Analysis of "The Greatest Danger in the Taiwan Strait"

2025年9月14日 10:46

Accidental War Crisis in the Taiwan Strait

Introduction

The original title is "The Greatest Danger in the Taiwan Strait". This article provides a detailed analysis of how an accidental conflict in the Taiwan Strait could escalate into a large-scale war. We hope that readers will gain a deep understanding of the complex factors and potential dangers of the Taiwan Strait situation, which is one of the most pressing geopolitical risks facing the international community, and strongly grasp the message regarding what diplomatic efforts and preventive measures are needed to avoid accidental clashes.

1. Article Summary

This article analyzes the risk of conflict in the Taiwan Strait from two perspectives: "intentional war" and "accidental war," with particular emphasis on the danger of the latter.

1.1. Types of War and the Danger of Accidental War

Types of Intentional War: Two main pathways are envisioned for conflict in the Taiwan Strait. One is an "intentional war (war of choice)" where China carefully considers economic, military, and political risks before attempting to seize Taiwan by force. The other is a "war of necessity" where China takes military action regardless of the cost if it feels Taiwan has crossed a "political red line" that permanently threatens China's control, for example, by officially declaring independence.
Overlooked Accidental War: However, this article points out that the possibility of an "accidental war (war of chance)" spiraling out of control due to accidents or miscalculations, while previously not receiving much attention, may actually be the most likely scenario.
Risk Factors for Accidental War: The risk of accidental war is heightened by the close proximity of both militaries, domestic politics on both sides making de-escalation difficult, and the potential for U.S. intervention to further complicate matters.

1.2. Scenarios for the Outbreak of Accidental War

Typical Escalation: For example, a scenario is envisioned where a People's Liberation Army (PLA) fighter jet approaches Taiwan too closely, ignores warnings, and is subsequently shot down by Taiwanese forces, resulting in the pilot's death. In response, Beijing retaliates by destroying Taiwanese air defense systems, causing dozens of casualties among Taiwanese forces. With concerns about U.S. intervention, both sides accelerate mobilization, interpret each other's movements as aggression, and the crisis rapidly escalates.

1.3. Historical Precedents

Lessons from the Past: Historically, there are many examples of accidental events escalating into large-scale wars. These include World War I, triggered by the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand in 1914; the American Revolutionary War, which began with British soldiers firing against orders; the Peloponnesian War in the 5th century BC, which expanded from factional disputes within city-states; and the Second Opium War in 1856, initiated by the arrest of British sailors. These examples show that not only political violence but also minor military or diplomatic incidents can lead to war.

1.4. Three Main Factors Increasing the Risk of Accidental War

Based on historical experiences, three factors that increase the risk of accidental war are presented.

Frequent Contact Between Opposing Military Forces: Frequent contact between opposing military forces, such as British soldiers and militia on the eve of the American Revolution, increases the likelihood of accidental incidents.
Domestic Political Dynamics: Domestic politics make de-escalation difficult when leaders prioritize intangible assets such as prestige, honor, and national reputation.
Involvement of Allies: Allies mobilizing due to concerns about the credibility of their own commitments can lead to a conflict escalating into something more serious.

1.5. The "Perfect Storm" in the Taiwan Strait

Presence of All Three Factors: All three factors mentioned above are present in the current situation in the Taiwan Strait. Chinese air and naval forces are increasingly approaching the Taiwanese mainland, eroding unofficial boundaries, and incidents have occurred where Chinese fighter jets have entered Taiwan's 24-nautical-mile contiguous zone or coast guard vessels have seized Taiwanese-flagged ships.
Leaders' Political Considerations: If an accident occurs, it will be difficult for leaders on both sides of the Taiwan Strait to de-escalate the situation due to political considerations . China fears losing face in the face of a "rebellious separatist movement," and Taiwan, with many residents supporting autonomy from the mainland, would face political costs for an easy retreat .
Potential for U.S. Involvement: Although Taiwan has no official military allies, U.S. involvement could escalate a crisis . If the U.S. views an accidental event as a pretext for invasion and deploys forces, China may also intensify mobilization, leading to escalation .

1.6. Dangers of Reckless Military Actions

Unintended Escalation: China conducts military actions with the intent of putting psychological pressure on the Taiwanese government, but the actions of individual pilots or sailors could unintentionally cross a line .
Past Cases: In the 2001 collision between Chinese and U.S. aircraft, despite the cause being a Chinese pilot's operational error, the Chinese government could not easily back down due to domestic nationalism . Other incidents that could lead to war include close encounters between Chinese military aircraft and U.S. military aircraft in the South China Sea (October 2023) , attacks by Chinese crew members on Philippine Navy vessels (June 2024) , and clashes on the China-India border (2020) , which are occurring frequently .

1.7. Measures to Prevent Accidental War

Restraint in Military Actions: The Chinese military should exercise caution when aircraft and vessels approach Taiwan and its surrounding islands . Taiwanese forces should also carefully apply rules of engagement and be careful not to view all approaches as intentional .
Clear Messages from Leaders: Leaders on both sides, especially President Xi Jinping, should send clear internal messages that reckless actions by military personnel will not be tolerated .
Establishment of Information Sharing Mechanisms: It is crucial to establish feedback mechanisms where information regarding dangerous encounters and reckless actions by individual operators receives high-level attention. U.S. authorities mediating information transmission to the Chinese side could also be effective .
Dialogue Through Back Channels: Dialogue through back channels between China and Taiwan is necessary to prevent crises and find solutions . Information exchange through research institutions should also be considered .
Maintenance of U.S. "Strategic Ambiguity": The U.S. should maintain its long-standing policy of "strategic ambiguity" regarding Taiwan's defense . This allows room to determine whether an accidental incident is intentional or accidental, preventing the U.S. from being forced into an immediate escalatory response .
Contingency Plans for Accidental Crises: Finally, the U.S. and Taiwan need to prepare credible plans for preventing escalation in the event of an accidental incident . Currently, most military exercises assume intentional use of force, and there is a concern about insufficient preparation focused on responding to accidental crises .

2. Analysis from a Peace Studies Perspective (Johan Galtung's "Peace by Peaceful Means" Analytical Framework)

The article content above is analyzed using Johan Galtung's peace studies framework of "direct violence," "structural violence," and "cultural violence."

2.1. Analysis from the Perspective of Direct Violence

The accidental war scenarios described in this article precisely suggest the concrete manifestation of direct violence and the danger of its escalation.

Escalation of Armed Force: The sequence of events involving Chinese PLA fighter jets approaching Taiwan, Taiwanese forces shooting them down, and subsequent retaliatory attacks depicts the chain reaction and expansion of direct violence through concrete use of force. This clearly demonstrates the potential for unintended violence to develop into an uncontrollable large-scale conflict.
Inducement of Violence by Individual Actions: The possibility that reckless actions by individual pilots or sailors could lead to direct violence such as aircraft or vessel collisions and casualties indicates that actions at the operational level can be the starting point for direct violence between states. This highlights a vulnerable situation where direct violence can occur even unintentionally.
Measures to Restrain Direct Violence: The article's proposed measures, such as restraint in military actions, careful application of rules of engagement, and clear non-violent messages from leaders , are positioned as concrete means to prevent and restrain such direct violence.

2.2. Analysis from the Perspective of Structural Violence

The Taiwan Strait situation can be interpreted as having an increased risk of conflict due to structural violence inherent in specific political, economic, and social systems and relationships.

Political Conflict and Difficulty in Maintaining Status Quo: The fundamental political conflict between China's "One China" principle and Taiwan's de facto autonomy and independence aspirations is a structural factor that hinders equal relations and mutual understanding. This conflict structure itself, concerning a specific political status, inherently contains potential for violence.
Stagnation Due to Domestic Political Dynamics: The domestic political dynamics where leaders prioritize intangible assets such as "prestige, honor, and national reputation" making de-escalation difficult indicate that the state's power structure, or the leader's power base maintenance as a "structure," impedes flexible responses in crisis management. This inhibits rational de-escalation and perpetuates the conflict structure.
Asymmetric Power Balance and the Structure of International Intervention: The relative asymmetry of military power between Taiwan and China , and the U.S.'s "strategic ambiguity" , demonstrate that international power dynamics are deeply involved in the conflict's structure. The potential for U.S. intervention acts as an international structural factor that could escalate the conflict , and its ambiguity, while carrying a certain instability, functions as a structure that currently restrains the decisive outbreak of conflict.

2.3. Analysis from the Perspective of Cultural Violence

Specific ideologies, historical views, and values that justify or promote conflict are believed to be intensifying tensions in the Taiwan Strait.

Incitement of Nationalism: The situation where nationalist sentiments are incited within China, positioning Taiwan as a "rebellious separatist movement" and emphasizing "protecting core national interests" , shows that specific ideologies and historical perceptions form a cultural basis that justifies the use of force. This is a classic example of negative labeling against a specific group culturally paving the way for violence.
Culture of "Face" and Inhibition of De-escalation: The psychological fear of "losing face" for leaders on both sides suggests that non-material values such as prestige and honor in East Asian culture act as cultural factors that hinder calm judgment and de-escalation efforts in crisis management. This cultural value becomes a pressure that promotes actions leading to direct violence.
Media Influence and Public Opinion Formation: The phenomenon seen in the Second Opium War where sensationalist reporting incited public anger and prompted forceful government responses demonstrates how a specific culture (in this case, journalism and its reception) can function as a form of "cultural violence" that manipulates collective emotions and escalates conflict.
Inheritance of Historical Narratives: China's historical perception of the "century of humiliation" and the support for "autonomy from the mainland" or "independence" in Taiwan indicate that the historical narratives and aspirations shared by each group form the cultural background of the current conflict, functioning as cultural elements that could trigger conflict.