logo
Sirens and evacuations as Taipei rehearses to counter China invasion threat

Sirens and evacuations as Taipei rehearses to counter China invasion threat

BBC News16-07-2025
Taipei is due to come to a standstill as the capital of Taiwan holds one of its largest-ever civil defence exercises against a possible Chinese invasion.Air raid sirens will ring out across the metropolitan area on Thursday, and in some areas residents must seek shelter indoors, while traffic will grind to a halt. The city will also hold mass evacuation drills and mass casualty event rehearsals.The exercise is held in conjunction with Taiwan's largest ever war games - the annual Han Kuang exercises - as the island increasingly ramps up its defences.China claims self-ruled Taiwan as its part of its territory and has not ruled out the use of force to "reunify" with the island.
Tensions have increased since last year when Taiwan elected its president William Lai, whom China reviles as a "separatist".While previous Han Kuang exercises also had civil defence components, this year authorities have combined them in a single Urban Resilience exercise across the island which began on Tuesday and ends on Friday.Each day of the exercise sees air raid sirens ringing out for half an hour in several cities across Taiwan.Residents in designated areas in each city must shelter indoors – or risk incurring a fine - and all shops and restaurants must pause operations. Road traffic must also come to a stop, with drivers required to pull over and head indoors immediately.In Taipei, emergency workers and volunteers will take part in evacuations of a market and temple, schools, subway stations and highways.They will also hold a mock mass casualty event and practise their response in treating the injured, and set up distribution points for emergency supplies.This week's Urban Resilience exercise is the latest civil defence drill Taiwan has held this year as it tries to prepare its cities for possible attacks and raise its population's defence awareness.
While US officials have warned of an imminent threat from China and that President Xi Jinping wants his military to be capable of invading Taiwan by 2027, most Taiwanese remain sceptical that an actual invasion will take place.One poll done last October by a government-linked think tank, the Institute for National Defence and Security Research (INDSR), found that more than 60% of Taiwanese do not believe China will invade in the next five years."The chances of China invading are low. If they really wanted to invade us, they would have done it long ago," said Ben, a 29-year-old finance professional interviewed by the BBC in Taipei on Wednesday. "But I do believe we need these drills, every country needs it and you need to practise your defence… I believe there is still a threat from China."But a few were sceptical. "There is just too big a difference in the strengths of China and Taiwan's militaries," said Mr Xue, a 48-year-old office worker. "There is no use defending ourselves against an attack."The IDSR poll had found that only half of Taiwan's population had confidence in their armed forces' capability to defend the island.It is a long-running sentiment that has spurred the Taiwanese government in recent years to beef up its military and expand Han Kuang.
More than 22,000 soldiers - about 50% more than last year – rehearsed defending the island from potential attacks from China in land, sea and air drills. Newly acquired military hardware such as the US-supplied Himars mobile missile system as well as Taiwan-made rockets were tested.This year's Han Kuang exercise also focused on combating greyzone warfare and misinformation from China, as well as rehearsing military defence in cities. In recent days soldiers took part in urban warfare exercises in an exhibition centre and on the subway in Taipei. On Wednesday the military rehearsed pushing back enemy troops on the streets of Taichung city, and turned a high school in Taoyuan into a battle tank repair station.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Why Labour's Ed Miliband is moving too quickly towards end of North Sea oil and gas
Why Labour's Ed Miliband is moving too quickly towards end of North Sea oil and gas

Scotsman

time2 hours ago

  • Scotsman

Why Labour's Ed Miliband is moving too quickly towards end of North Sea oil and gas

Sign up to our daily newsletter – Regular news stories and round-ups from around Scotland direct to your inbox Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to The Scotsman, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... In the days before he was Secretary of State for Energy, Ed Miliband once described me to a group of people as his 'lift buddy'. As his office was then directly above mine, it was where we bumped into each other. Our conversations were generally about energy, and while we agreed on the need for change, we tended to differ on how, and how quickly. For me, energy security and employment, never mind keeping the lights on, are key. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad I think it's fair to describe the Energy Secretary as favouring a speedier end to all oil production. In recent days, the topic has begun to dominate the airwaves as golf course entrepreneur and US President Donald Trump, and then environment charities, threw scorn on developments of offshore wind farms. Unlikely bedfellows, and although their reasons are very different, they reflect a growing unease. READ MORE: Chancellor Rachel Reeves defends windfall tax on oil and gas giants on visit to Scotland Ed Miliband tours Balltech Engineering Solutions, which specialises in offshore wind as well as oil and gas engineering, in Morecambe (Picture: Christopher Furlong) | Getty Images For Trump there is the dual scourge of spoiling the view from his controversial golf developments on a previous Site of Special Scientific Interest on the Aberdeenshire coast, and going against his 'drill baby drill' philosophy. For his former environmental opponents, it is about protecting wildlife. While I have a lot of sympathy with the latter, I also agree with those pointing to the irony of our growing dependence on gas imports rather than using our own. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Add that to the concerns that Chinese involvement in, and control of, windfarm facilities might threaten our energy security and it seems the future picture is far from universally agreed. Oil and gas supporters have long warned that premature shutdown of the North Sea would mean importing carbon fuels from countries with fewer safeguards and damaging our carbon footprint in the process. This week their argument has been given fresh impetus as government figures show UK gas imports grew by 20 per cent between January and March this year. With damaging price increases caused by our dependence on Russian gas supplies at the outbreak of war in Ukraine still fresh in the public memory, reliance on any foreign source feels risky and even unnecessary. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Will this autumn's Budget signal a change of direction from Downing Street? The Climate Change Committee has estimated that between 13 and 15 billion barrels of oil and gas could still be needed while we work towards net zero. Experts reckon that our domestic production could only fulfil about one third of that. If it could be doubled, it would not only reduce our foreign dependence, but industry lobby group Offshore Energy UK claim it could raise more than £160 billion of useful revenue. There is no simple or cheap solution. Shutting down the North Sea now might seem on the surface like the best way to ensure net zero, but it brings a host of other obstacles to overcome. Conversely, continuing to depend too heavily on a naturally declining basin would not only delay net zero but wouldn't guarantee cheaper energy. Getting the balance right will be the key and right now I am not sure that we have it right, either to protect the climate or help the Exchequer stabilise our economy and create growth. Once the UK Parliament returns, I will be looking to my lift buddy to navigate the best route forward.

Is David Williams the MoD's fall guy?
Is David Williams the MoD's fall guy?

Spectator

time3 hours ago

  • Spectator

Is David Williams the MoD's fall guy?

Yesterday the Ministry of Defence (MoD) confirmed that its permanent secretary, David Williams, will be stepping down in a matter of weeks. He has served for just over four years, almost exactly the average tenure of his predecessors since the department was created in 1964, but it is difficult to regard the timing as a coincidence. It is still not yet three weeks since the catastrophic loss of data on Afghan nationals and others, and the MoD's use of a super-injunction, were disclosed to parliament by defence secretary John Healey. Williams is not explicitly being sacked: permanent secretaries very rarely are. The Ministry of Defence is being very careful and measured in its language to refer to his impending departure: according to the BBC, Healey had a 'conversation' with Williams before the Afghan data loss story became public knowledge, and 'made clear that this was the right time to make a change'. There is a plausible argument that we should not draw a line directly from the data loss to Williams's departure. The MoD has also briefed that this is 'an appropriate time for a transition' of leadership; under Healey's Defence Reform programme, the senior levels of the Ministry of Defence have been rearranged and streamlined into a 'leadership quad' which will supervise all aspects of defence policy and the armed forces. This is the biggest reorganisation of the MoD for half a century, and it need not be any reflection on Williams that he chooses to step down before implementing the reforms in full, or that the defence secretary would prefer a fresh approach and a new top civil servant. Air Chief Marshal Sir Richard Knighton will be taking over as Chief of the Defence Staff next month, while the recruitment for a permanent national armaments director is taking longer than expected. While Madelaine McTernan, Chief of Defence Nuclear, has been in post since 2022, replacing Williams at this stage could make sense. Equally, Williams's departure could be seen as part of a wave of changes at permanent secretary level which often happen in the first year or so of a new government. Simon Case (Cabinet Secretary), Sir Matthew Rycroft (Home Office), Dame Tamara Finkelstein (Defra), Sir Philip Barton (FCDO), Dame Bernadette Kelly (Transport), Sarah Munby (DSIT) and Sir Jim Harra (HMRC) have all left the civil service within the past 12 months. And yet… while the MoD is making no explicit connection between Williams's departure and the data loss, it is hard to escape the feeling that we are being invited to join the dots, and that the permanent secretary is an expiatory offering to the political gods. The whole scandal did, after all, take place on his watch, and he was in charge of the overall management and leadership of the Ministry of Defence, as well as formally being principal accounting officer responsible to parliament. The MoD should under no circumstances be allowed to wipe the slate clean with Williams's departure. There is still a great deal we do not know about the Afghan data loss scandal, though the Intelligence and Security Committee, the House of Commons Defence Committee and the Public Accounts Committee will all be inquiring into the issue. But Williams – whatever his individual culpability – cannot be the fall guy. Even based on what we currently know, the MoD has a shameful inability to prevent the loss of secret data, and data breaches have increased threefold over the past five years. There is also a systemic lack of accountability, particularly in relation to a number of disastrous equipment procurement projects. The readiness with which the department accepted the comfort blanket of a super-injunction for nearly two years speaks to a deeply ingrained culture of secrecy and dislike of scrutiny. The Ministry of Defence is secretive, inefficient, unaccountable and almost pathologically unable to learn from its mistakes. That has been common currency in defence circles for decades, but the Afghan data loss cut through to the consciousness of the wider public. There is now a major issue of public trust, already a rare, valuable but rapidly disappearing commodity. If ministers try to usher Williams off stage, bring in a new permanent secretary and assume that previous disasters can then be written off, they must have their feet held to the fire. This is not a failing individual. This is an ingrained, systemic, cultural malaise. And it has to be fixed.

'Russia stunned into silence' by Donald Trump's nuclear subs move
'Russia stunned into silence' by Donald Trump's nuclear subs move

Daily Record

time11 hours ago

  • Daily Record

'Russia stunned into silence' by Donald Trump's nuclear subs move

Donald Trump announced the deployment of two nuclear submarines following "foolish and inflammatory statements" by former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev Russia has been left seemingly speechless after US President Donald Trump's decision to deploy two nuclear submarines in response to Moscow's rhetoric. The move, which saw the subs dispatched to "in appropriate regions" came after "foolish and inflammatory statements" by Russia 's ex-President Dmitry Medvedev. ‌ Mr Trump refrained from disclosing the exact location of the submarines or clarifying if they were nuclear-powered or armed. ‌ BBC's Russia Editor Steve Rosenberg reported a lack of immediate response from Russian officials, noting on BBC News: "Interestingly, there has been no reaction so far from the Kremlin, from the Foreign Ministry, from the Defence Ministry - anyone here, really. ‌ "I think everyone is trying to work out what on earth is going on and what, if anything, has changed in relations to where these nuclear subs are being positioned." Rosenberg observed that the announcement had unsettled Moscow's stock market, following over three years of "bombastic and provocative" commentary from Medvedev, reports the Express. ‌ He further noted: "There has been reactions from the Moscow stock market, which has fallen sharply. Judging by the reactions in the local media here, Russians are surprised to say the least by President Trump's post. "I suspect that nobody is more surprised than Dmitry Medvedev himself, because for more than three years he has been tweeting and posting some very bombastic and provocative social media posts - most of which have gone unnoticed, I have to say. "But now suddenly he has been noticed and he has gone under the skin of the President of the United States in a big way." ‌ Mr Trump revealed the submarine deployment on his Truth Social platform. He posted: "Based on the highly provocative statements of the Former President of Russia, Dmitry Medvedev, who is now the Deputy Chairman of the Security Council of the Russian Federation, I have ordered two Nuclear Submarines to be positioned in the appropriate regions, just in case these foolish and inflammatory statements are more than just that. "Words are very important, and can often lead to unintended consequences, I hope this will not be one of those instances. Thank you for your attention to this matter!". This followed Medvedev's warning to the US president about Russia's Soviet-era nuclear strike capabilities that could be deployed as a final option.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store