The escalating tensions across Taiwan are not isolated provocations—they are calculated maneuvers in China’s evolving blueprint for hybrid warfare. Unlike traditional military campaigns, this strategy seeks to conquer Taiwan without destroying its infrastructure or economy, aiming instead to coerce submission under a pretense of “peaceful” unification.

China’s approach to this “war without harm” involves a systematic five-phase strategy: sabotaging critical infrastructure, waging cognitive warfare through disinformation, conducting cyber-physical convergence attacks, employing military encirclement, and leveraging political subversion. Recent incidents, including the Matsu cable sabotage and disinformation campaigns during Taiwan’s 2024 elections, provide a glimpse of what future efforts to destabilize Taiwanese defense and erode public trust might look like. The attacks represent more than just scattered provocations among the typical ebb and flow of cross-Strait relations—they constitute a new model for hybrid warfare, one designed to neutralize Taiwan’s ability to resist while preserving its value as an economic and strategic asset.

Here’s how a Taiwan conflict might play out under this new hybrid warfare paradigm:

Phase One: Cutting Taiwan Off from the World via Infrastructure Sabotage

The first phase involves operations that leverage non-military and proxy actors, such as state-aligned civilian vessels, to target infrastructure in such a way that creates a classic ‘gray zone’ dilemma for Taiwanese policymakers. To respond risks escalating tensions and alienating international support, as any retaliation can be framed as aggression against non-combatants. Conversely, failing to respond allows China to continue disrupting Taiwan’s critical systems unchecked. This strategic ambiguity is central to China’s hybrid warfare strategy, enabling significant disruption while evading direct attribution.

Documented incidents attest to how this strategy is neither isolated nor unprecedented. In February 2023, Chinese vessels severed cables near the Matsu Islands, leaving residents and businesses without internet access for over 50 days . A similar operation in January 2025 targeted the Trans Pacific Express Cable System, with Chinese-linked entities concealing their involvement through sophisticated vessel-tracking obfuscation. The operations align with a broader global pattern of infrastructure sabotage, as seen in the 2024 Baltic Sea attacks, where China-linked vessels disrupted European undersea networks to gain strategic leverage without triggering conventional retaliation.

In a hypothetical wartime scenario, infrastructure sabotage would serve as the opening salvo of a broader campaign, crippling communications, financial systems, and operational coordination before conventional hostilities begin. The $10 trillion digital economy and Taiwan’s pivotal role in global semiconductor production amplify the consequences of such attacks, creating cascading effects on global supply chains, financial stability, and military readiness. These disruptions would obstruct international crisis response, delay allied support, and deepen Taiwan’s isolation in the critical opening stages of a conflict. By plunging Taiwan into a state of isolation and chaos, these actions pave the way for the next wave of hybrid warfare: cognitive manipulation.

Phase Two: Manufacturing Chaos and Consent via Cognitive Warfare

With Taiwan’s external connections disrupted, the CCP moves to shape perceptions within Taiwanese society, leveraging state-controlled media and coordinated bot networks to flood the information space with disinformation, sowing division and confusion.

Taiwan’s 2024 presidential election already showcased advanced CCP capabilities in the information sphere. AI-generated disinformation campaigns, including deepfakes and synthetic narratives, sought to influence voter behavior and undermine democratic processes. Historical influencing ops like distributing paper propaganda have now evolved into sophisticated digital operations, though the goal remains the same: manipulating perceptions and fracturing societal trust.

The psychological toll of this phase compounds the isolation caused by the infrastructure sabotage, leaving the Taiwanese public vulnerable to Beijing’s strategic domination of the narrative. By spreading divisive narratives and exploiting cultural and linguistic similarities, Beijing deepens societal fractures and creates an environment of uncertainty and fear. Here we see China’s next-generation psychological warfare strategy in action, where destabilizing adversaries takes precedence over direct confrontation.

Phase Three: Disrupting Communications via Electronic Warfare

China then escalates its hybrid warfare strategy to electronic warfare (EW), a distinct phase targeting Taiwan’s technological backbone. Where the first phase engenders physical isolation by severing underseas cables, EW seeks to disrupt Taiwan’s operational capability by impairing GPS and communication networks in and around the islands, impacting both military and civilian functionality.

China’s EW arsenal includes radar jamming, electromagnetic pulse (EMP) weapons, and GPS interference—tools demonstrated during PLA Navy drills in 2024, which obstructed critical maritime logistics routes near Taiwan. By disabling GPS systems, EW renders Taiwan’s reliance on advanced military technologies, such as drones, guided munitions, and precision navigation, ineffective. Civilian supply chains also suffer as logistical operations falter under disrupted communications.

Compounding these challenges is Taiwan’s lack of an independent satellite system, leaving it reliant on foreign partners for critical data. In contrast, China’s dominance in space-based infrastructure provides it with uninterrupted access to satellite capabilities, creating an asymmetric advantage that Taiwan cannot counter. This airspace and satellite disparity deepens Taiwan’s strategic vulnerability, as Beijing can isolate the island technologically while ensuring its own systems remain operational.

This stage differs from earlier phases in its direct incapacitation of Taiwan’s operational systems. While cable sabotage engenders physical disconnection and cognitive warfare sows informational chaos, EW disables the technological tools needed to navigate and respond. The collapse of GPS and communication infrastructure traps Taiwan in a state of systemic paralysis, affecting both strategic defense and everyday civilian functions.

By integrating these sequential disruptions, China effectively preconditions the battlefield before a single conventional shot is fired.

Phase Four: Military Encirclement

In the next phase the PLA attempts to seize the advantage amid Taiwan’s isolation and technological incapacitation, surrounding the island with overwhelming military power, hoping to amplify fear and weaken resistance. Military aircraft violate Taiwan’s Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) in record numbers, while warships position themselves along critical maritime routes, simulating a blockade. These actions create a no-exit scenario, signaling to both Taiwan and the international community that any attempt at intervention could escalate into direct conflict.

The simultaneous deployment of naval assets and long-range bombers erases the distinction between military signaling and active siege tactics. When conducted under the conditions of informational and technological disconnection, such maneuvers become exponentially more intimidating.

The 2024 “Joint Sword” exercises appeared to be a rehearsal for this phase, with missile overflights and encirclement drills demonstrating Beijing’s readiness to enforce physical isolation

Phase Five: United Front Destabilization and Political Subversion

Exploiting years of groundwork by the United Front Work Department, Beijing activates its network of infiltrators within Taiwan’s military, governance, and media sectors to push for surrender. Espionage cases like the 2022 scandal involving Taiwanese Colonel Hsiang Te-en, who accepted bribes for signing a surrender letter, demonstrate how internal actors are being primed to align with Beijing’s objectives in a moment of crisis. Espionage incidents have surged between 2022-24, some involving military personnel and officials compromising national security; for example, a former Presidential Office aide leaking sensitive documents to China earlier this year.

Simultaneously, United Front-linked institutions such as Jinan and Huaqiao Universities cultivate pro-Beijing sympathies among Taiwanese students through scholarships and career incentives, ensuring a steady supply of ideological allies. These efforts are reinforced by Chinese propaganda infiltrating Taiwanese news outlets and disinformation campaigns flooding social media during critical moments, such as the 2024 presidential election, to sow division and undermine resistance.

In this final stage, infiltrators emerge publicly, leveraging the chaos caused by severed communications and disrupted logistics to urge surrender and the acceptance of Beijing’s terms. Without firing a single shot, China’s hybrid warfare strategy culminates in internal collapse, achieving domination through meticulously orchestrated subversion.

Policy Implications and Recommendations

Each phase presents distinct threats requiring its own tailored solutions, all while contributing to an overarching strategy of resilience and deterrence:

• To increase resilience to critical infrastructure sabotage, Taiwan must prioritize securing its undersea communication cables above all. While technologies such as real-time distributed temperature sensing systems have been implemented in limited contexts, these capabilities should be expanded to provide comprehensive island-wide monitoring. Rapid-response units equipped with advanced repair technologies are also essential to minimize downtime in the event of sabotage. Taiwan should further strengthen its international collaborations to gain actionable intelligence on submarine activities and coordinate maritime security patrols with regional allies, addressing gaps in surveillance and response, which remain critical weak points.
• To counteract cognitive warfare and the spread of AI-driven disinformation, Taiwan must institutionalize media literacy and public education programs across all levels of society. These efforts should be supported by advanced AI systems designed to detect and neutralize false narratives rapidly. Enhancing cooperation with democratic allies and international organizations will be vital in bolstering Taiwan’s capacity to combat election interference and other psychological operations effectively. While existing initiatives show promise, notably Taiwan’s efforts to boost disinformation resilience surrounding elections, scaling them to meet the growing complexity of these threats is imperative.
• Shoring up critical communications systems calls for new investments in cyber-physical convergence defenses, including those already allocated for shielding drones and command networks, all of which must be integrated into a cohesive defense architecture. Developing indigenous satellite capabilities to ensure resilience against space-based disruptions is an urgent priority, as this will reduce reliance on foreign partners. Taiwan’s participation in international training programs, such as its investment in the “Viper Shield” electronic warfare system for F-16s, underscores its commitment to advancing electronic defense capabilities, though challenges remain in achieving full-spectrum readiness.
• A potential military encirclement can be blunted through proactive efforts to counter isolation and assert sovereignty. By expanding naval and aerial patrols, Taiwan can reinforce its presence in territorial waters and airspace. Strengthening alliances through joint regional exercises simulating encirclement scenarios will also enhance readiness and deterrence. Public preparedness programs should also be bolstered to maintain civilian morale and resilience in the face of prolonged isolation. Taiwan’s government has already taken key steps to protect electoral integrity from foreign manipulation, a foundation that must be expanded to encompass broader civil and military preparedness.

Ultimately, addressing these interconnected threats requires a whole-of-society approach. Taiwan’s legal frameworks must be updated to counter political subversion, including revisions to Foreign Influence Registration Laws modeled after international best practices, such as those in Australia. Technological innovation, particularly in autonomous defense systems and AI-driven monitoring, should be accelerated to outpace adversarial advances. Strengthening diplomatic ties and diversifying international partnerships are equally essential to mitigate geopolitical isolation and build a robust network of allies. But above all, if the Taiwanese government is to rise to the challenge of China’s evolving hybrid warfare capacity, it will have to raise its own level of proactive preparedness to that being displayed by Beijing.