Seeing former British prime minister Liz Truss visit Taiwan, pro-China politicians unfamiliar with British politics have lashed out by calling her a “washed-up political figure” who is seeking to make political capital out of the visit. With British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak backtracking on a pledge to shut down 30 Chinese state-sponsored Confucius Institutes across the UK, these politicians capitalized on the opportunity to disparage the significance of her visit to Taiwan.
However, anyone familiar with British politics would know that Truss is anything but a “washed up second-rate” politician. Chinese officials should not be so quick to write her off, as there remains the possibility that she could return as foreign secretary or assume another prominent government office.
When former British prime minister Margaret Thatcher visited Taiwan in 1992, she was no longer a member of the House of Commons who exercised real power, but a peer in the House of Lords, which is essentially a retirement position. However, as Truss is still a sitting member of the House of Commons, she has every opportunity of re-entering the Cabinet, especially as one of the four Great Offices of State: prime minister, chancellor of the exchequer, home secretary and foreign secretary.
Therefore, Truss’ visit is significant because it marks the first time a former British prime minister who is still an MP has set foot in Taiwan. As long as she remains an MP and the UK needs her, the chances of her being appointed to a major office are still on the table, as in the case of former British prime minister Winston Churchill, who served twice as prime minister.
So far, Sunak ally British Chancellor of the Exchequer Jeremy Hunt and the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office’s pro-China policy are not winning favor with the British public. The hawkish wing of the governing Conservative Party has established the China Research Group, an influential political organization modeled after the European Research Group that pushed for a no-nonsense, hard Brexit. Following the Conservative Party’s heavy losses in the local elections early this month, Sunak could be pressured into stepping down or ousted by his backbenchers in due course.
While Truss is visiting Taiwan as the G7 summit goes on in Hiroshima, Japan, her predecessor, Boris Johnson, flew to South Korea. The two displayed the Conservative Party’s hardline policy on China, and called on G7 leaders to take a tougher stance toward Beijing as it seeks to challenge the US-led global order.
Consequently, Truss’ argument during her visit in Taiwan could one day turn into policy.
“They [China] have already formed alliances with other nations that want to see the free world in decline. They have already made a choice about their strategy. The only choice we have is whether we appease and accommodate — or we take action to prevent conflict,” Truss said.
On the other side of the world, a 10-strong bipartisan delegation led by US Representative Mike Gallagher, chairman of the Select Committee on the Strategic Competition Between the US and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), is to spend three days in the UK meeting British ministers, officials and backbenchers to discuss a common approach to hostile activities by the CCP.
In view of these other events, Truss’ visit to Taiwan is not only an open display of support for Taiwan, but also a wake-up call for businesspeople, China Hands and politicians who still harbor fantasies about China. Anyone who deemed Truss an “out-of-touch politician” is out of touch with British politics.
Martin Oei is a Hong Kong-born British political commentator based in Germany and a member of the British Conservative Party.
Translated by Rita Wang
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
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS