It would be easy to look at headlines about the new UK government’s desire to boost economic and political cooperation with the People’s Republic of China (PRC) and shake your head with wonder. How little time has passed since the failure of then-British prime minister David Cameron and Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) “Golden Decade.”
A government that is rightly concerned about the security implications of certain Chinese foreign direct investments into the UK should probably not go to Beijing to beg for more.
A government concerned about Chinese annexationist intrusions into the Philippines’ exclusive economic zone, well-documented human right abuses and the contempt displayed by the running of extra-legal Chinese police operations on UK soil, should probably not make China the center-piece of a strategy to boost the domestic economy and tackle climate change. On the surface, the present course of UK-China relations might not augur well for Taiwan-UK relations.
However, developments in Taiwan-UK relations last year reveal that, despite no major change to the UK’s core position on Taiwan, there were a few promising signs to indicate that the UK is starting to realize how important Taiwan is to UK interests.
In March last year, the UK House of Commons hosted a debate on the Taiwan Strait. Subsequently, a delegation of Labour MPs visited Taiwan. In April, it was then announced that the Labour Party would be seeking cooperation with Taiwan in small and medium-enterprise development.
Taiwanese cultural outreach to the UK was seen in the Experience Taiwan festival, held in April at Lyric Square in Hammersmith by the Student Union Republic of China (ROC) Taiwan in the UK and the UK Taiwanese Chamber of Commerce. The event was designed as a way to promote Taiwanese food and culture in the UK, and to provide a place for Taiwanese students to enjoy their home food while overseas. It drew more than 4,000 attendees.
In May, the UK and Taiwan signed an organics equivalence memorandum of understanding, which enabled the resumption of UK exports of most processed organic products to Taiwan and meant the UK regarded Taiwanese organic regulations as sufficiently similar to the UK’s to allow reciprocation.
The UK also joined the US, Australia and Taiwan in staging the Global Cooperation and Training Framework energy transition workshop in Malaysia.
The same month saw a debate called “Defending Taiwan: A roadmap for the urgent policy steps to avoid a war,” attended by the then-British security minister Tom Tugendhat and former US deputy security advisor Matt Pottinger. Pottinger argued that Europe’s role in confronting PRC adventurism toward Taiwan would be mostly diplomatic and economic, but should come well in advance and not when hostilities have already started.
This aligns with the position of the Taiwan Policy Centre that the UK should lead the way in making clear to China the costs it would incur from any military action against Taiwan.
With the UK general election campaign in full swing by June of last year, it was pleasing to see the issue of Taiwan taken seriously by one of the major parties in parliament in the form of the Liberal Democrats issuing their manifesto — the first to explicitly recognize Taiwan as a country and call for deeper diplomatic relations between the UK and Taiwan.
Over in Taiwan, the second Taiwan-UK health technology assessment workshop focused on funding methods for new cancer drugs. That followed a cooperative agreement that the National Health Insurance Administration and the UK’s National Institute for Health Care and Excellence signed in May 2023. In November, the UK and Taiwan hosted a renewable energy conference and dialogue. The UK continues to play a large role in Taiwan’s wind power projects.
In the UK Houses of Parliament, Taiwan was raised numerous times throughout the year with 50 mentions in questions in the Commons and Lords, as well as during four Commons debates and three Lords debates.
In a Commons debate in November, entitled “Taiwan: International Status,” it was resolved that UN Resolution 2758 of Oct. 25, 1971, did not mention Taiwan, did not address the political status of Taiwan or establish PRC sovereignty over Taiwan, and that it was silent on the status of Taiwan in the UN as well as on Taiwanese participation in UN agencies.
The Commons resolution called on the UK Government to clarify its position that UN Resolution 2758 does not establish the “one China” principle as a matter of international law, to state clearly that nothing in law prevents the participation of Taiwan in international organisations, and to condemn efforts made by representatives of the PRC to distort the meaning of UN Resolution 2758 in support of Beijing’s “one China” principle.
This debate and resolution marks a landmark in awareness of the issue of Taiwan, at least in the UK Houses of Parliament. However, for now at least, it appears that a growing realization amongst parliamentarians of the consequences of war between China and Taiwan is not yet moving the needle policy-wise.
The Taiwan Policy Centre argues that it is time for the UK government to rationalize its defense of Taiwan on the grounds of Taiwanese right to self-determination. The Taiwanese already govern themselves as a viable and sovereign state, who determine their own laws and diplomacy. It is time for the UK, and the world, to acknowledge this indisputable fact.
Last year saw three separate Chinese intimidations towards Taiwan in the form of “Joint Sword 2024A” in May after President William Lai’s (賴清德) inauguration, and “Joint Sword 2024B” in October after Lai’s National Day speech. A smaller, mostly naval operation took place in the middle of last month. The UK media covered these events, but always through the prism of China relations rather than from Taiwan’s perspective.
So while relations between the UK and Taiwan continue to deepen, to the credit of all involved, awareness of how China threats to Taiwan are real and immediate, and the enormous consequences a blockade or invasion would have on the UK, economically and politically, are not.
We can only hope that this year the UK government would gain a better understanding of what is at stake in the region and for the people who live there. That would be the main focus of the work of the Taiwan Policy Centre this year.
Ben Goren is director of communications for the Taiwan Policy Centre.
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