Former French president Jacques Chirac left office on May 17. His successor, Nicolas Sarkozy, may be the most US-friendly French president since the creation of the Fifth Republic.
In his book Testimony, Sarkozy tells readers of his positive feelings for the US. During a visit to New York City in September to participate in a Sept. 11, 2001, memorial, when he was still interior minister, Sarkozy criticized Chirac's foreign policy, saying he believed France had made a big mistake by opposing the war in Iraq in 2003, promoting his political opponents to mockingly call him an American.
In his victory speech, Sarkozy said he would make an effort to improve France's relationship with the US and that the US could count on France's friendship.
Following changes in the political map of Europe in the past few years, Chirac had become the only European leader to insist on lifting the EU's arms embargo on China.
Although Sarkozy will introduce changes to France's traditionally Gaullist foreign policy, there may also be some changes to Chirac's policy of joining with China to counterbalance the US. This would make the EU's recent efforts to reach a compromise with the US over cross-strait policy clearer.
Thus, in the short term, the EU is unlikely to lift its arms embargo on China.
The controversy regarding the EU's potential lifting of its arms embargo on China originates from the Iraq War of 2003, a war that lead to a good deal of controversy between the US and the EU and during which the US seriously damaged the UN's authority.
It has also expressed a willingness to use its status as the only remaining superpower to pursue a unilateral foreign policy prioritizing US interests. This has generated a backlash among some European countries working toward a multipolar world. France worries that the world will become unipolar, which would damage its pursuit of a powerful and independent foreign policy.
In order to prevent a unipolar world dominated by the US, France has been actively engaging China. The two countries share policy goals such as the pursuit of a multipolar world and strengthening the UN's role. Under the direction of France, the EU also seeks to strengthen its relations with China and tries to improve their strategic relationship.
Both states try to co-opt and use the other to counterbalance the US.
Given these circumstances, France in 2004 pushed the EU to lift its arms embargo on China, which has always been seen as a major obstacle to the Sino-European relationship.
However, at a time when the EU was about to reach a unanimous agreement on lifting the embargo, the US strongly opposed the decision, which lead to a half year-long conflict between the US and the EU. During this process, many EU countries that value their relations with the US changed their past China policy mindset based on economic considerations to review the Sino-European relationship from a broader strategic view. It is clear that the the Atlanticist view weighed more heavily.
The embargo debate came to an end after Beijing officially passed the "Anti-Secession" Law (
But the embargo debate did lead to a re-evaluation of the EU's China policy. Especially after 10 eastern European countries joined the EU in May 2004, these new members have been unwilling to ignore US opinion. Also, the French-German alliance that dominated the push to lift the embargo collapsed after German Chancellor Angela Merkel came to power in late 2005. This trend could become even more obvious after pro-US French President Nicolas Sarkozy's coming to power last month.
The EU has made subtle adjustments to its China policy and is now more willing to cooperate with the US against China. The two sides have gradually adopted a more compromising but picky stance, demanding that Beijing adjust its trade policy and make its military expenditure more transparent. Although the EU is still adjusting or even searching for a cross-strait policy, this process has already meant that the lifting of the embargo has been greatly delayed. The impact this will have on Taiwan and the development of Taiwan-EU relations should not be overlooked and Taiwan should seize the opportunity this represents.
Chen Shih-min is an assistant professor in the Department of Political Science at National Taiwan University.
Translated by Lin Ya-ti and Eddy Chang
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion
RSS