Minister of Foreign Affairs Joseph Wu (吳釗燮) on Wednesday spoke at a seminar hosted by the International Center for Defense and Security in Tallinn, Estonia. He praised the country for its courage in allowing him to speak in public in his official capacity as a government minister of Taiwan.
The situation is particularly tense at the moment, as China objects to reports of a prospective Taiwanese representative office being set up in Tallinn.
That same day, Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesman Wang Wenbin (汪文斌) urged Estonia to abide by its “solemn commitment” to the “one China” principle, specifically by “refraining from allowing Taiwan to set up any official organizations and effectively safeguarding the political basis of bilateral relations.”
Behind these events lie a recognition of political courage, Tallinn’s geopolitical balancing act and a not-so-veiled threat from an insecure Chinese Communist Party (CCP).
Wang’s use of the phrase “solemn commitment” is interesting. Is adherence to a “one China” policy, which Wang called the “one China” principle — the distinction is important — really “solemn”? It depends on the perspective. Beijing would have other countries’ governments regard the agreement as a “solemn commitment” because the CCP wants to keep alive the “one China” fiction of Taiwan as an “inalienable part” of China. Beijing wants Tallinn to see it as a solemn commitment, as opposed to an agreement between two governments that it is, to underline the implied threat.
Neither Estonia nor Taiwan are young countries, but the former only became free and independent from the Soviet Union after its fall in 1991, and Taiwan, with its long and storied past, had its most recent “liberation” through the democratic reforms that led to its first direct presidential election in 1996.
Both feel the breath of totalitarian neighbors against their necks; both understand what it is to live under unforgiving regimes. Talk of shared values is not empty rhetoric, it has history and substance.
Aside from that, there are few substantial ties between the two, with insignificant trade figures and little tourist traffic to speak of.
For a long time, the messaging out of Tallinn, whether from the government or the pro-Taiwan Reform Party, was that there was no interest in opening a Taiwan representative office, even though the latter would ideally like to see it happen. Why the change, especially if it is going to irk Beijing so?
According to the Estonian embassy in Beijing, Estonia supports its “one China” policy, and in return, Beijing promises to respect the independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity of Estonia.
Marko Mihkelson of the Reform Party, who has served on the Foreign Affairs Committee of the Riigikogu, Estonia’s parliament, since 2003, has questioned the wisdom of being simultaneously at diplomatic odds with Russia and China.
Estonia fears Russia. It understands the importance of aligning with the EU and the US. Before Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, it balanced this by maintaining good relations with China, a permanent member of the UN Security Council, because it believed Beijing would push back against Russian aggression.
However, values matter. China’s military drills around Taiwan and its human rights issues convinced Estonia to leave the “16+1” China-Central Eastern Europe forum, but the invasion of Ukraine and Beijing’s refusal to denounce the actions of Russian President Vladimir Putin has radically altered the calculus.
Behind the events that had Wu praising Tallinn’s courage lies a roiling undercurrent of changes in the international order. Beijing can talk of a “solemn commitment” from others, yet neglect its duty as a permanent member of the UN Security Council.
Actions have consequences. So does silence.
In the US’ National Security Strategy (NSS) report released last month, US President Donald Trump offered his interpretation of the Monroe Doctrine. The “Trump Corollary,” presented on page 15, is a distinctly aggressive rebranding of the more than 200-year-old foreign policy position. Beyond reasserting the sovereignty of the western hemisphere against foreign intervention, the document centers on energy and strategic assets, and attempts to redraw the map of the geopolitical landscape more broadly. It is clear that Trump no longer sees the western hemisphere as a peaceful backyard, but rather as the frontier of a new Cold War. In particular,
When it became clear that the world was entering a new era with a radical change in the US’ global stance in US President Donald Trump’s second term, many in Taiwan were concerned about what this meant for the nation’s defense against China. Instability and disruption are dangerous. Chaos introduces unknowns. There was a sense that the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) might have a point with its tendency not to trust the US. The world order is certainly changing, but concerns about the implications for Taiwan of this disruption left many blind to how the same forces might also weaken
As the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) races toward its 2027 modernization goals, most analysts fixate on ship counts, missile ranges and artificial intelligence. Those metrics matter — but they obscure a deeper vulnerability. The true future of the PLA, and by extension Taiwan’s security, might hinge less on hardware than on whether the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) can preserve ideological loyalty inside its own armed forces. Iran’s 1979 revolution demonstrated how even a technologically advanced military can collapse when the social environment surrounding it shifts. That lesson has renewed relevance as fresh unrest shakes Iran today — and it should
As the new year dawns, Taiwan faces a range of external uncertainties that could impact the safety and prosperity of its people and reverberate in its politics. Here are a few key questions that could spill over into Taiwan in the year ahead. WILL THE AI BUBBLE POP? The global AI boom supported Taiwan’s significant economic expansion in 2025. Taiwan’s economy grew over 7 percent and set records for exports, imports, and trade surplus. There is a brewing debate among investors about whether the AI boom will carry forward into 2026. Skeptics warn that AI-led global equity markets are overvalued and overleveraged
RSS