In the event tensions escalate to a conflict between China and Taiwan, will the Philippine be involved? This may be one of the risk scenarios in 2022.*
China’s President Xi Jinping blamed the U.S. for the tensions between the two world economic and military powers on “Repeated attempts by Taiwan authorities for U.S. support in their independence agenda as well as intentions of some Americans to contain China” in a speech on the 110th anniversary on 10-October-2021 that overthrew China’s last imperial Ming dynasty in 1911. He further said, “reunification must be fulfilled but it must be achieved peacefully” but warned the Chinese people have a tradition of opposing separatism. By encouraging Taiwan‘s independence, Xi warned the U.S. “is playing with fire.”
Taiwan lady Premier Su Tseng Chang promptly reacted and accused China of “flexing its muscles and stoking tension” when months ago it sent some 60 fighter jets over the Straits of Taiwan into the island’s aircraft identification zone. She called on China to stop its “harassments, intrusions and provocations.”
While most western countries denounced and condemned China’s harassment and provocations, U.S. President Biden was more conciliatory. He said under the 1999 Taiwan Relations Agreement Act, U.S. follows a ‘One China’ policy that recognizes only China but has unofficial ties with Taiwan, and is obligated to provide arms for the islands’ defense. Two years ago, U.S. sold to Taiwan 66 F16CD with upgraded weaponry and avionics costing $62 billion, thus boosting its air defense to 200 fighter interceptors. That is puny compared to China’s nuclear missiles, long range bombers, and its land and carrier-borne jet fighters.
President Biden reiterated the U.S. position. It would oppose any unilateral move that would alter the status quo in Taiwan. When asked whether U.S. would defend Taiwan if attacked, the U.S. National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan said U.S. would “stand up and talk up.” Deliberate ambiguity has characterized U.S. pledge to defend Taiwan.
Taiwan then Formosa meaning beautiful, a name given by passing Portuguese mariners in the 16h century, must have enamored Europeans notably the Dutch and Spaniards who vied for its possession, control, strategic, and commercial importance. It was the Dutch who finally prevailed and added it to its prized and largest colony, the Dutch East Indies, now Indonesia. (The writer visited a sea side resort in Taiwan in the early 1970’s and saw islanders with European features. The tour guide said they were descendants of shipwrecked Dutch sailors)
In 1894, Japan, an emergent naval power seeking food and natural resources for its burgeoning population and growing western adopted industries, invaded Korea and fought China. The latter sought peace and ceded Korea, the Laotian peninsula, southeast of Manchuria and Formosa. In the next 45 years, Korea and Formosa became a colony of Japan until her defeat and surrender in 1945.
Formosa: Japanese Base for the Invasion of the Philippines in WW II. Military strategy and geopolitical considerations by the protagonists in WW II, Japan and the U.S., had determined the defense of the Philippines and the fate of its people. Formosa, an island about one third of and 200 kms north of Luzon figured prominently in Japan’s imperial design towards Southeast Asia, the conquest of the Philippines, then a Commonwealth and a U.S. protectorate, the British-held Malaya (Malaysia), Singapore, Hong Kong, and Dutch East Indies (Indonesia). Formosa was the assembly and staging area for land, air and naval forces for the invasion of the Philippines. The foremost objective was to destroy the U.S. B17 bombers and other aircraft at Clark Air Base, Pampanga; Nichols Field (Villamor Air Base) in Pasay; and naval facilities and fuel tanks in Cavite, two hours away via Japan long-range bombers based in Formosa.
U.S. Planned to Bomb Formosa. WW II had already started in Europe on 1-September-1939 with the invasion of Poland by German forces. U.S. had declared itself neutral in the war in Europe. As relations between U.S. and Japan had become strained after Japan had invaded China in 1931 and occupied Manchuria, Washington top military staff began drawing plans for the defense of Philippines. Under OPlan Orange Gen. Douglas MacArthur, Commander of the USAFFE, combined American and Filipino forces, the four-engine B17 bombers based in Clark, Pampanga would attack air and naval fleets in Formosa, and possibly delay Japan’s invasion of the Philippines. The defense of the Philippines was already conceded, a delaying action in the face of Japan’s numerically superior and well-equipped invasion forces.
But the surprise attack by Japan’s Asiatic Fleet on Pearl Harbor, Honolulu, Hawaii at about 8:00am on Sunday, 7-December-1941, a day of rest, religion and recreation for Americans and their families, scuttled MacArthur plans. Japan’s objective was to prevent the U.S. Pacific Fleet from interfering with Japan’s planned invasion of western colonized countries in Southeast Asia. The attack came while Japan’s Ambassador to U.S. was in Washington to present its Fourteen Parts Message, a compilation of replies and counters to U.S. demands. It was at 3:30am Monday, 8-December-1941 in Manila when Clark in Luzon heard the attack on radio. At noontime, Japan attacked and destroyed almost entirely the 40 U.S. B17 bombers on the ground in Clark. Within hours, Japanese warplanes attacked simultaneously Wake Island, Guam, Singapore, Malaya and Hongkong, executing as per plan. In contrast, Clark B17 bombers failed to attack air and naval targets in Formosa. MacArthur‘s staff in Manila and commanders at Clark were characterized with unpreparedness, mis-assessing the impending threat and miscommunication. Washington failed to read the ruse and treachery in Japan’s diplomatic moves. Condescending thinking and racial bias by the Americans on the ability of the Japanese navy commanders to sail their warships from the ports of Japan to Pearl harbor, a distance of 6,000 kms in 12 days undetected gave a false sense of security and sanctuary. Complacency doomed the U.S. naval forces in Pearl Harbor to destruction, death and dishonor. Four battleships were sunk, four damaged and 188 aircrafts destroyed, 2,400 dead American naval and army personnel. Two aircraft carriers at sea trials fortunately escaped the holocaust.
Bypass Luzon and Invade Formosa. In the liberation of the Philippines in the 1944 military strategy, geopolitics and U.S. domestic politics would determine the fate of the Philippines, the city of Manila and its 3 million residents. Top military planners in Washington were faced with the problem whether to bypass Luzon occupied by 60,000 Japanese troops or invade not heavily guarded Formosa and make it a base of offensive operations to the islands and mainland of Japan. General MacArthur who had escaped from Corregidor on 12-March-1942 and was now in Australia (Bataan fell on 9-April-1942 and Corregidor on 6-May-1942). The Commander of Allied land forces opposed the plan to bypass Luzon which was favored by Admiral Chester Nimitz, Commander of all naval forces in the Pacific. Both agreed though to invade first southern Mindanao and Leyte to divide in the center an estimated 400,000 Japanese troops occupying the Philippines. President Franklin Roosevelt had to call for the two strong-willed commanders to Honolulu in July 1944 to resolve the issue. Nimitz expounded on the need to save American soldiers, the losses in time, equipment and wasted effort. MacArthur in his flamboyant manner said American honor and prestige were at stake, not taking Luzon was both a “military and political disaster” President Roosevelt, eyeing a fourth term, which he won, sided with MacArthur.
U.S. invasion forces landed in Lingayen Gulf on 9-January-1945, in the vicinity where Japanese forces came ashore in the invasion of the Philippines on 22-December-1941. By this time, Gen. Tomoyuki Yamashita and his 50,000 troops had already left for the Mountain Province, hoping to reach the ports of Ilocos and be evacuated to Formosa. Rear Admiral Sanji Iwabuchi who defied Yamashita with his 20,000 Marines and army soldiers stayed behind in Manila to make the last stand and die for the Emperor. In the Battle for Manila, the city was left in rubbles next only to Berlin and Warsaw in devastation, with 100,000 Filipino civilians dead. Military pragmatism gave way to egotism and personal glory.
(Yamashita and his beleaguered troops formally surrendered on 3-September in Baguio, in obedience to the Emperor who had accepted on 15-August-1945 the terms of the Potsdam Declaration a week after U.S. dropped an atomic bomb each on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. In a reversal of fortunes, Yamashita surrendered to Major General Jonathan Wainwright who, in 9-April-1942 had surrendered to him combat weary and half-starved 80,000 Filipino and American soldiers in the Battle for Bataan after three months of fighting; and to Lt Gen Arthur Percival who had also surrendered, including Singapore and 90,000 British, Australian and Indian soldiers on 15-February-1942 after a week of skirmishes against 30,000 of Yamashita’s soldiers. Yamashita would later hang in Los Banos, Laguna a year after). (PVAO records claimed Yamashita and his starving soldiers surrendered to Filipino guerillas in Kiangan, Ifugao who turned them over to the Americans.)
Involvements after WW II. After Japan surrendered Formosa, it became commonly known as Taiwan.
This time the bone of contention was the Straits of Taiwan, a waterway which separates the island from southeast of China by a sea about 200 kms wide. After communist North Korea invaded on 25-June-1950, South Korea, a U.S. ally, in a strategic move, U.S. President Truman directed the U.S. 7th Fleet home-based in Hawaii to guard the Straits obviously to prevent Mao Zedong and the Peoples Liberation Army from crossing the waterway and invade Taiwan, the sanctuary of General Chiang Kai Shek, the Koumintang government and his fledging army after their defeat in 1949 in China’s decades old civil war. Incidentally China under Chiang was a strong ally of U.S. against Japan in WW II.
Philippines sent to South Korea a total of 7,000 battalion size army soldiers who fought alongside Americans under the United Nations Coalition. Clark in Pampanga and Subic in Zambales were used extensively in the assembly, training, staging, maintenance, logistics and R&R of U.S. military forces involved in the Korean War from 1950-52, and also in the Vietnam war from 1967 until U.S. departure in 1975.
From the foregoing discussions, Formosa, now Taiwan, in WW II figured prominently and significantly as an assembly and staging base of Japan’s invasion forces to the Philippines. It was considered by U.S. top brass as an alternate invasion objective in the plan to bypass Luzon. Post-war, U.S. air and naval bases in the Philippines were intensively used in U.S. conflicts with both communists North Korea and North Vietnam. Political and historical ties, military alliance with U.S. and geography inevitably involved the Philippines in U.S. wars in the Pacific.
Warnings. While President Xi in his October speech on the 110th anniversary of the overthrow of China’s last imperial dynasty was conciliatory it was no so last July when he declared he would ‘smash’ any formal declaration of independence by Taiwan. President Len-wen of Taiwan warned that threat from China was “growing every day.” His Defense Minister Chiu Kuocheng also warned that China could invade Taiwan by 2025 and that continuous intrusions in Taiwan’s air spaces was intended to wear down its air defenses He cited increased gray zone tactics like economic coercion, political intimidation, subversion undermine the Taiwanese people. Former Australia Prime Minister Tony Abbot said the present tension between China and Taiwan may escalate into a sea blockade by China in the Straits of Taiwan. Japanese Prime Minister Abe was quoted as saying an emergency in Taiwan would be an emergency in Japan, hinting a possible expansion of the conflict. The U.S. Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin warned that incursions by China’s bombers and fighters into Taiwan’s aircraft identification zone are rehearsals for an invasion. General Mark Miley, Chairman U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, in his testimony before the U.S. Senate said China is “clearly and unambiguously” developing the capability to invade Taiwan in the future. He would not say, so a window of one or two years perhaps. Retiring Admiral Davidson of U.S. Indo-Pacific Command said China could invade Taiwan in 6 years or by 2027. Incumbent Admiral John Aquilino, U.S. Indo-Pacific Command said China would “clearly invade Taiwan than most people think.” Various international publications agree.
There was, however, opposition from Chinese generals on China’s seemingly bellicose stance towards Taiwan according to GRAVITAS, an Indian news channel which reported their warnings: China’s goal is not reunification with Taiwan but rather national rejuvenation to achieve the dream of a good life for 1.4 billion Chinese people; it is not winning friends and not a single country supports China’s declarations; it has helped many countries but wants to take Taiwan by force; not to take advantage of U.S., but to take stock of its weaknesses; and China will be fighting numerous fronts. (China has: only one formal defense treaty with North Korea; a dispute with Japan on Senkaku islands, and border problems with India and Russia)
Flashpoint, Not West Philippine Sea (WPS) but Taiwan. China has actual possession of islands, islets, reefs and sea areas on WPS, which are Philippine territories and over which Philippines has sovereign rights and jurisdictions located in the Spratly Group about 130 nautical miles west of Palawan; and the Scarborough Shoal (Patag) about 120 nautical miles east of Zambales. Thus declared President Rodrigo Duterte in his SONA in July 2021. (WPS is the official designation by the government of the eastern part of South China Sea [SCS], west of the Philippines and included in its territory and exclusive economic zone [EEZ]).
China has employed the cabbage strategy, seizing control by swarming and surrounding islets and sea areas with layers of Chinese militia vessels to prevent intrusions and outside support, which Chinese militia vessels have been doing to Filipino fishermen at Scarborough Shoal. It was done on a massive scale when some 250 Chinese big fishing boats occupied the sea areas off Julian Felipe islet in the Spratly Group from April to May. In response, the Philippine Coast Guard ships patrolled within a safe distance in a symbolic gesture. In November, Chinese militia ships prevented a Philippine Navy ship from resupplying its personnel occupying a grounded navy vessel off the Ayungin island, 120 miles west of Palawan.
China also has applied the salami slicing strategy which is a series of actions, harassments and provocations not constituting a heightened conflict or a causa belli to test the response of its intended victim and achieve a higher goal. This is what happened in 1974 on Paracel Islands, south of Vietnam; in 1988 on Fiery Cross and Johnson Reef in the Spratly group west of Palawan which resulted in violent skirmishes with the defending Vietnamese who incurred more than a hundred casualties. China occupied in 1994 Mischief Reef, an island, a Philippine territory west of Palawan on which China has built structures and facilities for a 2,700 kms runway. In 2012, off Scarborough Shoal, west of Zambales, a Philippine navy warship had a confrontation with a number of Chinese Coast Guard vessels. Brokered by U.S. and mutually agreed to break off, the Philippine Navy ships departed but not the Chinese ships which are still there until today.
China adheres to the doctrine of Sun Tzu, a Chinese military strategist, the forerunner of the Prussian Clausewitz and Napoleon of France, who wrote more than 2,000 years ago that “The best commander is he who wins battles without fighting.” It has already actual possession, domination and control over many islands, islets, reefs and sea areas in South China Sea with which it has in disputes with militarily weak states of ASEAN and Taiwan. Hence it would not likely raise the ante, raise to a threshold of conflict to a next level or trigger a “causa belli.” Thus create a situation where the Philippines will invoke Art IV of the RP-US Mutual Defense Treaty, “an armed attack on either Party would be dangerous to its own peace and security and declares each Party would act to meet the common danger in accordance with its constitutional provisions and processes.” In 2019, U.S. declared SCS is in the Pacific and that “an armed attack on Philippine armed forces, public vessels and aircrafts would trigger paragraph IV.” To prevent entry by Philippine vessels into China occupied sea areas its militia ships employ water cannons, blaring signals in addition to radio broadcasts in asserting its “sovereignty” and “authority.”
The U.S. is obligated to defend the Philippines not “automatic or self-effecting” like that of NATO. It will require a resolution by the U.S. Congress. U.S. senators and congressmen may have known about WPS only when the Philippine government in 2011 referred to it to reinforce its claim before the Hague Arbitral Tribunal. It would be best to assume U.S. will not respond militarily and immediately to uphold Philippine interest on WPS, too far from U.S. homeland.
The horrifying memories of U.S. involvements in Korea, Vietnam, and lately in Afghanistan which resulted in a combined total of more than 150,000 dead and wounded American soldiers, and the shame of defeat and dishonor still haunt the American people.
South Korea has a similar mutual defense treaty with the U.S. with substantially the same provisions as those found in 1951 RP-US MDT. There are no records, however, that U.S. intervened militarily and immediately in behalf of the South Korean government after the following major incidents: the sinking of a South Korean warship, a corvette by a North Korean submarine off its coast in 2010 which resulted in the death of 46 and wounding of 56 South Korean seamen; and in the same year the firing of artillery shells on an island border that separates the two warring neighbors resulting in the wounding of many South Korean soldiers. 37 skirmishes have been recorded.
The U.S. would not likely involve itself militarily nor respond immediately on WPS. But not so with Taiwan where U.S. and China have so much at stake.
Sino-U.S. Relations. The One China policy is the cornerstone of Sino-U.S. relations. To China it guides its national policy and diplomatic relations with U.S. and other countries as well. It passed in 2004 the Anti-Secession Act, in response to interference of the international community in its internal affairs. It declares that the Taiwan issue has been left unresolved by the civil war, and it is the sacred duty of the Chinese people to reunify with the Taiwanese. China may adopt non-peaceful means if secessionist movements in Taiwan would cause its separation from China.
The U.S. adheres to a One China policy, a diplomatic acknowledgment that there is only one Chinese government. After it has recognized China in 1979, U.S. has severed formal diplomatic relations with the Taiwan government and maintains only “robust unofficial” ties through trade, commerce, education and culture. It revoked its 1954 defense treaty and replaced it with its 1979 Taiwan Relations Act which opposes non-peaceful means to unify Taiwan with China and obligates U.S. to provide arms but is not committed to defend her. A strategic ambiguity.
The U.S. is looked upon as a guarantor of peace in East Asia, a security ally of Taiwan, and protector of the militarily weak ASEAN states. In a landmark declaration in 2019, U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo sided with the Philippines which won the 1916 Hague Arbitral Ruling (which China rejected) when he stated, “U.S. rejects China’s claims based on the so called 9-Dash-Line on offshore resources across most of SCS as unlawful under UNCLOS, and its bullying to control them.” He warned “U.S. will not allow to make the SCS its maritime empire” effectively supporting the ASEAN states, Taiwan, and their disputes against China.
In a demonstration of might and resolve, U.S. on two occasions last year, two U.S. powerful carrier task forces sailed through SCS on a declared exercise of freedom of navigation (FON) in international waters. These were followed by exercises with the navies of Japan, Australia and India. Much later UK’s newest aircraft carrier escorted by her destroyers and frigates in tandem with U.S. ships sailed the SCS.
In March, newly sworn U.S. President Joe Biden convened the leaders of QUAD –India, Japan, Australia and India to a virtual summit to secure their pledge to counter rising influence of China in the Indo Pacific. Also, Australia, U.S. and U.K. formed a partnership AUS-UK to enable Australia to build a nuclear powered submarines, which is seen by observers as ushering into a strategic alliance.
To China, U.S. policies on and naval movements in the SCS, declared as FON operations, are undisguised provocations and multi-alliances are aimed to strategically encircle China. The bitter memories of China’s colonization and humiliation by European powers from the 1840’s to 1949, Japan’s invasion in 1931, and the occupation of Manchuria until 1945, the end of WW II, are still fresh in the minds of the Chinese people.
Strategic Importance of Taiwan. A very significant aspiration of China in the book by Jonathan Holstag: ‘The Coming War in Asia’ is the determination to “recover Taiwan, establish hegemony in Hong Kong, have dominance in the area bordering China, takeover of the islands and reefs in the SCS considered as territories by Japan, Vietnam, Malaysia, Taiwan and the Philippines.”
But the “arc of military and political alliances which extends from South Korea, Japan, the Philippines, Okinawa, Taiwan, Singapore, Indonesia, Australia and New Zealand poses a strong deterrence to military excursion and adventures by China into the Pacific Ocean and SCS.” (President Fidel V. Ramos is his paper, Strategic Leadership in the Challenge of the Times). The QUAD dialogue formed in 2016 and AUS-UK recently have been added to these alliances.
Taiwan forms an important part of the Island Chain from Kuril and Ryukyu islands (Okinawa), Senkaku (claimed by China but guaranteed protection by U.S.) of the Japanese archipelago down to Luzon, Philippines. To U.S., it represents the first island barrier of its defense of western Pacific. Taiwan to China is crucial to its entry and expansion towards the Pacific of its navy which has already surpassed the U.S. Navy in numbers. It was labelled an “unsinkable carrier” since WW II, a term to refer to an island from which armed forces can project its power. Its land mass about 400 kms long and 11 kms wide at its narrowest part can provide mobility for its aircraft and other defense equipment and facilities as well. The Straits of between southeastern China and northern Taiwan and the Bashi Channel between southern Taiwan and the Batanes Islands, north of Luzon are important waterways for international shipping. Underneath Bashi Channel are submarine cables for data and telephone international traffic. (A Philippine Marine detachment has occupied Navulis islet in the Batanes group). Hence, possession and control of Taiwan, Straits of Taiwan and the Bashi channel are crucial. Mahan’s doctrine “who controls the sea lanes controls the island; who controls the island controls the mainland” is still valid today despite the advent of long range bombers, ICBMS, aircraft carriers, drones and missile firing submarines.
Ideological Divide. Taiwan is a bulwark of western type democracy and its capitalistic system is an exemplar of a market driven and export-oriented economy. Its government is elected through popular votes and multi parties exist and are allowed. China is a socialist republic with “Chinese characteristics” and is run by the ruling Communist Party. It follows a socialist economy is a system where there is a predominance of state-owned enterprises within a market driven economy. Public ownership coexists with the various forms of private ownership, a system considered by economists as responsible for the very significant and high growth rate of China’s economy. The ideological divide is seen in the crackdown and imposition of stringent measures on dissent and assembly by the mainland government on Hong Kong residents who pine for their freedoms under British colonial rule which ended in 1997. The Taiwanese government and people can only express their vehement protests in fraternal sympathy.
Destined to Clash. Western scholars wrote that the conflict between U.S. and China may fall into the Thucydides Trap, a term popularized by Harvard Professor Graham Allison, that war is inevitable between a rising power and a ruling one. The “rise of power of Athens and the alarm, which it has inspired in Sparta” led to the Peloponnesian War (431-404 BC). Sparta, the reigning power, lost but both suffered heavily and declined in power for decades. Graham in his book cited 16 cases of conflicts between states or group of states from the 15th to 20th century including WW 1 and II up to the 1990’s –12 led to war.
Many historians and writers, however, have questioned the validity of predicting future conflicts on the basis of a battle that occurred 400 years B.C. and wars in the 15th to 20th century. It is Euro-centered interpretation of the causes and prevention of the conflicts –which are complex matters. Using social science methodology and making an analogy of the ancient battle where gun powder and air vessels were not yet in use to predict the outcome of the rivalry of U.S. and China is flawed. The core interests of China and U.S. are poles apart. China wants a ‘place under the sun,’ U.S. wants to maintain its global dominant position. Both China and the U.S. have internal problems. China’s President Xi’s wise counsel said soon after President Donald Trump (2017-2021) occupied White House, “As long as we maintain communication and treat each other with sincerity we can escape the Thucydides Trap.”
Four compelling reasons will prevent U.S. and China from going to war over their stakes and interests in Taiwan or the SCS according to an article in the Strategist: It may turn nuclear and each side would try to avoid it and likely resort to proxy wars; China plays a long game, lags behind in conventional forces; China has been gaining victories in the soft power global war like the Build and Road Initiatives and both economies are heavily intertwined. More importantly, the top leaders of U.S. and China have their people at heart, and are talking.
Biden-Xi Virtual November Summit. The deep differences in Sino-U.S. relations may be viewed from the declarations of President Biden and President Xi during their virtual Summit last 16-November-2021.
Biden said the U.S. would stand up for its interests and values as well those of allies and partners in the Indo Pacific region and uphold U.S. commitments to them; cited the importance of freedom of navigation and overflight; and will protect American workers and economy from China’s unfair trade practices. He raised concerns on Beijing’s human treatment in Xingiang, Tibet, and Hong Kong, and coerciveness in the SCS. He reiterated the One China policy and guarantees under the Taiwan Relations Act. In a conciliatory gesture, he said, “It is our responsibility as leaders of U.S. and China that competition between our countries does not veer into conflict whether intended or not.” (Readout of U.S. Summit Declaration)
President Xi wants respect, to be treated as equal in the world stage and asserts its one party political system is at par or better than liberal democracy. Its ‘state-centric-one-party-led economic system provides industrial policies, massive subsidies and preferential treatment of state enterprises and private enterprises to make them globally competitive,’ thus distorting market forces. As to treatment of its own people and others in territories it governs, China cannot be judged according to the domestic policies of U.S. and calls it interference. Xi considered U.S. declaration that it will oppose any change on the status quo on Taiwan as intimidating and for U.S. to be “more prudent.” In sum “China and U.S. should respect each other, coexist in peace and pursue win-win cooperation.” (East Asia Forum)
Many analysts and observers said there has been not much breakthrough in the Summit. Both leaders would have to hold more talks on nuclear arms control, hypersonic missiles development, ease the tensions over Taiwan, and coercion in the SCS.
Six years ago in Washington, President Barrack Obama (2009-2017) and President Xi met at a Summit. Obama said, “U.S. and China have structural differences but can manage their disagreements.” Both leaders discussed at length the Thucydides Trap. President Xi alarmingly said, “should major powers time and again make the mistake of strategic miscalculations they might create such traps for themselves.”
In the event of a miscalculation, a misreading of intentions or a misstep leading inevitably to a conflict between U.S. and China over their differences on Taiwan and SCS, the Philippines will be involved because of existing military alliances with U.S. and geography, so said former AFP Chief of Staff Retired General Emmanuel Bautista Jr at a forum sponsored by the Stratbase ADR Institute on 25-November-2021.**
__________
* According to The Economist Intelligence (EIU).
** Forum on Security and Foreign Policy Outlook 2022.
About the Author:
You may reach the author at maningoxales@yahoo.com