whether they are acquiescing to Beijing or drifting the policy from its original advantages and the Congressional intent of the TRA.

Some say the reality is that Taiwan is a country or that two Chinas co-exist. Some stay silent. Instead of perceived provocation or timid passivity in the face of Beijing’s radicalism, Washington could re-set the “One China” Policy to its true form.

The policy’s origins embodied creativity and ambiguity, even supporting the ROC’s and PRC’s dual representation at the United Nations in 1971. The United States did not explicitly recognize or acknowledge the PRC’s claim over Taiwan. Since it does not discuss “one China,” the TRA is not the legal basis of any such notion of the “One China” Policy. The TRA does not stipulate US-Taiwan ties to be “unofficial,” so Pompeo was reasonable to remove restrictions on the Executive Branch’s contacts with Taiwan. The TRA expects the ROC’s survival, requiring in Section 15(2) that “Taiwan” also means the same governing authorities recognized as the ROC prior to 1979. The TRA calls for resistance against both the CPC’s coercion as well as the potential use of force.

In 1982, Reagan’s Six Assurances included one of not altering the US position on sovereignty over Taiwan (without stating that position). US policy focuses on a peaceful process to determine Taiwan’s unsettled status (without stating any objective).

Recommendations for Reality

1. The White House needs to regain control and leadership over the narrative on Taiwan, countering the CPC’s gaslighting and twisting the US “One China” Policy. Washington needs to add a policy objective and an informational campaign about UN Resolution 2758.
2. Congress could reassert its traditional, critical policy role that includes telling the truth about UN Resolution 2758. For example, Senator Rubio introduced S.Res.633 in April and Senator Risch introduced S.Res.687 in May.
3. Washington’s leadership is not sufficient yet. Multinational counters to Beijing on UN Resolution 2758 are needed, particularly, by the Group of Seven (G-7), NATO, and Quad.
   In November 2023, the European Parliament reported on European Union-China relations and urged steps to “condemn China’s increasing military provocation around the Taiwan Strait and oppose China’s constant distortion of UN Resolution 2758…”
   On May 24, 2024, the representatives in Taipei of eight countries jointly stated their support for Taiwan to be an observer in the WHA. However, Australia, Britain, Canada, Czech Republic, Germany, Japan, Lithuania, and the United States failed to dispel China’s blatant lie about Resolution 2758.
   In a speech on June 6 in Honolulu, Australian Ambassador to Washington Kevin Rudd criticized China’s false narrative on Resolution 2758, though he could have said more.

4. Even without diplomatic recognition, foreign officials should refer to and contact the ROC (Taiwan) in recognition of its reality and legitimacy. With US diplomatic recognition from 1913 to 1978, the ROC still exists as a legitimate democracy of 23 million citizens. Sun Yat-sen is still honored as the ROC’s founding father inside the Presidential Building and inside the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. There is still the ROC Postal Service.
   The Vatican and other diplomatic partners recognize the ROC, not “Taiwan,” contrary to news reports. The government in Taipei upholds the ROC, but the CPC tries to extinguish this single beacon of democracy in a Chinese culture.

The main point:  The United Nations, foreign media, and national capitals need to counter the CPC’s dangerous gaslighting about the ROC (Taiwan) and UN Resolution 2758.

[1] This author uses “Communist Party of China (CPC)” in recognition of official and literal translations.

(Featured photo by Xinhua News)