Last year, China entered into a spat with Lithuania over Vilnius allowing Taipei to open a de facto embassy using the name “Taiwan.” Beijing recalled its ambassadors from Lithuania and downgraded its diplomatic ties with the Baltic state to the “charge d’affaires” level.
In hindsight, China should realize that this move handed Lithuania on a plate to Taiwan.
China used its economic leverage as punishment. First, it tried to pressure German industry giant Continental AG to stop using Lithuanian-made components. When an EU trade commissioner said that Chinese customs were refusing to clear goods containing Lithuanian parts, China denied it was at fault, but it was too late; it had crossed the EU’s red line in adopting unfair trade measures.
China, which has been using its economic clout to bully others, underestimated Lithuania. What started as a diplomatic dispute evolved into an issue that concerns “safeguarding the European single market from attack.”
France, which has assumed the EU presidency, was keen to deploy anti-coercion trade measures. German Minister of Foreign Affairs Annalena Baerbock said that the EU would stand in solidarity against China’s threats, while the US has voiced its support for Vilnius.
China then tried to stir up antagonistic sentiment between Lithuanian President Gitanas Nauseda and Lithuanian Prime Minister Ingrida Simonyte. The president had expressed his annoyance that he was not consulted on the name for the Taiwanese representative office.
To China’s grave disappointment, Nauseda was just expressing affronted feelings for the undermining of his authority on foreign relations, while Lithuanian Minister of Foreign Affairs Gabrielius Landsbergis reiterated his support for Taiwan.
In an interview in November last year, Lithuanian Member of Parliament Matas Maldeikis, chairman of the Parliamentary Group for Relations with Taiwan, said that the dispute between Nauseda and Simonyte is routine political rivalry in a democratic country.
Beijing’s inclination to take advantage of its trading partners has deteriorated relations with major countries and blocs. The EU, the US and NATO nations’ backing of Lithuania is not just about defending an ally, it is about teaching China a lesson.
The European Parliament is to continue supporting Taiwan by voting on two foreign policy reviews next month. The Common Foreign and Security Policy and Common Security and Defence Policy are said to include pro-Taiwan recommendations and are expected to pass.
Calling Taiwan by its name is not only an act of justice, but a necessity. Now that the EU is aligning with the US to rein in China, Taiwan is an indispensable ally in the anti-China coalition.
What of the name the Republic of China (ROC)? Because of China’s efforts to isolate Taiwan, it has only been able to participate in international activities under alternative names and pseudonyms.
Even though the political situation has changed, there remains a minority of Taiwanese who would like to keep the ROC name. However, if the name has not worked its magic in diplomatic affairs in the past, it would only create further confusion now.
The advocates of the ROC name can freely express their views in private, but in the realm of diplomatic affairs, the government should push for a Taiwanese agenda by using the name Taiwan.
Taiwan’s ability to use its actual name on the international stage should be a given.
Tommy Lin is director of Wu Fu Eye Clinic and president of the Formosa Republican Association.
Translated by Rita Wang
US aerospace company Boeing Co has in recent years been involved in numerous safety incidents, including crashes of its 737 Max airliners, which have caused widespread concern about the company’s safety record. It has recently come to light that titanium jet engine parts used by Boeing and its European competitor Airbus SE were sold with falsified documentation. The source of the titanium used in these parts has been traced back to an unknown Chinese company. It is clear that China is trying to sneak questionable titanium materials into the supply chain and use any ensuing problems as an opportunity to
It’s not every month that the US Department of State sends two deputy assistant secretary-level officials to Taiwan, together. Its rarer still that such senior State Department policy officers, once on the ground in Taipei, make a point of huddling with fellow diplomats from “like-minded” NATO, ANZUS and Japanese governments to coordinate their multilateral Taiwan policies. The State Department issued a press release on June 22 admitting that the two American “representatives” had “hosted consultations in Taipei” with their counterparts from the “Taiwan Ministry of Foreign Affairs.” The consultations were blandly dubbed the “US-Taiwan Working Group on International Organizations.” The State
The Chinese Supreme People’s Court and other government agencies released new legal guidelines criminalizing “Taiwan independence diehard separatists.” While mostly symbolic — the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has never had jurisdiction over Taiwan — Tamkang University Graduate Institute of China Studies associate professor Chang Wu-ueh (張五岳), an expert on cross-strait relations, said: “They aim to explain domestically how they are countering ‘Taiwan independence,’ they aim to declare internationally their claimed jurisdiction over Taiwan and they aim to deter Taiwanese.” Analysts do not know for sure why Beijing is propagating these guidelines now. Under Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), deciphering the
Delegation-level visits between the two countries have become an integral part of transformed relations between India and the US. Therefore, the visit by a bipartisan group of seven US lawmakers, led by US House of Representatives Committee on Foreign Affairs Chairman Michael McCaul to India from June 16 to Thursday last week would have largely gone unnoticed in India and abroad. However, the US delegation’s four-day visit to India assumed huge importance this time, because of the meeting between the US lawmakers and the Dalai Lama. This in turn brings us to the focal question: How and to what extent