Before attending a three-day G7 summit in Hiroshima, Japan, which concluded on Tuesday, German Minister for Foreign Affairs Annalena Baerbock visited China and South Korea.
While in China, she co-chaired with Chinese Minister of Foreign Affairs Qin Gang (秦剛) the sixth round of the China-Germany Strategic Dialogue on Diplomacy and Security, and met with his predecessor, Chinese Central Foreign Affairs Commission Director Wang Yi (王毅).
Baerbock is clearly a hardliner toward China. As a former deputy chair of the German Bundestag’s Berlin-Taipei Parliamentary Circle of Friends, she is not unfamiliar with Taiwan affairs.
She takes a firm stand on human rights issues, especially those concerning Xinjiang and Hong Kong. During her meetings with Chinese leaders, she did not hold back from talking about China’s human rights environment, and she warned China against making any unilateral change to the “status quo” in the Taiwan Strait.
Baerbock’s visit to China was not expected to produce any substantial benefit. Her main purpose was to warn China to be cautious in its handling of Taiwan. Her statements came as a slap in the face to French President Emmanuel Macron after he said that Europeans should not be “followers” of either the US or China with regard to Taiwan.
Baerbock said in China that tensions around Taiwan directly affect European and global economies, and reiterated that the EU’s position on Taiwan has been consistent and unchanged, adding that Taiwan is a reliable Asian partner for the EU and shares common societal values.
Wang told Baerbock that China had supported the reunification of East and West Germany, and that Germany should likewise support China in achieving a “peaceful reunification” with Taiwan. He even said that Taiwan’s “return” to China was an important part of the post-World War II international order.
Beijing insists that issues regarding Taiwan’s governance are “China’s internal affairs” and it does not tolerate interference by “foreign forces.” Wang said that “Taiwan independence forces” were the real cause of cross-strait tensions.
These statements show that China’s stance regarding Taiwan is completely at odds with that of the free world. Along with other factors such as China’s past “wolf warrior” diplomacy and its attitude toward Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, they give the EU reason to doubt that China is willing to uphold the international order. Its behavior is limiting the scope for preserving the “status quo” in the Taiwan Strait.
Baerbock made her position clear. While saying that any military escalation by China would be unacceptable, she added that Germany has no interest in economic decoupling.
However, she said that Germany should learn lessons from its reliance on Russian energy resources and reduce the risk of unilateral dependencies. These are close to the views of European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, who received a cool reception from China when she accompanied Macron on his visit from April 5 to 7.
Baerbock’s statements were doubtlessly meant to signal to China that playing the economic and trade market card no longer works. They also show that Germany and the EU are prepared for greater economic decoupling from China.
For Germany, the most important element of the Chinese market is automobile manufacturing, but that industry also depends on semiconductors manufactured in Taiwan. Furthermore, the Taiwan Strait is an important international shipping route, so Germany and the EU naturally want to reduce geopolitical risks.
Whether China’s relations with Germany continue as a partner, competitor or systemic rival depends on which path China chooses.
Germany’s attitude has changed from the era of former German chancellor Angela Merkel. Baerbock’s China visit could be interpreted as a message to Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) that Germany would not take the side of the invader.
Hong Tsun-ming, who is originally from Hong Kong, is a specialist in the Taiwan Statebuilding Party’s international section.
Translated by Julian Clegg
What began on Feb. 28 as a military campaign against Iran quickly became the largest energy-supply disruption in modern times. Unlike the oil crises of the 1970s, which stemmed from producer-led embargoes, US President Donald Trump is the first leader in modern history to trigger a cascading global energy crisis through direct military action. In the process, Trump has also laid bare Taiwan’s strategic and economic fragilities, offering Beijing a real-time tutorial in how to exploit them. Repairing the damage to Persian Gulf oil and gas infrastructure could take years, suggesting that elevated energy prices are likely to persist. But the most
In late January, Taiwan’s first indigenous submarine, the Hai Kun (海鯤, or Narwhal), completed its first submerged dive, reaching a depth of roughly 50m during trials in the waters off Kaohsiung. By March, it had managed a fifth dive, still well short of the deep-water and endurance tests required before the navy could accept the vessel. The original delivery deadline of November last year passed months ago. CSBC Corp, Taiwan, the lead contractor, now targets June and the Ministry of National Defense is levying daily penalties for every day the submarine remains unfinished. The Hai Kun was supposed to be
Most schoolchildren learn that the circumference of the Earth is about 40,000km. They do not learn that the global economy depends on just 160 of those kilometers. Blocking two narrow waterways — the Strait of Hormuz and the Taiwan Strait — could send the economy back in time, if not to the Stone Age that US President Donald Trump has been threatening to bomb Iran back to, then at least to the mid-20th century, before the Rolling Stones first hit the airwaves. Over the past month and a half, Iran has turned the Strait of Hormuz, which is about 39km wide at
The ongoing Middle East crisis has reinforced an uncomfortable truth for Taiwan: In an increasingly interconnected and volatile world, distant wars rarely remain distant. What began as a regional confrontation between the US, Israel and Iran has evolved into a strategic shock wave reverberating far beyond the Persian Gulf. For Taiwan, the consequences are immediate, material and deeply unsettling. From Taipei’s perspective, the conflict has exposed two vulnerabilities — Taiwan’s dependence on imported energy and the risks created when Washington’s military attention is diverted. Together, they offer a preview of the pressures Taiwan might increasingly face in an era of overlapping geopolitical
RSS