#Taiwanese Presidential Election

[mariacallous]

“I am opposed to war, unless in self-defense.” This was the most-liked comment on Douyin—the Chinese counterpart to TikTok—in reaction to a speech delivered by Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi on Jan. 9. In his address, Wang previewed China’s top diplomatic goals for 2024 and emphasized “the unwavering resolve of all 1.4 billion Chinese citizens to achieve reunification with Taiwan,” a statement made just days prior to the island’s general elections.

The broader reaction to Wang’s remarks likely wasn’t what the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) hoped for: Tens of thousands of Chinese social media users responded, many of them with grievances, sarcasm, and defiance, widely questioning the costs of a potential war.

One man from Shanghai complained, “Who is going to fight the war? If I die, who is going to pay my mortgage or my car loan?” Wang’s speech framed “national unification” as one of “China’s core interests,” but as one user from Hunan rebutted, “[China’s] core interests are that every Chinese can be treated equally and have access to elderly care and health care.” The pushback went beyond economic and social grievances. Some posters were even bolder, suggesting that Taiwan’s democracy may demonstrate a political alternative to mainland China: “The fact that Taiwanese choose their own way of life,” said one commentator from Shandong, “might show that Chinese people can take a different route.”

The mood among social media users is a sharp departure from past elections. After almost every Taiwanese general election since 2016, a wave of pro-war fever has swept the Chinese internet. After Taiwan’s 2020 elections, for example, upbeat war enthusiasts in China produced oil paintings that illustrated wild fantasies of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) capturing Taiwanese President Tsai Ing-wen alive after landing in Taiwan and forcing her to sign an official surrender document onboard a Chinese aircraft carrier—a scene reminiscent of the 1945 Japanese surrender that ended World War II.

In 2021, one of the most popular songs to go viral on Chinese social media was “Take A Bullet Train to Taiwan in 2035.” Its allusion to a high-speed rail line connecting Beijing and Taipei was a dog whistle to nationalist masses who hoped that unification was on the horizon—by force, if necessary.

Absent from these fantasies, however, was the blood and violence that accompanies real war. At the time, China’s star was rising on the international stage, and public confidence was riding high on China’s success in controlling the COVID-19 pandemic within its borders. As such, the sentiments surrounding unification and the use of military force were quite romantic; many people believed that victory over Taiwan would be easy, that the Taiwanese would surrender voluntarily if the PLA simply blockaded the island.

In 2024, however, things have changed. The most recent Taiwanese presidential election—in which the pro-independence Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) won a repeat victory—served as an uncomfortable reminder to the Chinese public that neither Taiwanese politicians nor voters are interested in Beijing’s plans for political unification. Although the forceful unification narrative still exists, any push from nationalists to reignite war fever has now run into a wall of skepticism following the DPP victory.

“Wake up,” one Weibo user wrote in opposition to the broader online calls for forceful unification. “Stop dreaming,” another echoed. The defiant voices are becoming a common reaction to the suggested use of military force to an extent rarely seen, given the massive culture of censorship on Chinese social media.

A clear reason for this change is China’s economic slowdown. While Taiwan went to the polls in 2024, China was grappling with a youth unemployment rate above 20 percent, a housing market crisis with sales down by 45 percent, and a stock market in free fall that lost $6 trillion in just three years, the likes of which haven’t been seen in almost a decade. News about Taiwanese elections failed to arouse the same nationalistic reactions among the preoccupied Chinese public that had occurred in the previous two contests.

Instead, the 2024 elections triggered a flood of complaints: “Sort out our own economy, what a mess.” a Shanghai resident said angrily. “Look at our stock market,” an apparently frustrated investor from Hunan grieved, “It’d be better to keep the status quo, and leave Taiwanese alone.” The gloomy economy has made some commenters question the underlying justification for war: “With low-income people making less than 1,000 yuan a month ($140), and the national insurance tax going up, huge medical bills, and unaffordable apartments, why do you want forceful unification? I don’t get it.”

“It is the economy that really matters,” another person from Tianjin pointed out. “[Taiwan] being independent or not has nothing to do with ordinary people.”

The changing attitudes toward Taiwan’s elections reflect a broader shift in public sentiment in China’s online space. Discontent about the country’s poor economic reality has been growing louder, drowning out calls for a military takeover.

Ironically, the CCP’s own past propaganda efforts contributed to this cooling effect. Right before Nancy Pelosi, then the speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, visited Taiwan in August 2022, official and semiofficial rhetoric in mainland China was so belligerent that it led many Chinese to believe that the day of unification had finally arrived and that the military would shoot down her plane and launch its attack on Taiwan imminently.

This was the peak of forceful unification hysteria, but it only left its crusaders disappointed. In the end, there was not only no shootdown of Pelosi’s plane, but there also weren’t even military exercises conducted before she left Taiwan. Many Chinese, especially forceful unification advocates, felt betrayed and disillusioned by their government’s failure to follow through on its belligerent rhetoric, and the after-effects of this letdown are still being felt today.

During Taiwan’s 2024 elections, war enthusiasts were continuously reminded of Beijing’s military inaction following Pelosi’s trip to Taiwan. “Have you guys forgotten Pelosi?” one said. One commonly repeated joke, observing the lack of military action, scoffed that the only thing that was fired up when Pelosi visited was the stove in her hotel. The kinds of threats that once resonated with nationalists now drew widespread ridicule online: “delusion,” “talking a big game,” “an unrealistic fantasy,” and “all hat, no cattle.”

Meanwhile, at the other end of the Chinese political spectrum, the 2024 election prompted the resurgence of the view among many liberals that Taiwan’s democracy represents a desirable political model. In the early 2010s, many Chinese saw Taiwan as a beacon of hope for Chinese society—a liberal, civic, and democratic alternative to the one-party state. The liberal Chinese writer Han Han coined a popular phrase—“The most beautiful scenery of Taiwan is its people.”—that encapsulated the view of how trustworthy and free a people can become under democracy.

But after the crackdown on liberal intellectuals and online speech under Chinese leader Xi Jinping, the honeymoon did not last long and was gradually replaced by a climate of xenophobia, jingoism, war euphoria, and a longing for unification by force. Making matters worse, a growing nationalist mood in Taiwan led many to believe that Taiwanese looked down on mainlanders.

The 2024 elections, however, prompted a renewed interest from the Chinese public about their neighbor, home to the world’s only Chinese-speaking democracy. News about Taiwanese elections aroused great curiosity on Weibo about the nuts and bolts of the electoral process—what a ballot looks like, how many ballots one can cast, how votes are counted, and how candidates are selected. When a few Taiwanese Weibo users answered these questions, they were liked and retweeted by thousands of Chinese accounts, drawing genuine admiration and blessings from many.

“Are we going to see one day like this?” one user from Gansu wondered with a crying emoji. “Maybe this is accumulating experience for our own future: giving speeches, holding debates, and counting votes,” commented another, from Tianjin.

China’s shifting public sentiment is bound to have repercussions for cross-strait relations, but it would probably be a bridge too far to infer that the Chinese public will fiercely oppose a war in the Taiwan Strait. Ultimately, the nationalist base remains. At present, the euphoria about forceful unification is quieting down, mainly because the party’s over-the-top propaganda failed to meet the expectations of its most ardent supporters. But if aggressive rhetoric were followed by military action in the future, war fever could be easily fanned again.

Despite the prevalence of extreme nationalism, Chinese public opinion is more divided on Taiwan than it seems, and these divisions are only likely to increase. What concerns most ordinary Chinese are decent jobs, good income, accumulating savings for retirement, and getting affordable access to health care and housing.

So long as the economy is struggling and people’s livelihoods are threatened, there is no guarantee that the CCP’s attempts to exploit nationalism will work; quite the opposite, it could be faced with plenty of pushback.

[zvaigzdelasas]

With Taiwan’s high-stakes presidential election only four months away, Beijing has unveiled a sweeping guideline to turn Fujian province into a model zone for “integration” with the island and remove a social constraint on long-term Taiwanese residents in a bid to advance peaceful unification. In a 21-article document, policymakers released detailed measures to turn the southeastern mainland province into a demonstration area for integrated development across the Taiwan Strait.

13 Sep 23

[warsofasoiaf]

Hi, how is your day going? I wanted to ask if you knew why the Kuomintang and the CCP have such a confusing relationship. I was taught in school that they were rivals during the Chinese civil war, but recently I've come across some articles suggesting that the CCP hopes the Kuomintang wins Taiwan's presidential elections. What gives?

They were. The KMT was the political party of Chiang Kai-Shek and fought opposite the CCP during the Chinese Civil War.

However, that was decades ago, and the DPP has a pretty strong hold on pro-independence voters and Taiwanese natives, so the KMT, to stay politically relevant, shifted to a pro-economic ties with mainland China position and largely supports status quo policies, at least according to their own statements.

As to why the CCP supports them, it's because they're one of two parties that has a chance to win and the DPP is far more anti-China and pro-US.

Thanks for the question, Fan(g).

SomethingLikeALawyer, Hand of the King

[ttomm1357]

some fun trivias about Nymphia wind:

62

January 2024 is Taiwan‘s presidential election. Although the money in nymphia’s account is too little to be withdrawn (she was still poor at the time, New York is expensive and her RPDR money hasn’t credited yet), she still found a way to fly back to Taiwan to vote (and she was almost like just left taiwan and quickly return). However, she left her Taiwanese ID in New York, and she ended up not being able to vote.

[indizombie]

Taiwanese snacks were only thrown into the spotlight in the mid-1990s when the island became a democracy and domestic tourism started to boom. It had its first elections in 1996 and the KMT won. But in 2000, the KMT lost the presidential race to the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), moving out of power for the first time in half a century. "Taiwanese snacks were included in the state banquet for the first time. The status of snacks was elevated," Ms Kao says. "It showed that the local identity had become stronger."

‘General Tso’s chicken to bento bowls: A food guide to Taiwan politics’, BBC

[partisan-by-default]

Taiwan’s ruling Democratic Progressive Party secured an unprecedented third consecutive presidential term Saturday, with the party’s candidate, current Vice President Lai Ching-te, winning 40% of the ballot.

He defeated Hou Yu-ih of the China-friendly opposition party Kuomintang, or KMT, and Ko Wen-je of the Taiwan People’s Party.

During his speech, Lai said his win was a victory for democracy.

“We are telling the international community that between democracy and authoritarianism, we will stand on the side of democracy,” he told a room of more than 100 local and international journalists.

He said that the Taiwanese people successfully resisted external forces’ attempts to interfere in the election, hinting at the wide range of tactics used by China during the monthslong presidential campaign.

“We trust that only the people of Taiwan have the right to choose their own president,” he said.

[oww666]

you mean like they did in the us election and the cdn election ?

[quotesfrommyreading]

How did we get to this point? The origin story of Taiwan most familiar to Americans begins in 1949, when Chiang Kai-shek’s nationalist forces, locked for years in a civil war with Mao Zedong’s Communists, were defeated. Along with much of his remaining army, Chiang fled to Taiwan and set up a government-in-exile called the Republic of China. That government was recognized by the United States. But within a few years of Richard Nixon’s 1972 Cold War opening to Beijing, the U.S. formally switched diplomatic recognition to the People’s Republic. Ever since, Taiwan’s status has been cloaked in ambiguity. The U.S. acknowledges Beijing’s claim to Taiwan without recognizing its sovereignty over the island. To help deter a Chinese effort to seize Taiwan by force, the U.S. has pledged to provide Taiwan with the means to defend itself.

That origin story explains Taiwan’s curious geopolitical status, but it leaves a lot out. When Chiang fled to Taiwan—with roughly 2 million Chinese from the mainland—there were some 6 million people already living on an island that was just emerging from 50 years of Japanese rule. Most of the people living on the island when Chiang arrived could claim roots in Taiwan going back hundreds of years. They had their own languages and culture. So too did the island’s many Indigenous groups, such as the Amis, the Atayal, and the Paiwan. To subjugate the island, Chiang killed and imprisoned tens of thousands over decades—a period known as the White Terror. He set up a military dictatorship under the leadership of his Chinese nationalist Kuomintang Party (KMT) and, from this offshore platform, vowed to reclaim mainland China.

Taiwan is different now. With its broad boulevards, glass towers, military monuments, narrow side streets, night markets, and ample signs in English, Taipei today presents an ambience of blended cultures: Chinese, Japanese, Western, and distinctly Taiwanese. Bubble tea, a Taiwanese invention, is everywhere. But consider what it was like to grow up in the shadow of Taiwan’s postwar history, and you can better understand the profound ways in which younger generations have been remaking the island’s politics and identity.

Emily Y. Wu is a professional podcaster who blends a focus on youth culture with an urgent concern for Taiwan’s political present. (One of her shows is called Metalhead Politics.) She is among dozens of Taiwanese I spoke with during the past year, first on Zoom, then in person in Taipei. Wu was born under KMT martial law in 1984. Her family did not come over with Chiang; they had lived in Taiwan for generations. “Chiang Kai-shek brought China over,” she told me. “I grew up always knowing that there was this alternate history: It was Taiwanese history, which was not taught in school.” Students were taught Chinese history and geography under the presumption that the KMT would one day govern China again. Mandarin was spoken in class, and speaking Taiwanese was discouraged. Wu recalled Lesson 9 of her childhood textbook: “ ‘Hello teachers, hello students, we are Chinese!’ ”

But a movement for democracy was building. “We grew up hearing these names, knowing that there was a group of activists, scholars, lawyers that tried to imagine a free Taiwan,” Wu explained. Many of those people were members of the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), which currently governs Taiwan. In 1987, the KMT lifted nearly 40 years of martial law. Wu’s political consciousness was shaped by the protests, marches, and hunger strikes that led to Taiwan’s first true presidential election, in 1996.

By the beginning of the 21st century, Taiwan was becoming ever more democratic—and ever more Taiwanese. The school curriculum changed: Taiwan’s distinct history was taught, as were Taiwanese languages. Taiwan also began to celebrate its Indigenous population. After the election of President Ma Ying-jeou, in 2008, links of trade, investment, and travel helped reduce tensions with China. Ma was from the KMT, and the party’s Chinese heritage and its ties to Taiwan’s business elite eased the way to détente with Beijing. But many Taiwanese, particularly the young, feared that forging too close a connection could ultimately give Beijing leverage over Taiwan. In 2014, in what became known as “the Sunflower Movement,” named for the flower that served as a symbol of hope, students occupied the Taiwan legislature to oppose a free-trade agreement with China. After a tense standoff, they succeeded in stopping the deal. They also helped propel a political wave that in 2016 brought the election of the DPP’s Tsai Ing-wen as president.

As Taiwan was becoming more democratic, China was becoming more autocratic. And as Taiwan was becoming more Taiwanese, China was becoming more fervently nationalist. After the ascent of Xi Jinping to the head of the Communist Party, in 2012, Beijing shifted from incentives to coercion. Xi’s government proved adept at bullying companies and entire countries to stop doing business in Taiwan and to recognize China’s narrative of sovereignty. Xi also began escalating crackdowns on China’s periphery—in Xinjiang province and in Hong Kong.

  —  Taiwan Wants China to Think Twice About an Invasion

[usafphantom2]

China sends 103 military planes towards Taiwan in a new peak of activity that the island calls harassment

Fernando Valduga By Fernando Valduga 09/20/2023 - 10:44am in Military, War Zones

The Chinese military sent 103 warplane towards Taiwan in a 24-hour period, in what the island's Ministry of Defense classified as a new recent high.

The planes were detected between 6 a.m. on Sunday and 6 a.m. on Monday, the ministry said. As usual, they came back before arriving in Taiwan. Chinese warplanes fly towards the autonomous island almost daily, but usually in smaller numbers. The Taiwanese ministry did not explain what period it referred to as a "recent" high.

China, which claims Taiwan as part of its territory, has been conducting increasing military exercises in the air and waters around Taiwan, as tensions increase between the two and with the United States. The U.S. is Taiwan's main arms supplier and opposes any attempt to change Taiwan's status by force.

The Chinese government would prefer Taiwan to be under its control voluntarily and last week revealed a plan for an integrated development demonstration zone in Fujian province, trying to attract Taiwanese while militarily threatening the island, in what experts say is China's long-standing baton and carrot approach.

Recent actions may be an attempt to influence Taiwan's presidential elections in January. The ruling Progressive Democratic Party, which leans towards the formal independence of the island, is an anathema for the Chinese leadership. China favors opposition candidates who defend work with the continent.

The presidential candidates made no immediate comments on Monday about the latest Chinese military activity.

The Taiwanese Ministry of Defense said that 40 of the planes crossed the symbolic midline between mainland China and the island. They included more than 30 fighters, as well as in-flight refueling tanker planes. Taiwan also reported nine Chinese ships in the region's waters in the previous 24 hours.

The ministry called the Chinese military action "harassment", which warned that it could increase in the current tense atmosphere. “We ask the Beijing authorities to take responsibility and immediately stop this type of destructive military activities,” he said in a statement.

China's Foreign Ministry spokesman Mao Ning, asked about the alleged military activity, said that there is no "median line" because Taiwan is part of Chinese territory.

Last week, China sent a flotilla of ships, including the aircraft carrier Shandong, to waters near Taiwan. The exercises took place shortly after the U.S. and Canada sailed with warships through the Taiwan Strait, the waters that separate the island from the mainland.

Taiwan and China separated in 1949, when the communists took control of China during a civil war. The losing nationalists fled to Taiwan and established their own government on the island.

Only a few foreign nations give the island official diplomatic recognition. The US, among others, has formal ties with China, while maintaining a representative office in Taiwan.

Source: AP

Tags: Military AviationPLAAF - China Air ForceRoCAF - Republic of China Air Force/Waiwan Air ForceWar Zones - China/Taiwan

Sharing

tweet

Fernando Valduga

Fernando Valduga

Aviation photographer and pilot since 1992, he has participated in several events and air operations, such as Cruzex, AirVenture, Daytona Airshow and FIDAE. He has work published in specialized aviation magazines in Brazil and abroad. Uses Canon equipment during his photographic work throughout the world of aviation.

Related news

MILITARY

Northrop Grumman releases update on the program and progress of the B-21 Raider

09/19/2023 - 18:00

MILITARY

Philippine Air Force introduces Cessna C-208B surveillance aircraft donated by the U.S.

19/09/2023 - 14:00

HELICOPTERS

IMAGES: Bell presents the Czech AH-1Z and UH-1Y combat helicopters

19/09/2023 - 12:00

MILITARY

Paramount declares first Mwari operational and reveals additional sales for two operators

19/09/2023 - 09:00

MILITARY

Australia will upgrade the P-8A Poseidon fleet and acquire the fourth MQ-4C Triton

19/09/2023 - 08:14

AIRCRAFT ACCIDENTS

Wreckage of the U.S. Marine Corps F-35B jet is found in South Carolina

18/09/2023 - 23:26

[ac120]

I have been watching a lot of coverage for Taiwanese presidential election as a sort of palate cleanser, and I am really enjoying some anime vernacular making it into mainstream political discourse.

[mariacallous]

Lai Ching-te will be Taiwan’s next president after winning Saturday’s election, ensuring that the ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) will remain in power and dealing a rebuke to Beijing’s wishes for a more China-friendly administration. In the days before the election, Taiwanese voters were flooded with information. Look up, and they saw posters on buses and buildings declaring the virtues of all three candidates and their running mates. Look down, and they got a stream of news, gossip, and opinions from their phones—not all of it true and much of it likely stirred up by internet trolls in China.

Taiwan is one of the world’s most digitally connected countries, and on social media, false posts and videos are reaching thousands of people before platforms can take them down. TikTok was flooded with disinformation accusing Lai of sex scandals, tax evasion, and conspiring to start a war with China. His vice presidential pick, Hsiao Bi-khim, has been accused of secretly holding U.S. citizenship. So has the running mate of Ko Wen-je, the third-party candidate livestreaming his spoiler campaign on YouTube and TikTok.

Researchers have attributed much of the false information to Chinese actors—and rather than blasting pro-China views to Taiwanese voters, they’ve focused on amplifying negative stories about Taiwan’s domestic politics and wedge issues, such as the role of the United States, with the intent of polarizing Taiwanese society.

“Beijing’s cognitive warfare is evolving,” said Tzu-wei Hung, a scholar at Taiwan’s Academia Sinica. “Negative narratives are effective not because they will change the election result but because they intensify social conflicts and create a vicious cycle of distrust and hate.”

Taiwan faced a similarly toxic disinformation environment before the 2020 presidential election, and at the time, it fought back—hard. Officials frequently accused China of being behind wide-ranging disinformation campaigns. Police summoned private citizens for posting false stories and levied fines in some instances for violating a law preventing public disorder. The National Communications Commission (NCC) issued a series of fines to the pro-China TV station Chung Tien Television (CTi) for broadcasting false information. Eventually, in December 2020, CTi was taken off the air after the NCC declined to renew its broadcast license.

The government learned quickly that none of it worked.

“If you want to curb disinformation by legal measures, it’s difficult and dangerous,” said Yachi Chiang, a professor at National Taiwan Ocean University specializing in intellectual property and tech law. It “opens a pathway for the government to control speech.”

Taiwan has always been a banner holder of free speech in Asia. In 2020, however, DPP legislators were panicked over the prospect of Chinese election-meddling. President Tsai Ing-wen was riding a wave of global popularity by supporting the Hong Kong pro-democracy protests, which had broken out months earlier, giving Beijing every reason to remove her from office or disrupt her legislative majority.

Tsai was reelected in a landslide—but not because her government cracked down on fake news. Many fines levied under the Social Order Maintenance Act, an existing law that was utilized against disinformation peddlers, have since been overturned by the courts.

The NCC’s crusade against CTi hasn’t gone much better. Opposition politicians used its removal from the airwaves to hammer DPP politicians as enemies of free speech. The NCC, at the time, argued that CTi had failed to adhere to basic fact-checking standards and could not ensure impartiality from outside influence—a clear reference to its owner, the domestically unloved Tsai Eng-meng, a snack food tycoon with extensive business interests in China and a track record of pro-unification statements.

In May 2023, a Taipei court ruled against the NCC’s decision to shut down CTi, saying it had failed to provide adequate reasoning for its decision. At present, CTi remains off the air—and its request to have its license renewed by the court was rejected—but the NCC has been ordered to review its own decision and provide stiffer reasoning. “You need something stronger to sustain your ruling,” Chiang said.

Taiwanese authorities have successfully prosecuted citizens who received funding from China to publish fake news. But in general, politicians began to realize that moving through the judicial system “would be slow,” Chiang said. “The decisions might be disappointing. The results might be less effective.”

Just after the 2020 election, however, Taiwan’s government found a better way to combat disinformation when the COVID-19 pandemic swept the globe. Taiwan was the first country to alert the World Health Organization of the presence of a coronavirus in Wuhan and then introduce travel restrictions and quarantine protocols.

Public officials also began releasing accurate, easily digestible information as quickly as possible, before disinformation could reach people’s phone screens. Chen Shih-chung, the health minister at the time, held press conferences each afternoon, earning him the nickname “Minister Clock.” His ministry, along with the social media accounts of Tsai and Premier Su Tseng-chang, posted colorful memes sharing data on the pandemic and extolling the virtues of masking and hand-washing.

It was a triumph of public transparency that paid off handsomely. Taiwan saw just 823 COVID-19 cases in all of 2020, despite its close proximity to the pandemic’s epicenter.

It also helped politicians realize that “you can’t count on laws to tackle disinformation,” Chiang said. “You need to create your own information.”

“Free speech is not the cost but the key to counteract disinformation,” said Hung, who noted that in 2022, Freedom House found that countries that protect free expression and have robust civic society groups do a better job at mitigating false information.

Taiwan has tried other forms of a more open approach. Although it banned the Chinese-owned video platform TikTok from government apps in 2022, Taiwan has not followed countries such as India in issuing a general proscription on the app despite concerns that Beijing can influence content. About one-quarter of Taiwan’s population uses the app, including a host of popular influencers and celebrities.

Taiwan also has a network of strong civic fact-checking organizations that work with social media companies to combat disinformation. One of them, MyGoPen, recently started collaborating directly with TikTok to correct false posts about the 2024 election.

No matter who is in power, politicians seem to acutely understand that the best way to combat false information about them is to push out their own narratives on social media. “If you are popular on the internet, that’s more important than [popularity on] traditional media channels,” Chiang said.

Lai’s win on Saturday is not an outright victory against disinformation itself—both Chinese and domestic actors will surely continue to create confusion and distrust whenever they can. It did, however, show that Taiwanese voters can’t easily be swayed, as long as public officials do their part to communicate rapidly, positively, and honestly.

[libertariantaoist]

News Roundup 6/29/2023 | The Libertarian Institute

Here is your daily roundup of today's news:

News Roundup 6/29/2023

by Kyle Anzalone

Russia

The Biden administration on Tuesday announced a new $500 million military aid package for Ukraine that includes new Bradley and Stryker armored vehicles and munitions for various weapons systems. AWC

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky told BBC last week that there will be no Ukrainian presidential election in 2024 if martial law is still in effect, The New Voice of Ukraine reported. AWC

The Kremlin’s top diplomat said Moscow can no longer trust Washington and the potential for nuclear war has escalated. The Russian foreign minister suggested talks with American officials were possible, but Washington has not made an effort to engage. The Institute

The State Department announced it authorized selling $15 billion in advanced air defense systems to Poland. The deal comes as Washington wants to increase NATO’s military presence in Eastern Europe. The Institute

In a move which will surely garner censures from Bern’s European allies, Switzerland has vetoed a plan to send roughly 100 mothballed German-made Leopard 1 battle tanks to Kiev, citing its neutrality laws. This decision comes as Ukraine’s long awaited counteroffensive has netted substantial losses in armored vehicles. The Institute

US officials speaking to The New York Times said Wednesday that a senior Russian general knew Yevgeny Prigozhin was planning an uprising, a claim dismissed by the Kremlin. AWC

NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg said Wednesday that the alliance is prepared to defend itself from any threat posed by Wagner fighters who go to Belarus. AWC

The Swedish government permitted a Quran-burning protest that took place in Sweden on Wednesday, a move that angered Turkey and made it less likely that Ankara will approve Stockholm’s NATO membership before the Vilnius summit in July. AWC

China

The Taiwanese military has reaffirmed that it will fire on Chinese warplanes and naval vessels if they come within 12 nautical miles of Taiwan’s coast, which marks the beginning of the island’s territorial waters and airspace. AWC

US Ambassador to India Eric Garcetti said Wednesday that Washington and New Delhi can jointly deploy warships and warplanes in the Indian and Pacific Oceans as the two nations are increasing military ties. AWC

Iran

Axios reported on Wednesday that White House National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan expressed concern to his Israeli counterpart about Israel leaking information to the press about the US and Iran holding indirect talks to reach an interim agreement on Tehran’s nuclear program. AWC

Read More

[mightyflamethrower]

There are three current hot or cold wars: on the Ukrainian border, in the regions surrounding Israel, and in the strategic space between Taiwan and mainland China. All three conflicts could not only expand within their respective theaters but also escalate to draw in the United States.

And all three involve nuclear powers.

Various Russian megaphones routinely threaten to use tactical nuclear weapons against Ukraine. Some boast about sending strategic nuclear bombs or missiles against its Western suppliers, especially as the costs of Russian aggression mount and the humiliation of Putin escalates.

Nuclear Israel and near-nuclear Iran have both exchanged attacks on their respective homelands—and promise to do so again.

China likewise on occasion existentially threatens Taiwan. Its freelancing generals and spokesmen periodically warn Japan and the U.S. of dire nuclear consequences should they intervene on Taiwan’s behalf.

In all these theaters, there superficially appears to be stasis and deadlock: Israel is said to be bogged down in Gaza as it seeks to neutralize 400 miles of subterranean command-and-control installations and munitions, find and rescue surviving Israeli hostages, and take out the Hamas leaders. And no one believes that the degradation of Hamas will mark the end of the war, given the agendas of Hezbollah, the Houthis, and Iran, to attack periodically and chronically the Jewish state.

Combined Russian and Ukrainian dead, wounded, and missing may be nearing one million. Experts argue about whether the current apparently successful Ukrainian counteroffensive towards Kursk inside Russia was merely a demonstration to gain diplomatic concessions. Or was it designed to take and hold ground inside the Russian homeland? Or intended to draw off Russian offensives to the southeast? Some call it brilliantly conceived but dangerous—given the risk of its ending like the ill-fated Battle of the Bulge German offensive of 1945 that achieved startling initial success but was soon ground down by superior numbers and ultimately weakened the overall German defense.

China has stepped up its harassment of Philippine forces and its rhetoric. It has upped its intrusions into Taiwanese airspace and waters while cementing strategic partnerships with Russia and Iran, even as it courts India and Turkey.

Yet for now, China is not especially eager to attack Taiwan, given that it feels it is steadily gaining momentum in psychologically, strategically, and politically strangling the Taiwanese.

Confusion and strategic pauses for the brief moment mark all these conflicts. In part, the hiatuses arose because of uncertainty surrounding the murky intentions and role of the United States. The latter is bogged down in an unpredictable if not bizarre election year, compounded by ambiguity about who is actually in control of the country and for how long, and who will be president after January 2025.

The 2024 race saw the first-ever presidential debate held well before the formal nomination of candidates, the sudden forced removal of President Biden from his reelection candidacy, the abrupt coronation of a once-deemed-unimpressive Kamala Harris as his replacement, the inability or unwillingness of Harris to meet the media or give interviews, the continued apparent debility of Biden as he enters the last six months of his presidential tenure, the assassination attempt on Donald Trump, and the near-even presidential polls.

While Russian and Ukrainian forces advance and retreat along their shared border, most experts privately feel that there is quiet consensus about an eventual armistice to end the Somme-like bloodbath. This will involve recognition of Russia’s control over the Donbas and Crimea that Putin attacked and de facto absorbed in 2014; a demilitarized border; and an autonomous and heavily armed but non-NATO Ukraine.

Currently, Ukraine is running out of manpower, given its losses, draft problems, and a quarter of the population having fled the country. Russia has suffered twice as many casualties as Ukraine and faced blows to its military prestige. It has so far found no tactical or strategic pathway to absorb Ukraine as it intended with its February 2022 surprise attack on Kyiv.

Yet the apparent ossification on the border may be illusory. If either side cracks and its enemy suddenly makes dramatic advances, a dangerous escalation could ensue, and rapidly so. Russia will likely not allow Ukraine to occupy for any extended period any Russian territory and will up its threats toward what it sees as an exhausted Ukraine and a tired NATO partnership.

And NATO and the United States will likely never allow Russia to annex Ukraine in toto beyond the Donbas and Crimea. The longer the ensuing stagnation, the more likely one side will seek a dramatic breakthrough, and so the more likely becomes a greater war with third-party intervention and deadlier weapons.

Turning to the second conflict, we find that Iran is now in a dangerous position of its own making. It has loudly promised Israel and boasted to the Muslim world that it will attack the Jewish homeland for a second time within a year. Hezbollah threatens to join in, perhaps along with anemic contributions from Hamas and the Houthis.

Yet does Iran really believe that even a missile and drone launch twice the size of its last huge but failed barrage—say 640 projectiles—will seriously injure Israel? Even with the confusion and chaos in the U.S., is Tehran really convinced that the U.S. and some of its European and Arab allies will not again intervene to protect their own assets or their own or international airspace, by knocking down Iranian aerial attacks?

In short, Iran’s rhetoric and the provocations of its satellites have put it in a lose/lose situation: to save face the theocracy feels it must honor its threats and attack Israel, but it also knows it may not be able to do much damage, while earning a second retaliatory response potentially far more grievous and far more warranted in international eyes than Israel’s prior successful but largely demonstrative missile launch.

Ditto Hezbollah. It hopes that its some 150,000 rockets and drones will do real damage in concert with an Iranian attack but accepts that it will certainly earn in response a devastation of Shiite Beirut and its environs far in excess of what it suffered in 2006. The damage from that conflict took a generation to repair, with hundreds of miles of roads, thousands of homes, and billions of dollars in infrastructure destroyed.

So, like the Ukrainian conflict, the Middle East war is only temporarily on pause. And it will continue until Iran or Israel seeks to break the stalemate in a second phase that would make the Gaza campaign seem minor in comparison and be far more likely to draw in outside powers—especially if the United States appears feeble and unable to protect its traditional ally Israel.

As for the third, still-bloodless conflict: China envisions strategy globally rather than regionally. It helps to fuel the stalemate in Ukraine, on the grounds that its traditional rival turned temporary friend Russia is hurting the West by consuming its money, weapons, and attention—while conveniently hurting itself in the process.

China is openly aiding Iran, not because it is especially friendly to radical Islam (cf. its treatment of the Uyghurs) or innately hostile to the Jewish state. Instead, it simply welcomes these tensions that cause radical domestic upheaval and political dissension inside America, while drawing U.S. naval and air assets far away from the South China Sea.

China’s operating principle seems to be to watch and wait for the outcome of the wars in Ukraine and the Middle East, given that both tax Western powers. It is eager and patient to see how the conflicts end, especially whether Russia achieves by force its apparent goals, and whether Iran and its proxies permanently redefine the future of the Middle East. These outcomes will serve to indicate the level of potential Western resistance to or intentional condemnation of its own planned annexation of Taiwan.

In conclusion, we are entering a very dangerous five-month period.

Joe Biden has been judged by the American people in the polls as too enfeebled to be reelected and declared by his own party to be too cognitively challenged to remain its nominee. That may suggest to foreign risk-takers that the U.S. president is deemed unfit by Americans themselves and thus conclude there might be a vacuum of rapid-response leadership at the White House.

The unspoken corollary is that the American people and both their political parties are certain that, while Biden is incapable of continuing as a normally engaged president through the last half-year of his tenure, he will nevertheless inevitably do so. And that conclusion is likely shared by enemies abroad, who may surmise that if there ever was a time to alter the current geostrategic map or the relative balance of power, that rare occasion is now on the horizon.

[zooterchet]

Colella's Supermarket (America's Special Mission Force)

Colella's Supermarket, located in Hopkinton, Massachusetts (now shut down), was modeled to help employees, of highschool (highschool jobs allowed for military cadet or police informant or state police status at college) and town labor (those found in poverty but allowed to live in town, the generous support system found through the Ludlow family, the "Spiders", descents of Queen Elizabeth I, the "Virgin Queen"). The model, is to survive Buchenwald, a famous death camp in Italy during World War 2, intended for political opponents of Benito Mussolini (the man who invented "Dro", poisoned marijuana, instrumental in Hitler's election to the German Chancellorship).

Through Colella's, ATF operatives (those dealing in grocer's union rules, to counter Canada) are trained and outfitted in cross multitasked operation skills, and a work disorder called "Vladivostock", hated by the French nationals in New England for producing lithe, thin, muscled, and burly men, and vivacious women, however with the same food intake as French prison guards (large, obese men, and greasy ugly women).

Here are my five special operations, using Blockbuster Video, a Trump owned company, now shut down and transferred to Rotary Presidential Association ownership (YouTube) due to my acts of valor in the field, against Canada.

"Death Race 2000": The resistance to the Boston Mafia, while infiltrating the police services of Canadian Mounted Patrol, and the removal of the Boston Mossad office, the alleged State Police control; actually located on highway stations, with police living in apartment complexes out of Chestnut Hill Realty.

"Run Ronnie Run": The resistance to the Haitian "Negro" movement, to label all of anyone's skin color as black, however inside the stance and sphere of the white man's rights; for the common rumor, to become industry, without the complex dynamics that make these things work. A better labor, for the past physical plant worker at a college, now a warehouse or factory laborer, where books and texts are now illegal, leaving only "A Farewell to Arms", by Ernest Hemingway; seeking to produce the same childhood as the famed Malcolm X, a fetal alcohol syndrome baby.

"CB4": The shutdown of the clad feminist, those women who demand independence and power, however are infirmed under severe physical handicap. The "Pink Panthers" movement, they are found in every walk of life, and they are "walking", at all times, in the words of famous Hopkinton crime boss, Alex "Wheels" Danahy, his label by local police authorities. The hunt for "Wheels", through his alias tags of those disabled online, continues, to catch each of the "enabled" community, for their dream, the American Dream, of running people off the road in traffic at screaming speeds, in Franklin Delano Roosevelt's special car. Once all the disabilities were cured, they believed they could be immortal, with cybernetics and slaves in the French, Israeli, and Taiwanese Maoist enclaves of INTERPOL, run by the Mainland Red Chinese. Sadly, the CS Lewis dream, has been shut down, and "The Matrix", is at an end; now, merely a movie, about what could've been.

"8MM": The creation of a new arts movement, where only wealthy envoys from foreign countries are killed, and on reality TV, if they volunteer to represent their homeland, "The Croatan Society", the Titoist movement supported by the famous "Boston Strangler", the De Salvo family and DC Comics. Previously, actresses were murdered, for reporting a lesbian haze from a female homosexual, a guidance law student, however now those women are saved, and become attorneys at law instead, with the haze artists kicked out on the streets, to be supported by their home countries; where their language is garbled, without the UN Law Academy to assist them. Suspecting their famous friend, "Riker", but not the cad, "Xanatos", they are in a state of misery, losing their top volunteer envoys, "The United Nations Mossad", and other Persian Jews, to the streets, with famous investments like Dunkin Donuts and Starbucks Coffee, the "barista" job, a share owner in the Vietnamese coffee trade, shut down. No longer can Reagan Foundation purchases of businesses occur, for those little yellow girls, "Hello Kitty". Now, the kitty can't eat human flesh, a dead drama club champion; "cat", in the Chinese boneless spare ribs.

"Bowfinger": The end to the internet supremacy of France and Israel, with the recovery of women marked with disabilities through claimed "household accidents", actually Apple technology from Steve Jobs, employed on timed circuits for the "Holocaust History Museum", the radio promotions industry; "the champagne room". All those stolen children from police officer fathers, taken to strip clubs in prison towns, returned to the life meant for them, that of euthanization, and their fathers freed from their long duty, no longer victims of the National Hockey League and the radio promo guys, "Bobby Brown", his ballad made famous by Frank Zappa, the man himself. Now, lesbian marriages to men are over, and women can marry whom they presume to choose, without mob threats from Sheriffs Unions, B'nai B'rith, and we can return to some semblance of life; the days of MUSH, are over. 4chan, is gone, and 8chan, is the future, of the modern internet, where nobody pays attention if you post on "chan", the Waters Foundation; you wanted the Holocaust, Islam; Small Penis Humiliation.

[misfitwashere]

Political Warfare and Congress

My Testimony from 17 April

Timothy Snyder

Apr 19, 2024

The essence of “political warfare,” in the sense defined by the Chinese communist party, is that Beijing uses media, psychology, and law to induce adversaries to do things counter to their own interests.

Political warfare works through you or it does not work. So if you are not willing to think about yourself, you are not thinking about political warfare.

I had the honor of testifying to Congress on the question of Chinese political warfare this past Wednesday, April 17th. This testimony was before the Oversight Committee, which has devoted months of time, money, and attention to an impeachment inquiry which is based on a mendacious claim by a man in contact with Russian intelligence services.

That congressional impeachment inquiry, based on a Russian fabrication, then became the subject of Chinese propaganda tropes, designed to spread the lie that President Biden took a bribe. This false notion, generated by Moscow, can only be spread by Beijing because there are Americans in the middle, American elected officials, who do their part.

A hearing on political warfare in Congress, and especially before this particular committee, requires self-reflection.

The hearing had some moments of interest, many of which are circulating as clips. Feel free to post your favorites in the comments.

The below text is my formal written testimony, which you can find in with all the notes and references on the congressional website. Video of my opening remarks is here. The entire session can be viewed here.

•••

Testimony to Oversight Committee, “Defending America from the Chinese Communist Party’s Political Warfare, Part I”

Professor Timothy Snyder, 17 April 2024

Democracy is in decline, dragged down by the autocratic lie. The autocrats offer no new visions; instead they lie about democracies and insert lies into democracies. The test of disinformation is its power to alter the course of crucial events, such as wars and elections.

Russia undertook a full-scale invasion of Ukraine on the basis of a big lie about Nazis.

Even as we meet today, Russian (and Chinese) propaganda shapes House debates about Ukraine, the most important foreign policy decision of our time. In domestic politics, the most important matter in coming months the coming presidential election.

To begin with the war. Beijing cares about Ukraine because it is the decisive conflict of our time. It can spread lies about Ukraine thanks to prior Russian labor. Beijing wrongly blames the war on Washington. Chinese information actions seek to attract American actors around to Russian propaganda tropes meant to justify Russian aggression and bring about American inaction.

Though Americans sometimes forget this, Ukrainian resistance is seen around the world as an obvious American cause and an easy American victory. So long as Ukraine fights, it is fulfilling the entire NATO mission by itself, defending a European order based in integration rather than empire, and affirming international order in general. It is also holding back nuclear proliferation.

Given these obvious strategic gains, American failure in Ukraine will lead other powers to conclude that a feckless and divided United States will also fail to meet future challenges. The fundamental goal of Russian (and thus Chinese) propaganda is to prevent American action, thereby making America seem impotent and democracy pointless -- also in the eyes of Americans themselves.

Russia's invasion of Ukraine is intimately connected to a possible Chinese war of aggression against Taiwan. As Taiwanese leaders continually and urgently remind us, Ukrainian resistance deters Chinese aggression. Ukraine deters China in a way that the United States cannot, without taking any action that Beijing could interpret as provocative. A Russian victory in Ukraine, therefore, would clear the way for Chinese aggression in the Pacific. It would strengthen China's ally, force Europe into a subordinate relationship to

Beijing, and discredit democracy. It would also bring into Russian hands Ukrainian military technologies that would be significant in a Chinese war of aggression.

Russia's one path to victory in Ukraine leads through minds and mouths in Washington, DC. Russian and Chinese propaganda therefore celebrates the inability of Congress to pass aid for Ukraine, and praises those who hinder the passage of such a bill. But the specific propaganda memes that China spreads (and some American leaders repeat) about the war are of Russian origin. Russia is the leader in this field; China is imitating Russian techniques and Russian tropes.

A central example is the Russo-Chinese invocation of "Nazism." Russian began its full-scale invasion of Ukraine with the grotesque claim that its aim was the "denazification" of Ukraine. (Ukraine is a democracy with freedom of expression, assembly and religion, which elected a Jewish president with more than 70% of the vote. Russia is a one-party state with a leader cult that is fighting a criminal war and suppressing all domestic opposition.) This "Nazi" meme was immediately boosted by the Chinese government. Over the weekend before this hearing, a Member of Congress tweeted this Russian disinformation trope.

The Russian war of destruction in Ukraine is the pre-eminent test of democracy; U.S. elections come next. Russia is also the leader here.  China has has no Paul Manafort.  It lacks American human assets with experience in directing foreign influence campaigns and close to American presidential campaigns. Nothing China has done (as yet) rivals the Russian hacking of the Democratic National Committee in 2016.

On social media, CCP propaganda demeans the Biden administration. But China's social media campaign on behalf of Trump in 2024 looks like a copy (a poor one) of Russia's on behalf of Trump in 2016. CCP propaganda invokes the false charges raised in impeachment hearings, but the lies that China magnifies arose from a person in contact with Russian intelligence. What China can do is try an influence campaign based on a Russian initiative -- and American impeachment hearings. Insofar as this works at all, it is a cycle: Russia-America-China -- with the Chinese hope that the propaganda it generates from Russian initiatives and American actions will cycle back to distress Americans and hurt the Biden administration.

The CCP's internet propaganda is posted on X (Twitter). Likewise, Russia's denazification meme did not need a Russian or a Chinese channel to reach Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene. Nor did she need a Russian or Chinese platform to spread the disinformation trope further. She and her American followers used X (Twitter).

Marjory Taylor Greene is not the only member of Congress to have presented the Russian "denazification" trope in public debate. In the case of Matt Gaetz, we know that the transmission belt was Chinese, because he cited a Chinese state propaganda source in congressional debate.

It is not clear in what sense X is an American platform; in any event, its owner, Elon Musk, has removed prior safeguards identifying state propaganda outlets, driving much higher viewing of Russian and Chinese propaganda.  Under Musk, X (Twitter) has been particularly lax in policing known Chinese propaganda accounts, ignoring their flagging by government and other platforms. Musk has also personally spread specific Russian propaganda tropes.

Russian lies are meant not only to disinform, to make action more difficult, but also to demotivate, to make action seem senseless. Russian memes work not by presenting Russia as a positive alternative, but by demoralizing others. No one wants to be close to "Nazis," and the simple introduction of the lie is confusing and saddening.

The same holds with the Russian meme to the effect that Ukraine is corrupt. A completely bogus Russian source introduced the entirely fake idea that the Ukrainian president had bought yachts. Although this was entirely untrue, Representative Greene then spread the fiction. Senator J.D. Vance also picked up the "yacht" example and used it as his justification for opposing aid to Ukraine.

The larger sense of that lie is that everyone everywhere is corrupt, even the people who seem most admirable; and so we might as well give up on our heroes, on any struggle for democracy, or any struggle at all. Ukraine's president, Volodymr Zelens'kyi, chose to risk his life by remaining in Kyiv and defending his country against a fearsome attack from Russia which almost all outsiders believed would succeed within days. His daring gamble saved not only his own democracy, but opened a window of faith that democracies can defend themselves. It confirmed the basis lesson of liberty that individual choices have consequences. The lie directed at Zelens'kyi was meant not only to discredit him personally and undermine support for Ukraine, but also to persuade Americans that no one is righteous and nothing is worth defending.

Insofar as legislators such as Marjorie Taylor Greene and J.D. Vance are vectors of propaganda, they are themselves playing a part of the Russian (or Russo-Chinese) operation. As such they are not merely spreading fictions; they are also modelling a "Russian" style of government, a politics of impotence, in which big lies are normal, corruption is thought to be routine, and nothing gets done. Russian lies about Ukraine are meant to prevent action to help Ukraine; but in a larger sense they are also meant to spread the view that those in power are incapable of any positive action at all.

When legislators embrace Russian lies, they demobilize the rest of us, conveying the underlying notion that all that matters is a clever fiction and a platform from which to spread it. A first step legislators can take is to cease to spread known propaganda tropes themselves. Russian (or Russo-Chinese) memes work in America when Americans choose to repeat them.

Republican leaders quite properly raise concerns about Russian memes in the Republican mouths. The chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee and the chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence have warned in recent weeks that Russian disinformation has shaped the views of Republican voters and the rhetoric of Republican elected officials. Representative Michael R. Turner said that "We see directly coming from Russia attempts to mask communications that are anti-Ukraine and pro-Russia messages — some of which we even hear being uttered on the House floor."

For this and other reasons, the problem cannot be dismissed as "foreign." Elite American actors such as Congressional representatives and billionaires know what they are doing when they spread Russian memes. Most Americans, however, confront them unknowingly.

From the perspective of Russia (and China), all social media platforms present an attack surface. Non-Chinese platforms are the main vectors of Russian and disinformation. During the 2020 presidential election, for example, the largest Facebook group for American Christians was run by people who were neither. While ByteDance/TikTok is important, it is less so than Twitter and Facebook. Social media as such favors hostile interventions over locally reported news. During the 2020 presidential election, for example, the main Facebook site for American Christians was run by people who are neither.

ByteDance/TikTok is an attractive target for legislation, but a ban on TikTok unaccompanied by other policy will have limited effects. It will not prevent China from carrying out influence operations in the United States, nor would it stop China from gathering information on American citizens. To hinder Russian (and Chinese, and other) operations, all platforms would have to be regulated.

In the contest between authoritarian and democratic regimes, it will ultimately be not just self-defense but creative initiative that defines and saves the democracies. The era of hostile disinformation is also the era of the decline of reporting, and the two phenomena are linked. An American who has access to reporting will be less vulnerable to disinformation, and better able to make navigate the demands of democratic citizenship. A victory over disinformation will be won in a climate in which Americans have access to reliable information and reasons to trust it.