China's defence ministry warns Taiwan ‘we will get you, sooner or later'
The threat was delivered in a press conference on Thursday, but grabbed attention inside China for its apparent mirroring of a line from the record-breaking children's movie Ne Zha 2.
Wu Qian was asked by journalists in Beijing about reports that Taiwan's annual live-fire drills, the Han Kuang exercise, would expand in scope this year. The drills are a big part of Taiwan's defensive preparations to deter or one day resist an attack by China, which has vowed to annex the territory.
'It is a serious miscalculation of the situation, the public opinion and the comparison of strength,' said Wu. 'Overreaching itself in such a way is extremely dangerous. We warn the DPP [Democratic Progressive party] authorities that holding back the tide with a broom will only end up in self-destruction. We will come and get you, sooner or later.'
On Chinese social media, the remarks quickly drew parallels with the blockbuster children's movie now in cinemas. Ne Zha 2, an animation about a young boy battling demons based on Chinese mythology, includes a scene where he admonishes a groundhog, saying: 'I will come back and get you.'
Ne Zha 2 has been hugely popular in China, generating massive coverage in state media after it became the highest-grossing film ever in China, and then the world, overtaking the revenue of Inside Out 2. Its success has driven a surge of patriotism in China, with people reportedly viewing it numerous times, and cheering it on against Captain America: Brave New World, released in China around the same time but with lacklustre attendance.
Ne Zha 2 has not been released in Taiwan.
In response to Wu's comments and in further criticism of recent Chinese military drills held off Taiwan's south-west coast, the Taiwan defence ministry accused China of becoming the biggest 'troublemaker' in the international community.
'This year marks the 80th anniversary of (the end of) world war two, and history has proven that any form of aggression and expansion will end in failure,' it said in a statement. 'The actions of the communist military in recent years are repeating the mistakes of the invaders and pushing China towards defeat.'
China's military is pushing on with modernisation efforts, designed to reach capability of a full-scale invasion of Taiwan. Last week it amended regulations to emphasise that the military's top responsibility should be 'winning battles', and ordered the military to 'focus on preparation and readiness for combat'.
Bill Bishop, a China expert behind the Sinocism newsletter, said on Friday that Beijing's language towards Taiwan 'appears to be getting harsher'. The readout of this year's Taiwan affairs work conference, held earlier this week, did not include a goal to 'promote the peaceful development of cross-strait relations', which had been part of the 2023 and 2024 readouts.
Taiwan is boosting its defences but remains vastly outgunned by China. Its greatest backer has historically been the US, but that has come into question under the second presidency of Donald Trump.
This week Trump refused to say if the US would come to Taiwan's defence militarily, in the event of a Chinese attack. The stance is in line with the US's longstanding doctrine of strategic ambiguity, but is a departure from his predecessor, Joe Biden, who repeatedly suggested the US would defend Taiwan under his leadership. Trump's stance, taken with previous comments questioning the worth of supporting Taiwan and accusing it of 'stealing' US semiconductor business, has raised alarm in Taipei.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Spectator
5 hours ago
- Spectator
Why Reeves should sell her bitcoin hoards
Deep fried prawn balls, chicken chow mein, crispy shredded beef and a Ponzi scheme could be about to win the Chancellor a decent chunk of her headroom back. As Rachel Reeves starts sketching out her autumn Budget, most of the focus has been on the tax hikes she'll need if she's serious about sticking to the 'ironclad' fiscal rules she recommitted to just last week. Economists reckon the wafer-thin £9.9 billion margin she left herself at the Spring Statement has already been wiped out and that she's now staring down a black hole of over £20 billion. So it was a relief to read this morning that the Treasury isn't relying solely on tax rises and has discovered a rather large stash of money down the back of the government sofa. According to The Telegraph, the government is developing a system to allow police forces and the National Crime Agency to sell more than £5 billion crypto assets seized in recent years We don't know the total amount of confiscated crypto the state is sitting on but one seizure in 2018 took in 61,000 bitcoin. If sold today, it would bring in some £5.4 billion – more than triple the culture budget and twenty times its value on the day the police got their hands on it. Jian Wen, who worked in a chinese takeaway, was convicted of laundering money – and her bitcoin seized – from a crypto scam carried out in China when she went from a life living in 'shabby Chinese restaurants' to putting cash offers on £24 million pound houses in Hampstead and villas in Tuscany. Victims of that Wen's ponzi scheme will be entitled to any proceeds of the sell off but experts are confident that enough of them will be untraceable that the Treasury can scoop up the rest and use it to start plugging the black hole. Of course, if Reeves does press 'sell', she will be accused of 'pulling a Gordon Brown', and selling the gold. Bitcoin is already up nearly 20 per cent this year and on current trajectories the Wen haul could be worth over £200 billion in 20 years. But she'd be wise to ignore those voices. Sure, crypto probably will rise. But given it has no fundamental value it might nosedive too. And the state simply can't afford to gamble on highly volatile assets when the public finances are in the mess they are in. So if this really is the plan, the Chancellor should act fast, take the money, and resist the temptation to hold. If all goes well she can treat herself to a Chinese.
Spectator
7 hours ago
- Spectator
Inside the Lords battle on foreign media ownership
After a two-year impasse, the future of the Daily Telegraph could be resolved shortly. A £500m deal has been struck for US firm Redbird Capital to take control of the Telegraph Media Group, with state-backed Abu Dhabi investment vehicle IMI among investors. But a fresh challenge has arisen in the House of Lords. Peers are threatening to block minister's efforts to change the law to give foreign companies a greater stake in British media outfits – up from the existing five per cent to 15 cent. This is a necessary legal change to allow the Telegraph sale to go ahead. A 'fatal motion' will be held in the Lords on Tuesday; if passed, it would kill the government's plans. It is a device seldom wielded by peers, having been last used in 2012. But opponents are growing increasingly confident that the 'fatal motion' could succeed. Two separate fronts have opened up in the Lords. The first is led by Liberal Democrat peer Lord Fox, who tabled the motion. Lib Dem whips are understood to be pulling out all the stops to maximise turnout, including facilitating the attendance of their older peers who do not vote regularly. Their argument is simple: the power of the free press should not be sold to overseas companies susceptible to foreign government influence. The hope is that a sufficient number of Tory and Crossbench peers will vote it down. The second front is led by the cross-party Inter Parliamentary Alliance on China (Ipac) and its supporters like Lord Alton. Their focus is more directly on the Telegraph sale. Sir Iain Duncan Smith has written to Lisa Nandy, the Culture Secretary, arguing that a Foreign State Intervention Notice (FSNI) be issued in this case. A legal opinion by Tom Cross KC details alleged links between Redbird Capital's chairman John Thornton and the Chinese state, including his advisory roles on Beijing's sovereign wealth fund. Sir Iain argues that this is compelling evidence for Nandy to 'adhere to your statutory duty and issue a FSIN without delay.' Both groups are seeking to influence their colleagues across the House. Given the government's lack of a majority, the hope is that a sufficient number of Tory and Crossbench peers will vote it down. Tory whips are expected to vote against the fatal motion, though their colleagues will not be whipped to follow suit. Lord Forsyth, the respected chair of the Association of Conservative Peers, is expected to vote for the motion; others will likely follow his lead. One opponent notes that the Conservatives voted for fatal motions that successfully halted government legislation when they were last in opposition before 2010. A separate 'motion of regret' has been put down by Baroness Stowell, the former Leader of the House. Some supporters of the fatal motion fear it could frustrate their efforts, with wavering peers potentially voting for Stowell's amendment rather than Fox's. The government will argue that a statutory instrument can close the loophole whereby multiple states can each own 15 per cent of any publication. But their critics will counter that this is insufficient and will not stop the Telegraph deal from going ahead.
Spectator
a day ago
- Spectator
Is China cooking the books on its economy?
A Western financial analyst based in Shanghai once described China's economic statistics to me as 'one of greatest works of contemporary Chinese fiction'. Not even the Communist party's (CCP) own officials believed them. A cottage industry of esoteric techniques developed to try and measure what was really going on, ranging from diesel and electricity demand to the fluctuating levels of the country's chronic air pollution, car sales, traffic congestion, job postings and construction – even the sale of underwear or pickled vegetables. One enterprising analyst regularly sent spies to Shanghai port to count the ships and throughput of trucks. I thought about that conversation again this week when China's National Bureau of Statistics published new figures claiming that the economy grew by 5.2 per cent in the three months to the end of June and thereby 'withstood pressure and made steady improvement despite challenges'. Growth figures have always been political rather than economic in China but have become even more so as Beijing seeks to demonstrate that its economy is resilient enough to withstand any further tariffs that Donald Trump might throw at it should their fragile trade truce break down. I have no idea what new techniques the hapless Shanghai analysts are now deploying, but questioning the official figures has become increasingly dangerous in the China of President Xi Jinping. Shortly before Christmas, Gao Sanwen, a top economist and former official at China's central bank, cast doubt on official figures, telling a conference in Washington DC that China's growth over recent years was likely just 2 per cent, which is less than half what the government had claimed. Gao then promptly disappeared from view. Online commentaries in which he had also highlighted soaring unemployment, China's 'dispirited youth' and 'disenchanted middle-aged' were deleted by censors. A few months earlier, Zhu Hengpeng, a top economist with the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences' Institute of Economics also disappeared after making disparaging remarks about Xi Jinping's economic stewardship in what he thought was a private online chat group. It is more difficult than ever to tell what is really going on with the Chinese economy since the CCP has effectively criminalised pessimism. The Ministry of State Security, its main spy agency, has declared that gloom about the economy is a foreign smear and that 'false theories about 'China's deterioration' are being circulated to attack China's unique socialist system'. It could well be that China's economy did get a bounce in the three months to the end of June as factories ramped up production and pumped out more exports in order to beat any future tariffs. The government has also attempted to boost consumer demand with a trade-in programme worth an estimated $42 billion (£31.3 billion) so far this year, covering a range of consumer goods, from washing machines to electric vehicles (EVs), air conditioners, smartphones and tablets. Xi has pledged to 'fully unleash' China's consumers, but retail sales actually slowed in June, with consumers cautious in the face of a continuing property slump and a deteriorating jobs market. Housing accounts for around 70 per cent of Chinese household wealth, and with prices continuing to fall, consumers appear to be in no mood to be unleashed. Meanwhile, the CCP has begrudgingly acknowledged that the economy is chronically overproducing, notably in renewable tech, such as batteries, EVs and solar panels – though the party will not bring itself to use that term. Instead, it has embraced the term 'involution' (neijuan in mandarin), which describes what it sees as unhealthy and self-destructive competition, which it acknowledges is fuelling deflation and undermining growth. What it doesn't acknowledge is that this is a direct result of its own policies – the enormous subsidies thrown at these industries, which in turn is fuelling global wariness about being the target of Chinese exporters desperate to dump this stuff. The CCP has set a full-year growth target of around 5 per cent, and by hook or by crook it will hit that, no matter what is really going on in the economy. It is not simply a matter of the Chinese government cooking the books, since creating this particular work of fiction is more complex than that. The Chinese economy is a surreal organism, which simply can't be measured by the tools that would usually be brought to bear in other developed economies. The system creates perverse incentives whereby officials at every level are under enormous pressure to manipulate data in order to be seen to fulfil the party's growth targets, for which they are rewarded or punished. Add to that mix a brewing trade war with America and you are left with statistics that are more political and untrustworthy than ever. My Shanghai analyst soon found another proxy for measuring economic activity – the throughput of visitors at Shanghai Disneyland. I said that felt a little far-fetched, which he acknowledged, but pointed out that a morning in the company of Mickey Mouse was a lot more fun and potentially more productive than dealing with officials at the National Bureau of Statistics.
