Good morning and happy Sunday,

This is Pacific Weekly, a special edition of The Intel Brief intended to keep you updated on events across the hotly contested Indo-Pacific region.

Reporting Period: 16-22 December 2024

Bottom-Line Up Front:

US Lawmakers Demand Retaliation Amid Chinese Cyber, Information Warfare Attacks

Summary
On December 16, Representative Moolenaar, Chairman of the Select Committee on the CCP, and Representative Mark Green, Chairman of the Homeland Security Committee, published an opinion editorial addressing China’s persistent cyber threats. They highlighted the Salt Typhoon attack as not just an isolated incident but a clear example of China’s hybrid warfare strategies. The representatives cautioned that China is positioned for future cyberattacks and emphasized the need for Congress and the Trump administration to implement stronger protections and enforce stricter penalties.

Findings

• Options: The article by Moolenaar and Green propose some options for dealing with malign Chinese attacks:

  • Exploit inter-CCP political vulnerabilities and insecurities

  • Expose corruption, assets, activities of malign CCP officials

  • Pursue offensive cyber operations against Chinese espionage and sabotage actors

  • Improve federal and corporate (private) cybersecurity standards and cooperation

• Salt Typhoon: The recent telecommunications cyberattack, perpetrated by the CCP-linked Salt Typhoon group, is the largest penetration into US networks by Chinese hackers ever. The hack infiltrated more than a dozen telecommunication companies and penetrated classified networks in addition to stealing customer data and metadata. The Salt Typhoon attack was carried out over a period of 1-2 years.

• FBI Warning: On 16 December, the FBI warned that the CCP were planning on releasing fake stories about US lawmakers to sow division and decrease support for policies related to Taiwan. The warning states the CCP will portray two US lawmakers as pro-Taiwan due to receiving bribes from Taipei.

• Biden’s Reaction: President Biden has reportedly banned the remaining US-based operations of China Telecom in an effort to hinder Chinese cyber operations. The decision will need to be upheld and adopted by Trump when he takes office, but it would restrict Chinese access into internet and phone networks.

Why This Matters
Cyber warfare is proving to be a favored tool of multipolar powers like China, North Korea, Russia, and Iran due to their low cost, high frequency, and high efficiency.

• National Security: Cyberattacks disrupt critical infrastructure, like power grids, telecommunication, healthcare, financial services, or transportation, to extoll high costs or exploit other ongoing crises — the goal is to always create or expand on secondary or tertiary effects. In the case of Salt Typhoon, the attack had the added benefit of stealing classified data for the CCP. Perpetrating cyberattacks also establishes proficiency and allows for pre-positioning for future attacks.

• Economic Impact: Unless assets are directly stolen (e.g. North Korea reportedly stole $1.5bn of crypto currency in 2024), cyberattacks also effect economies by restricting services, stealing intellectual property, and undermining a consumer’s relationship with businesses.

• Public Trust: Perhaps one the greatest advantages to successful cyber campaigns is the damage to public trust in public and private institutions. This can lead to short-term effects like loss of business or influence, or long-term effects like political protests, violence, or apathy.

I would also add that due to cyberattacks often being perpetrated by third parties, there is the added benefit of plausible deniability and disassociation for governments. This means governments who sponsor cyberattacks can often avoid diplomatic or legal repercussions and continue their cyber warfare campaigns.

Despite stated desires to improve relations with the United States under Donald Trump’s leadership, it is very likely that multipolar powers will continue and expand cyber warfare operations.

Sources: Homeland Security, Fox News, NBC News, The New York Times, Stanford Law

China’s PLA Releases List Of Targets In Preparation For War With US, Taiwan

Summary
On 16 December, the South China Morning Post reported that the latest issue of the CCP-administered Defense Industry Conversion magazine published a “target list” of assets in preparation for a potential conflict with Taiwan and the United States.

Findings

• Report: The target list was authored by Mo Jiaqin, an electronic warfare expert in the PLA. The report “precisely labeled” American radars, sensors, and communications systems and how the PLA can target them through electronic warfare. Specifically, Jiaqian claims the PLA can hack, jam, or infiltrate the US Navy’s Cooperative Engagement Capability (CEC) system. The report indicates significant Chinese intelligence collection on US national assets.

• CEC: The CEC is one of the Navy’s advanced communication systems. It allows for multiple sensor-producing agencies to correlate their data into one common operational picture. This data, which is shared between network participants, allows for early warning, composite tracking and identification, and joint targeting by air and ground-based platforms.
  Jiaqian suggests the PLA can overwhelm the system with access requests, or use signals to “infiltrate the CEC network as a cooperative unit and launch attacks.”

Why This Matters
This can be a highly technical conversation but I will try to explain it in layman’s terms as it relates to US strategy and military operations:

The targets identified by Jiaqian are what make up the US military’s command and control (C2) apparatus — the agencies or commanders that manage the myriad forces, systems, actions, and missions on the battlefield to reflect operational or strategic goals.

Those systems — radars, communications, sensors, relays, digital networks, etc. — are the tools that facilitate that coordination and improve awareness.

By disrupting a C2 structure like CEC, the PLA would be able to undermine the authority and efficiency of agencies that manage the US “kill chain” — the process of identifying, tracking, targeting, and engaging valid military targets during wartime. This potentially gives the PLA a significant advantage during a conflict by slowing a US-led military response and dismembering joint capabilities.

Sources: South China Morning Post, Express, Anadolu Ajansi, Johns Hopkins University, MCDP 6 Command and Control

Xi Jinping Continues Purges Amid Corruption, Espionage Allegations

Summary
On 16 December, Xi Jinping published an article in the CCP’s Qiushi magazine stating that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) must “turn the knife inward” to root out ideological inconsistency, corruption, and lack of discipline. At the Central Commission for Discipline Inspection, Xi played down the threat, stating changes in leadership and style will “inevitably lead to various conflicts and problems within the party.”

Findings

• Tigers and Flies: When Xi took power in 2012, he began his tenure with a series of political and military purges in an effort to control the ideological and decision-making structure of the CCP. He proposed rooting out “Tigers” (formidable dissidents) and “Flies” (the self-serving corrupt) from the party. Xi has purged dozens of high-ranking military officials or CCP elites, including two sitting Defense Ministers (Li Shengfu and Wei Fenghe).

• Foreign Espionage: On 16 December, the Global Times reported that the Ministry of State Security (MSS) had identified three Chinese security officials who conducted espionage for a foreign power. All three individuals reportedly had access to classified information. The article, published the same day as Xi’s, likely serves as a warning and justification for his continued purges.

• Continued Purges: The current Defense Minister, Dong Jun, was recently under investigation for corruption allegations, but has since returned to his duties. It is possible that Dong Jun, averting a purge, is still under surveillance by the MSS.

• Pentagon Report: Key findings from the Pentagon’s 2024 China Military Power Report indicate that the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) experienced heightened levels of corruption among senior leaders. The report cites the purge of 15 senior officers and defense industry executives from July to December 2023.

These findings are consistent with a Long-Form Analytic Report I authored in October 2024 — email me if you would like a copy.

Why This Matters
Remember, the question this all comes back to is whether or not China is capable of seizing Taiwan and, to another degree, will it do so by 2027?

The report undoubtedly reflects a rapidly growing PLA; both in size and capability. However, potential security issues within China’s sphere of influence raise questions about whether or not the PLA could sustain multiple crises at one time.

Additionally, persistent reporting on purges and CCP elite corruption raise questions as to how effective, or willing, the PLA would be to wage war across the Indo-Pacific region. This is a part of the China assessment that is hard to gauge due to the PLA having limited combat experience. What we see with aerial and naval incursions is that the PLA is more than willing to carryout bullying policies as it seeks diplomatic, economic, or subversive resolutions to strategic issues over time.

The report also fails to address, in deep detail, how China may experience civil unrest, protest, or revolt in the event of conflict. Economic and COVID-related protests were the largest China has seen since Tiananmen Square, and Beijing knows it must dedicate substantial resources and manpower to keeping the Chinese populace in compliance with regime failures — no matter how well they hide them from the world.

Bottom-Line: China is persistently approaching military parity with the US and will pursue strategic gains through conflict when it feels certain it can do so successfully.

Sources: Times of India, Reuters, CNN, Global Times, VOA, DOD

Key Facts: Pentagon’s 2024 PLA Report

Summary
On 18 December, the Pentagon released its annual report that analyzes China’s military capability. In a Global Times article, China’s Foreign Ministry played down the report, stating “like the ones we’ve seen before, it lays little emphasis on truth,” and that labeling China a threat is a tool of military supremacy. There are some critical facts presented in the 182-page report.

Findings
Please note that this is an extremely expedited summary of the Pentagon report. That being said, it should attune you to some critical talking-points and policy concerns. I highly encourage you to read these findings and then expand your knowledge-base by reviewing specific section in the report (linked below):

• China’s Strategy: China wants to pursue the “Great Rejuvenation of the Chinese nation” by 2049, a strategy that demands extraordinary expansion of national power in diplomatic, informational, military, and economic environments. Two key goals are overtaking the US economy as the global leader and the integration of Taiwan into “One China.” The existence of separatist Chinese states (e.g. Hong Kong, Xinjiang, Tibet, and Taiwan) is the CCP’s persistent external threat and rallying national cause.

• Global Presence: The PLA is further developing its “offshore” military capability through the construction of a blue water navy, island reclamation, overseas military activity, and building overseas bases. While these developments support China’s ability to seize Taiwan, they also progress China’s position as a regional hegemon despite US-led efforts to contain Beijing.

• Spending: An analysis of China’s military indicates that Beijing’s annual defense spending consistently exceeds public figures, with the CCP pushing upwards of $450 billion to defense in 2024. China is rapidly expanding its navy, rocket force, and electronic warfare capabilities.

• Corruption: As mentioned, the report indicates the CCP and PLA have ongoing corruption issues, a problem Xi repeatedly attempts to clamp down on in order to guarantee military efficiency and compliance.

• Belt and Road Initiative: China’s BRI is the foundation of Beijing’s foreign policy; it is how it coerces regional and global partners into working-with or invest in China. Its investment peaked between 2016-2018, but is likely to see rejuvenated efforts. BRI is also a cornerstone of China’s policies in the developing world or “Global South.” BRI, as we see in Myanmar, can be used to justify the deployment of security forces abroad.

• Emerging Technology: The CCP is pressuring the defense, tech, and civil industries to develop AI, quantum, and biotech capabilities in order to win the 21st century’s technology race. Beijing believes key emerging technologies will dominate all areas of national power in the future, and harnessing their capabilities before adversaries is a growing strategic goal.

• Military Disposition: The PLA is the largest military in the world with 2 million active, 510,000 reserve, and 500,000 paramilitary personnel. The PLA Navy has 370 ships and submarines, including 3 aircraft carriers. The PLA is working to become a “world class” military capable of frequent and efficient multidomain operations. The PLA has yet to develop urban warfare and long-range logistics capabilities which complicates an invasion of Taiwan. This is also a critical vulnerability in the event of simultaneous conflicts at geographic flashpoints, such as Xinjiang, Tibet, Korea, Taiwan, or along the BRI.

• Rocket Force: The PLA Rocket Force is a critical asset for the PLA and CCP. The PLARF maintains a growing arsenal capable of striking critical targets well beyond the second island chain. Providing the PLA with incredible stand-off fires and first-strike capability, this is a strategic center of gravity for China.

• Nuclear Capability: China’s nuclear capability is growing and its ICBMs are capable of striking the continental US. The PLA is developing a Launch on Warning system, similar to the US and Russia, that would allow Beijing to detect and launch missiles before an adversary first-strike would detonate on targets.

Sources: Military and Security Developments Involving the People’s Republic of China (2024), Global Times

End Brief

That concludes this edition of Pacific Weekly.

I think this edition is particularly important/valuable, so if you are at the end having skimmed it, consider making a deeper readthrough this evening.

Thanks for being a subscriber!

See you tomorrow,

Nick