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
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of