PolicyR ePolicyc o m Recommendations
mendations

Policy Recommendations on the Taiwan Issue

Japan’s Greatest Challenge is
How to Avoid War Involving Taiwan
Kyoji Yanagisawa
ND Board Member / Former Assistant Chief Cabinet Secretary

Mike Mochizuki
ND Board Member/Associate Professor at George Washington University

Takashi Okada
Editorial Writer at Kyodo NewsShigeru Handa
Defense Journalist / Former Tokyo Shimbun Editorial and Editor

Toshiya Tsugami
Modern China Researcher

Sayo Saruta
ND President / Lawyer (New York, USA)

Centered around the competition for military superiority between the United Statesand China, the security environment in East Asia is destabilizing. As the possibilityof China using force against Taiwan is under discussion, the United States is aiming
to build a new military posture to prevent it. From the U.S. perspective, Taiwan is asymbol of democracy, while on the other hand, for China, Taiwan is a symbol ofnational unification. Therefore, as there is no room for compromise, there is a fearof war between the two countries.
A war between superpowers, such as the United States and China, would destroy
the world economy. Today's economy relies on a network of supply and finance thattranscends national borders. A war between the United States and China would not
be limited to land, sea, and air; it would also physically and psychologically destroy
the global economic network through the destruction and chaos of space andcyberspace.
The world has never experienced such war, and no one can accurately predict its
impact. However, at the very least, it is certain that there will be no winner in thiswar and that it will result in the destruction of both the Chinese dream of the“great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation” and US hopes to rebuild and strengthen
its domestic economy and global leadership.

1New Diplomacy Initiative

Policy Recommendations

Furthermore, the firing of missiles will turn the entire region into a battlefield,
which would lead to many soldiers and civilians losing their lives. It is unlikely thatpublic opinion in the United States, China, and Japan, as well as the international
community, would allow such a loss of lives. It is also inevitable that Japan will
suffer damage from this missile war because of its proximity to Taiwan and its role
as a host for US military bases.
Some people in Japan take it for granted that Japan will participate in the defenseof Taiwan along with the United States. However, defending Taiwan would mean
going to war with China, and it is hard to believe that Japanese citizens areprepared to do so. One cannot help but be concerned that a part of the public
opinion is influenced by militant discussions that do not consider the costs of war
and the prospects for peace and order after the war is over.
As there are rising concerns about the Taiwan Strait the greatest challenge is,“how to avoid war between the U.S. and China,” not only for Japan’s national
security but to all countries concerned, including Taiwan.

Do Not Underestimate the Risk of a US-China War
Many people believe that the U.S. and China will never go to war because of thesignificant costs of war and the possibility of disastrous consequences with nowinner. However, history has taught us that when two countries, full of mistrustand hostility, continue to provoke each other politically and militarily, minor
conflicts caused by errors and misunderstandings may escalate into major wars.
In recent years, China has strengthened its military capabilities and increased
military pressure to support reunification of Taiwan, while the United States has
strengthened its countermeasures. Recently, the United States adopted policies tosupport Taiwan that may violate the “one China policy.” China signaled its
dissatisfaction with these policies through provocative military action. The twohave created a vicious cycle that the United States is using to provide Taiwan withweapons and strengthen its military posture.
In a telephone conversation with President Xi Jinping, President Joe Biden signaled
he wanted to put on the brakes so “competition does not veer into conflict.”
However, there have been no significant changes in the actions of both sides. Thereis still a risk of conflict occurring due to errors or misunderstandings. Political andmilitary restraint from both the United States and China is needed.
The more Japan recognizes these risks, the more the discussion in Japan tends tolean towards military deterrence rather than requesting the United States andChina exercise restraint.

2New Diplomacy Initiative

Policy Recommendations

Peacefully Resolve and Avoid Future Conflict with Taiwan
No one would disagree with a peaceful resolution of the issues in Taiwan. However,
the reality is that most Taiwanese citizens do not desire to be reunited with China
and that China will not change its desire for the reunification of Taiwan. Moreover,the further the possibility of a peaceful reunification gets, the more China is left
with no choice but to resort to strong measures.
The coexistence between both sides have been maintained through a delicate
understanding of the “One China policy”. Therefore, in the short term, therecognitionof

the“oneChinapolicy”

andthe“non-supportfor

Taiwan’sindependence” is necessary for a peaceful resolution regarding the Taiwan issue. Inthe medium term, all countries involved must act prudently to avoid creating asituation in which China has no other option but to use the force.
In the long term, the Taiwan issue can only be resolved by China and Taiwan. Thereis no reason not to believe in the wisdom of the next generation. However, because
we do not have that wisdom now, the greatest mission for political leaders of thecountries involved is to continue avoiding war.
Japan must adhere to its agreement in the 1972 Japan-China Joint Communique,which states that Japan “understands and respects China's position" on Taiwan.

Japan must also request both the United States and China to exercise restraint
while continuing to express Japan's position that “a war that could destroy theworld must be avoided.”

Deterrence with Reassurance
The logic of deterrence is to make the opponent who is contemplating war aware of
one’s ability and willingness to inflict damage that outweigh the perceived gains ofwar. If China believes that “the independence of Taiwan would undermine the coreinterests of the Communist Party rule and cannot be tolerated at any cost,” it would

be difficult to deter China with military superiority alone. It is essential to leaveroom for the opposing side to believe that “even without the use of force, its coreinterests will not be threatened.” In other words, reassurance is also needed.
In the case of the conflict over Taiwan, the 1972 political decision on the “nonsupport of Taiwan’s independence” serves as reassurance to China.
The purpose of deterrence is to discourage China's use of force. The heart of theissue is a growing Taiwanese desire for independence. China has been constantly
strengthening its armed forces and has expressed the possibility of using force toprevent independence. On the other hand, the U.S. is “changing the political statusquo” by strengthening political relations with Taiwan and gradually treating Taiwan

as an independent country. This is further provoking China into further expanding3New Diplomacy Initiative

Policy Recommendations

its military capability to prevent independence. To keep deterrence from escalating
endlessly, the addition of reassurance on non-support for independence is essential.
Japan taking actions to change the existing political relationship with Taiwan would
undermine reassurance and destabilize deterrence.

The U.S. Deterrence Strategy and Japan
Strategic plans and military posturing for deterrence against China are being

examined by the Biden Administration. The United States is focusing on preventing
China from occupying the main island of Taiwan. In other words, since China would
need to position thousands of military units across the Taiwan Strait to occupy
Taiwan, the U.S. strategy is to destroy China's naval vessels with cruise missiles
and submarines. This strategy focuses on “deterrence by denial” to stop a militaryinvasion, rather than as punitive measures on mainland China.
At the same time, the United States is developing new ground-based intermediaterange ballistic missiles that can destroy military facilities in mainland China thatposes a threat to U.S. armed forces. Although the U.S. policy regarding thedeployment of this missile is undecided, from the range and purpose of this missile,deployment within the first island chain, which includes the mainland of Japan,
would be the viable option. In such a case, the next wave of military competition
between the United States and China will become an intermediate range ballistic
missile arms race in which Japan will become a battlefield. This situation would
further increase the dangers of a missile war due to errors and misunderstandings.
Japan and the United States should both limit the purpose of deterrence to stop
China from occupying Taiwan and using military force to invade the territory ofJapan. In other words, they should limit it to “exclusively defense-orienteddeterrence by denial” and should not include preemptive or punitive elements, suchas neutralizing the missile facilities inside mainland China. The deployment ofballistic missiles in Japan and Japan’s possession of an enemy base attack
capability are not necessary to accomplish this purpose.
At the same time, Japan should strongly urge the United States and China to pursue
dialogue to prevent conflicts stemming from misunderstandings. They should also
develop a shared crisis management system to avoid political errors.

The Problem with the “Autocracy” vs “Democracy” Debate
The Biden administration has defined its relationship with China as a “competition
between autocracy and democracy" and has called for unity among allies. At thesame time, the United States has also called for cooperation on global issues, such

4New Diplomacy Initiative

Policy Recommendations

as new infectious diseases and climate change. However, it is not easy to build acooperative relationship to tackle global issues while promoting a global politicalrivalry.
When looking at these issues through the narrow lens of “competition withautocracy" it tends to divert attention from global issues. Furthermore, if one
spends all its time in a zero-sum confrontation to inflict loss on the other side forits own benefit, neither the United States nor China can become a trusted andrespected superpower.
Japan, as a friend and neighbor, must continue its efforts to persuade both theUnited States and China that repeating self-serving claims will not benefit either
country. From the perspective that international cooperation on global issues is thepriority, Japan should not join the U.S.-led “battle over values.”
In addition to the summit meeting with the United States, Japan should urgently
hold the postponed summit meeting with China. A dialogue among the leaders aswell as communication at various levels, including on security issues, are needed
regularly in this situation of significant differences with a lack of concrete results.

October 2021

※References:
ND policy recommendations"Go Beyond Deterrence Dominant Japanese Security Strategy Under a New Paradigm Shift“(March 2021)
www.nd-initiative.org/en/assets/pdf/GoBeyondDeterrenceDominant.pdf“Learning from the Invasion of Ukraine 2022 Containing Force and Promoting War
Avoidance Diplomacy”(June 2022)
www.nd-initiative.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/Containing-Forceand-Promoting-War-Avoidance-Diplomacy.pdf

New Diplomacy Initiative (ND)
1-15-9 Sawada Bld. 5F Shinjuku
Shinjuku-ku Tokyo 160-0022, Japan

TEL：+81-3-3948-7255
E-mail：info@nd-initiative.org
WEB：www.nd-initiative.org/en

The New Diplomacy Initiative is a think tank seeking to inspire a diversity ofvoices in political and diplomatic issues between the United States and Japanas well as throughout East Asia.