OPEN LETTER: To the China that encircles Taiwan — your maneuvers will not go unnoticed

June 22–26, 2026: Taiwan simulates the unthinkable

From June 22 to 26, 2026, Taiwan is conducting a series of military exercises called the "Immediate Combat Readiness Exercise." These exercises simulate a precise and alarming scenario: one in which China suddenly transforms a routine military maneuver into a real attack. This is the surprise-strike scenario, the instant escalation, the war that begins before anyone has had time to react. That Taiwan is training specifically for this scenario says everything about the nature of the threat it perceives.

These exercises do not occur in a vacuum. On June 21 and 22, 2026, Taiwan's defenses detected 23 military aircraft from the People's Liberation Army and 7 Chinese warships, as well as 5 official Chinese vessels in the area. On June 21 alone, 21 aircraft — including J-16 fighters and tanker aircraft — were spotted. This massive military presence is no accident. It is the immediate context in which Taiwan decided to sharpen its readiness.

The permanent pressure: 5 to 6 Chinese warships at all times

Taiwan is permanently surrounded by 5 to 6 Chinese warships, according to the Wall Street Journal. This constant presence is a form of continuous psychological and operational pressure. It means that Taiwan has no moment of respite, no window without surveillance. Every move by the Taiwanese navy is observed. Every military decision is analyzed. It is a permanent cold war in hot waters.

This letter addresses Beijing directly. Because the Chinese method — progressive encirclement, continuous pressure, calculated incidents — deserves to be named for what it is: a systematic intimidation strategy against a democracy of 23 million people. And this strategy must be clearly denounced.

Regular Chinese exercises as rehearsals for invasion

The threat that Taiwan simulates in its exercises — a routine maneuver suddenly transformed into a real attack — is precisely the doctrine that military analysts attribute to People's Liberation Army planning. The PLA regularly conducts large-scale exercises around Taiwan corresponding to all phases of a blockade or amphibious operation. These exercises are presented as "routine maneuvers." Taiwan reads them correctly: as rehearsals.

In response, two MQ-9B SkyGuardian drones were delivered to the Taiwanese military. These aircraft, capable of flying for 40 hours continuously, significantly improve Taiwan's maritime surveillance capability. They can continuously cover critical approach zones, detecting Chinese naval movements before they reach Taiwanese waters. This is exactly the kind of asymmetric response Taiwan must develop in the face of the PLA's numerical superiority.

Han Kuang 42: the major annual survival exercise

On August 5, 2026, Taiwan plans Han Kuang 42, its major annual military exercise, which each year simulates real invasion scenarios with ever greater fidelity. The June "Immediate Combat Readiness Exercise" prepares Taiwanese forces for Han Kuang. This is a progressive, systematic training calendar. Taiwan is not merely hoping for peace — it is preparing for war. And that is precisely the right reaction when facing a power that multiplies provocations while never officially owning them.

There is a remarkable dignity in the way Taiwan handles this pressure. No panic. No capitulation. Methodical preparation, regular exercises, targeted arms acquisitions. This island democracy is an example of resilience that many larger nations would do well to study.

The MQ-9B drones: a strong but insufficient signal

The delivery of two MQ-9B SkyGuardian drones to the Taiwanese military represents an important political signal: Washington is maintaining its security commitments to Taipei. The 40-hour flight endurance of these aircraft makes them ideal surveillance tools for an island on permanent alert. But two drones do not constitute a defense. What matters now is the consistency and continuity of arms deliveries.

Taiwan's overseas investment data reveals a significant trend: only 0.86% of Taiwan's external investments go to China in January–May 2026, a decline of 32%. This economic data is an indicator of confidence — or rather, distrust. Taiwan is progressively withdrawing its capital from mainland China. It is diversifying. It is protecting its economy against the risk of conflict. This is an economic resilience policy running in parallel with military resilience.

American consistency tested by Trump

The Trump administration is sending mixed signals on Taiwan. On one hand, arms deliveries continue. On the other, Trump's transactional logic may create uncertainties about American commitment in an actual crisis. What Taiwan needs from Washington is not only weapons — it is unequivocal strategic credibility. A conditional commitment is almost as dangerous as no commitment at all, because it encourages Beijing to test the limits.

Trump is unpredictable, and Beijing knows it. This unpredictability can cut both ways: it may deter Beijing from acting out of fear of a disproportionate response, or it may encourage Beijing to act in hope of no response at all. That is the fundamental risk of a foreign policy based on surprise rather than clear principles.

Reducing investment in China: sound policy

The drop of Taiwan's investment in China to 0.86% of the total in January–May 2026 represents a structural transformation of the Taiwanese economy. While in the 2000s and 2010s many Taiwanese companies had massively invested on the mainland, this withdrawal represents a collective awakening. Economic interdependence with a potential adversary is a vulnerability, not a stabilizer.Taiwan is right to reduce this dependency.

In parallel, Taiwan invested 35 billion USD abroad in January–May 2026, a rise of 133%. This money flows toward friendly markets — the United States, Europe, Southeast Asia. It builds economic ties that reinforce international solidarity around Taiwan. It is a strategy of economic integration into the free world, and it is exactly the right approach.

The "Immediate Combat Readiness" exercise as a diplomatic message

These military exercises are not only defensive preparation. They are also a diplomatic message addressed to Beijing: Taiwan is ready, Taiwan is preparing, Taiwan will not be caught off guard. This strategic signaling is essential. Deterrence works when a potential adversary is convinced that the cost of an attack will be high. Every Taiwanese exercise raises that perceived cost. Every additional drone, every better-trained soldier, every acquired weapons system reinforces this deterrence.

I am convinced that deterrence is the only language Beijing understands on this issue. Diplomatic declarations count for little. What counts is the real capability to inflict damage on any invasion force. And every time Taiwan improves that capability, Xi Jinping's calculation becomes less favorable to military adventurism.

The Taiwan scenario concerns Europe too

Europe tends to view the Taiwan question as an American affair in the Pacific. This is a mistake. Taiwan produces approximately 90% of the world's most advanced semiconductor chips. A military crisis around Taiwan would mean the collapse of global technological supply chains. The European economy — already weakened by the war in Ukraine — would be severely affected. Taiwan is a pillar of the global economy, and its security is therefore a direct European concern.

Moreover, a Chinese success against Taiwan would send a devastating message to all democracies: aggression pays, resistance is futile, alliances do not protect. This signal would be heard in Moscow, in Pyongyang, in Tehran. It would encourage the adventurism that Europe is striving to contain. Abandoning Taiwan alone means weakening all democracies.

What Europe can concretely do

Europe can diversify its economic relations with Taiwan, support its participation in international organizations, and publicly express its opposition to any change of status quo by force. It can also strengthen its own defense industry so as not to depend exclusively on the United States in any potential conflict. A militarily capable Europe is an additional guarantee for the security of Taiwan and of the international order.

Europe needs to stop treating security as something others manage on its behalf. The war in Ukraine showed that aggression can knock at Europe's own door. The situation in Taiwan shows that supply chains can collapse overnight. These realities call for an armed, united, and determined Europe. Not in ten years. Now.

23 aircraft and 7 ships in two days: facts, not allegations

The figures are there: 23 PLA military aircraft and 7 Chinese warships detected on June 21 and 22, 2026. These data points do not come from Taiwanese propaganda. They come from official Taiwanese detection systems, reported in credible international media including The Straits Times, the Washington Post, and Semafor. These figures are documented facts, not perceptions.

The permanent presence of 5 to 6 Chinese warships around Taiwan is also documented. This is not a defensive presence. These ships are not defending anything. They are surveilling, pressing, signaling intent. The international community must call these facts by their proper name: a continuous military intimidation campaign against a sovereign democracy.

International law and the Taiwan question

China claims Taiwan as an integral part of its territory and does not exclude the use of force to "reunify" the island. This position violates the principle of the non-use of force enshrined in the UN Charter. Whether Beijing states it explicitly or not, any strategy of permanent military intimidation aimed at forcing a change of the status quo is contrary to international law. The international community has a responsibility to name this reality.

I understand the diplomatic nuances of Taiwan's status. But diplomatic nuance cannot serve as an alibi for passivity in the face of military intimidation. When a major nuclear power permanently encircles a democracy with dozens of warships, international law and moral conscience demand a clear response.

35 billion USD in overseas investment: weaving the web of solidarity

Taiwan invested 35 billion USD abroad in January–May 2026, up 133%. This redirection of Taiwanese capital toward allied economies — United States, Europe, Southeast Asia — builds something essential: economic interdependence with the democratic world. The more allied economies are embedded in Taiwanese prosperity, the more concrete and measurable their interest in defending Taiwan becomes. This is high-efficiency economic diplomacy.

In parallel, the drop of Taiwanese investment into China to only 0.86% of the total — down 32% — represents a deliberate reduction of economic vulnerability. A Taiwan less economically dependent on China is a Taiwan less susceptible to being coerced by economic pressure in a military crisis. This strategy of progressive decoupling is as prudent as it is courageous.

Han Kuang 42 and the culture of Taiwanese resistance

Exercise Han Kuang 42, scheduled for August 5, 2026, is the major annual military exercise simulating an invasion. Each year it becomes more realistic, more demanding, closer to the real aggression scenarios Taiwan fears. These exercises are not only military preparation. They are a cultural declaration: Taiwan chooses to defend itself. It trains its population, prepares its soldiers, tests its systems.

The delivery of two MQ-9B SkyGuardian drones to the Taiwanese military — aircraft capable of flying 40 hours continuously — reinforces permanent maritime surveillance. Faced with 5 to 6 Chinese warships permanently around the island, this extended surveillance capability is essential. Taiwan does not want to be taken by surprise. And every exercise, every drone, every defensive investment reduces the risk of that surprise.

This letter to Taiwan is also a letter of admiration. Living under the permanent threat of a major nuclear power, exercising democratic governance, maintaining a prosperous economy, training militarily without hysteria — this is a performance of resilience that many nations, protected by geography or alliances, have never had to achieve.

A global democratic compact around Taiwan

This open letter calls for the construction of an explicit global democratic compact around Taiwan. Not a formal alliance born from strategic ambiguity — but a clear commitment of democratic solidarity in the face of any attempt to change the status quo by force. This compact should be signed, documented, and its triggering mechanisms defined. Strategic ambiguity has its merits; the clarity of commitment has its own.

The June 2026 exercises — Immediate Combat Readiness with 23 Chinese aircraft and 7 ships detected — show that pressure is permanent and growing. Exercise Han Kuang 42 on August 5 deepens the preparation. But military preparation alone is not enough. It must be accompanied by a clear political will among Taiwan's allies to act if necessary. Without that will clearly expressed, deterrence is incomplete.

The five days of exercises as the starting point for a global response

The five days of Taiwan's Immediate Combat Readiness exercises from June 22 to 26, 2026 are not an end in themselves. They are a starting point. They show that Taiwan is preparing. They must be the signal for the West to prepare as well. To deliver more armaments. To strengthen sanctions against Chinese companies supporting North Korean armament. To diplomatically support Taiwan's participation in international organizations.

This open letter ends with a simple and direct appeal: look at Taiwan. Look at its exercises, its investments, its resilience. And ask yourself whether you are doing your part so that this democracy of 23 million people survives the pressure of its 1.4 billion-strong neighbor. The honest answer to that question will dictate the necessary policies.

Writing an open letter to China, to Washington, to Europe, and to Taiwan in the same article is recognizing that Taiwan's security is everyone's business. It is not solely the responsibility of Taiwanese citizens, nor solely an American responsibility. It is a collective challenge requiring a collective response. And time is running short.I end this letter with one certainty: the five days of June 2026 exercises may be mentioned in history books, either because they helped deter a war, or because they preceded a crisis they could not prevent. Which of these two futures materializes depends largely on the decisions that democracies take in the coming months.

Five days of exercises to remind us what is at stake

These five days of Taiwanese exercises are not a local military event. They are five days of reality check: a democracy of 23 million people lives under the permanent threat of invasion. It prepares, it invests in its defense, it reduces its economic vulnerabilities, it acquires modern equipment. It is doing what a democracy must do in the face of an existential threat. It deserves the West's total support — not only in words, but in deeds.

What this letter calls for doing

This letter calls for one simple and fundamental thing: face reality honestly. Reality is 23 Chinese aircraft in two days. Reality is 5 to 6 permanent ships. Reality is a DPRK arming Russia while China diplomatically covers the DPRK. Faced with this coordinated axis, the only response can be total democratic solidarity with Taiwan, with Ukraine, and with all those who resist the authoritarian order. That is what this letter calls for building.

By Maxime Marquette, columnist

Editorial stance

I am not a journalist but a columnist and analyst. My expertise lies in observing and analysing the geopolitical, economic and strategic dynamics that shape our world. My work is to take political strategies apart, to understand global economic movements, to put the decisions of international actors in context and to offer analytical perspectives on the changes that are redefining our societies.

I do not claim the cold objectivity of traditional journalism, which stops at reporting facts. I claim analytical clarity, rigorous interpretation and a deep understanding of the complex issues that concern us all. My role is to give meaning to the facts, to place them in their historical and strategic context, and to offer a critical reading of events.

Method and sources

This text keeps the basic distinction between verified facts and interpretive analysis. The rule never changes: a factual claim is published only when a verifiable source supports it, and the sources this article actually used are listed under Sources, never here.

Primary source families used by the publication, when the story has them: official statements from governments and international institutions, public statements by political leaders, reports from intergovernmental organisations, dispatches from recognised international news agencies.

Secondary source families: specialised publications, internationally recognised news media, analyses from established research institutions, reports from industry organisations.

When an article cites statistical, economic or geopolitical data, it comes from the institutions that produce it (intergovernmental organisations, central banks, national statistics offices), and the exact institution is named under Sources.

Nature of the analysis

The analyses, interpretations and perspectives in the analytical sections of this article are a critical, contextual synthesis based on the information available, the trends observed and the expert comments cited in the sources consulted.

My role is to interpret these facts, to set them in the context of today's geopolitical and economic dynamics, and to give them a coherent meaning within the larger story of the changes shaping our time. These analyses reflect expertise built through continuous observation of international affairs and an understanding of the strategic mechanisms that drive global actors.

This article describes a documented state of affairs on its publication date, not a prediction: later developments may shift its outlook. No update is promised in advance; when an article is corrected or completed, the change is dated in the text.