The Taiwan Temptation: Why Beijing Might Resort to Force
By Oriana Skylar Mastro
Foreign Affairs, July/August 2021

“U.S. policymakers may hope that Beijing will balk at the potential costs of such aggression, but there are many reasons to think it might not. Support for armed unification among the Chinese public and the military establishment is growing. Concern for international norms is subsiding. Many in Beijing also doubt that the United States has the military power to stop China from taking Taiwan—or the international clout to rally an effective coalition against China in the wake of Donald Trump’s presidency. Although a Chinese invasion of Taiwan may not be imminent, for the first time in three decades, it is time to take seriously the possibility that China could soon use force to end its almost century-long civil war.”

Congress must stop the march toward war with China
By Mac Hamilton
The Hill, June 4

“In an era of globalization and increased economic interdependence, approaching China as a military threat misunderstands China’s grand strategy. This approach is already leading us toward billions of dollars of wasted defense funding. As House Armed Services Committee Chairman Adam Smith noted at a Ronald Reagan Institute event in April, the Biden administration’s defense strategy is “too big, too ambitious, and too unachievable,” in regards to countering China.”

“In considering both the budget and other China-focused “strategic competition” legislation, Congress should note that unlike the U.S., China has a “no first use” policy in place, meaning they will only use nuclear weapons defensively, not offensively. They have also removed their missiles from “launch on warning” status, another assurance that these weapons will not be unintentionally deployed. These are common sense reforms that, if adopted by the U.S., would lead to confidence-building measures that open the door to decreasing nuclear arsenals globally.”

China is gaining ground in space. Should the US be concerned?
By Chelsea Gohd
Space.com, June 1

“This May, China landed a rover on Mars, expanding the nation’s growing presence in space. The feat showed the world the nation’s space capabilities and fueled fires anew of competition in space, but is there truly cause for concern?”

“..Currently, competition seems to outweigh collaboration as both nations continue to push the boundaries of science and technology in space. Still, as we have seen throughout NASA’s history, especially with the political pressures of the 1960s “space race” with the former Soviet Union that drove NASA to land the first humans on the moon, competition can spark innovation.”

China’s Quest for Global Primacy: An Analysis of Chinese International and Defense Strategies to Outcompete the United States
By Timothy R. Heath, Derek Grossman, Asha Clark
Rand Corporation

“Focusing on the international and defense dimensions of U.S.-China competition, the authors of this report make three contributions. First, they intend this report to serve as a planning tool by positing international and defense strategies that could allow China to outcompete the United States. Second, they mean to educate readers on Chinese strategy and policy processes. Third, the authors seek to encourage greater public debate about the nature and stakes of the competition.”

“As presented by the authors, China’s international strategy aims to establish the country’s primacy in the Asia-Pacific region and leadership of the international order. The international strategy presented seeks to achieve this end state through peaceful methods, although it does not rule out the possibilities of militarized crises or even conflicts of a limited scope, such as proxy wars. The core of the proposed international strategy is a reliance on China’s economic prowess and diplomatic maneuver to put Beijing into a position of advantage from which it cannot be dislodged by the United States. A complementary defense strategy would aim to constrain Washington’s ability to forestall or prevent its own eclipse by building a superior Chinese military that renders the risks of military conflict intolerably high”.

America’s Military Risks Losing Its Edge: How to Transform the Pentagon for a Competitive Era
By Michèle A. Flournoy
Foreign Affairs, May/June

“For almost a decade, U.S. defense officials have deemed the return of great-power competition to be the most consequential challenge to U.S. national security.”

“Yet despite such a widespread and bipartisan acknowledgment of the challenge, the U.S. military has changed far too little to meet it. Although strategy has shifted at a high level, much about the way the Pentagon operates continues to reflect business as usual, which is inadequate to meet the growing threats posed by a rising China and a revisionist Russia. That disconnect is evident in everything from the military’s ongoing struggle to reorient its concepts of operations (that is, how it would actually fight in the future) to its training, technology acquisition, talent management, and overseas posture. Some important steps have been taken to foster defense innovation, but bureaucratic inertia has prevented new capabilities and practices from being adopted with speed and at scale.”

Advancing a Liberal Digital Order in the Indo-Pacific
By Lisa Curtis, Joshua Fitt and Jacob Stokes
Center for a New American Security, May 27

“The United States and other regional democracies risk losing ground in the competition to shape Asia’s digital future. China is making rapid inroads in developing the region’s 5G infrastructure and is playing an increasingly expansive role in the broader digital ecosystems of Indo-Pacific countries. Beijing’s position at the center of Asia’s developing digital order poses a series of challenges to the interests of America and its democratic allies and partners—ranging from the potential compromise of critical networks to the development of new technology standards that favor Chinese companies and undermine civil liberties.”

“The challenges to ensuring a future liberal digital order are immense; to meet them, the United States must develop a multifaceted approach that prioritizes coordination with democratic allies and partners….The technology future of the region will directly impact the national security of the United States. Washington will not outspend Beijing dollar for dollar. Instead, America will have to leverage its private sector and civil society and allied and partner coalitions, while encouraging local, national, and regional efforts focused on building a more secure digital future that fosters democratic development and institutions.”

Playing The China Card
By Ryan Hass
Noema, May 20

“As Tarun Chhabra, Scott Moore, and Dominic Tierney argued in the Foreign Affairs article, “The Left Should Play the China Card,” “In times of war or heightened geopolitical competition, the federal government has raised taxes, tightened economic regulation and increased spending on science, infrastructure and social services, boosting opportunities for marginalized groups and reducing wealth disparities.” They urged progressive politicians to frame a domestic reform agenda around rivalry with China and suggested that doing so could attract broad bipartisan support, including from conservatives. There is a clear logic for the Biden administration to pursue this line of argumentation.”

“The Biden administration seems to appreciate the need for striking a balance between policy and politics on its approach to China. Biden appears comfortable operating in a complex world that lacks black and white dividing lines between friend and foe. He recognizes that a globally hostile view of China could undermine his ability to achieve his priority objectives, such as progress on climate change, global economic recovery or enhancements to the world’s public health infrastructure….but the project will ultimately need to be justified on its own terms. Any effort to lean on the external threat of China as a basis for overcoming domestic divisions at home is unlikely to succeed and likely to harm U.S. interests at home and abroad.”

Surprises from China’s Latest Census
By Scott Kennedy
Center for Strategic & International Studies, May 14

“China’s latest census has garnered a great deal of attention because it shows that the total size of the population is stagnating. That is certainly important and confirms that we have shifted from an era when officials were aiming to limit births to one where they are trying to encourage them, at least among the Han majority.”

“We still need to get a hold of the entire dataset, but there are a few other nuggets in the initial release from the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) that stood out to us which have implications for China’s economic trajectory and relationship with the rest of the world.”

China’s Foreign Technology Wish List
By Ryan Fedasiuk, Emily Weinstein Anna Puglisi
Center for Security and Emerging Technology, May

“Within the People’s Republic of China’s broader strategy to acquire foreign technology, “science and technology diplomats” (科技外交官) act as brokers. Stationed in PRC embassies and consulates across 52 countries, S&T diplomats monitor host country technological breakthroughs, identify investment opportunities for Chinese firms, and serve as the overseas arm of the International Cooperation Department of China’s Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST).”

“We offer the following observations about the methods by which S&T diplomats seek technology, the content of the projects that interest them, and the locations and success of their technology acquisition efforts:

• Methods: S&T diplomats use a variety of state-sponsored methods, including the PRC’s expansive foreign influence apparatus, to monitor technology developments overseas….
• Content: When vetting potential partners, S&T diplomats tend to recommend investment positions that advance Chinese equity in supply chains relevant to the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) stated development objectives….
• Locations: Nearly half of all technology projects referred by Chinese S&T diplomats originated in Russia, the United States, the United Kingdom, and Japan….”