Two German naval vessels, a supply ship and a frigate, passed through the Taiwan Strait on the way to Jakarta earlier this month, the first time in 22 years that a German warship has transited the Strait.
German Minister of Defense Boris Pistorius announced the transit in Berlin on Friday last week, saying that “international waters are international waters,” and that the transit was in full compliance with international law.
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) views the situation differently. Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokeswoman Mao Ning (毛寧) said that the Taiwan Strait is part of China’s internal waters and therefore part of its exclusive economic zone, and that the passage of the German vessels was provocative, threatened China’s sovereignty, and could put regional peace and stability at risk.
The Taiwan Strait being part of China’s internal waters is consistent with the CCP’s territorial claims over Taiwan. If other nations pay lip service to China’s “one China” principle in their individual “one China” policies, the CPP can say it has a legitimate basis for its “internal waters” claim.
A Ministry of Foreign Affairs news release in June 2022 said that Chinese officials had repeatedly claimed in meetings with the US that the Taiwan Strait does not constitute international waters. The news release refuted these claims and the ministry “reiterate[d] that the Taiwan Strait is international waters and that freedom of the high seas as defined in international law applies to waters beyond Taiwan’s territorial sea limits.”
The German warship transit was the action backing up Pistorius’ words. A more explicit clarification of individual governments exercising their rights of passage through international waters needs to be made to push back against the CCP’s claims.
Ships proceeding south from Japan can take onboard containers in various locations, including Taiwan and the Philippines, sail into the South China Sea and on to Singapore, and from there go through the Strait of Malacca and on to India and Europe. It is also an oil route connecting East Asia with the Middle East. Recognition of the Taiwan Strait as international waters has real and significant implications for global trade.
Looked at from this perspective, one can see yet another aspect of the CCP’s designs over Taiwan as an extension of its claims over virtually all of the South China Sea that forms the basis of the current tensions between Beijing and Manila, and a potential new issue between Beijing and Tokyo.
Japan’s Nikkei Asia magazine has reported that China might be preparing to establish a Ryukyu research center, possibly to back up new CCP rhetoric questioning Japan’s sovereignty over the Ryukyu island chain, which includes Okinawa as well as the Senkaku Islands, known in Taiwan and China as the Diaoyutais (釣魚台). This is not the first time we have seen evidence of CCP officials and Chinese nationalists bringing up the “undecided status” of the islands.
Exactly what is behind the CCP’s “Ryuku card” strategy is unclear. Looking at a map of the Ryukyu islands arc extending from the southern tip of Japan to the east coast of Taiwan, it is not difficult to see how it would impact China’s ambitions to control the first island chain and shipping lanes.
Although the CCP’s rhetoric over Taiwan and the South China Sea is ostensibly about reclaiming its territory lost during its “century of humiliation,” it appears in no rush to take back land in Manchuria stolen by Russia in the 1958 Treaty of Aigun and 1860 Treaty of Beijing.
This apparent contradiction is behind President William Lai’s (賴清德) invocation of Aigun and why the treaties have sparked such interest in Taiwan and overseas.
The time is ripe to respond to the CCP’s false narratives with facts and increased scrutiny.
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
RSS