Last week, the European Parliament adopted a resolution on the annual report on the implementation of the EU’s Common Foreign and Security Policy.
The resolution contained strong, supportive language for Taiwan, saying: “Neither Taiwan nor China is subordinate to the other” and “only Taiwan’s democratically elected government can represent the Taiwanese people on the international stage.”
It is important to keep in mind that the resolution is more symbolic than substantial.
The parliament has no power to set or implement EU policy, which is the job of the European Council and the European Commission respectively, but it could be thought of as the seat of the EU’s moral conscience.
EU-Taiwan relations are constrained by European nations’ perceived interests and “one China” policies. However, that is not to say that parliamentary resolutions are meaningless.
It is often said that the EU is not a geopolitical actor — internally divided and lacking a unified EU military. Critics say that the bloc is not capable of shaping its external environment in the same way that true great powers like the US and Russia could.
This criticism is not exactly true. The EU’s power is derived less from its military might, and more from its ability to shape the norms and values of international politics.
The EU has been described by some experts as being a “normative power,” in that it shapes its external environment more to its liking through the promotion of norms such as human rights, democracy and freedom, and setting an example for others to follow.
The European Parliament plays an important role in backing Taiwan and shaping the discourse in support of the nation’s democracy and freedom against China’s propaganda campaigns.
The parliament, through its resolutions, said what the commission’s officials or national leaders might not say, for fear of harming bilateral relations with China. While the bloc’s “one China” policy constrains EU-Taiwan relations, the parliament ensures it does not silence the nation entirely.
It is unlikely that the EU would heed its call to initiate “preparatory measures for negotiations on a bilateral investment agreement with Taiwan,” or to deepen security cooperation. However, the direction of the European project signals positive developments.
EU member states no longer wish to tolerate Germany’s geopolitical folly of building a trade and energy dependency on authoritarian powers into the heart of the European project. This dependence came at the expense of solidarity with Ukraine, and many Europeans do not want to see something similar happen to Taiwan.
Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine is changing the balance of power in the European project. With Germany and France’s theory of diplomacy thoroughly discredited, many are talking about a movement of power east, toward Central and Eastern European countries such as Poland, the Czech Republic and the Baltics, which have more geopolitical clout after being proven right in their warnings about Russia and China. This movement to the east would only be turbocharged when Ukraine eventually joins.
The growing influence of states such as Poland and the Czech Republic, which are strongly supportive of Taiwan, suggest that a changing Europe would greatly benefit the nation.
Central and Eastern European countries know what it is like to live under authoritarianism and they are less likely than their Western neighbors to take the liberal international order for granted.
A more geopolitically assertive Europe could help chasten China and strengthen Taiwan, in time.
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
At the same time as more than 30 military aircraft were detected near Taiwan — one of the highest daily incursions this year — with some flying as close as 37 nautical miles (69kms) from the northern city of Keelung, China announced a limited and selected relaxation of restrictions on Taiwanese agricultural exports and tourism, upon receiving a Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) delegation led by KMT legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (傅崑萁). This demonstrates the two-faced gimmick of China’s “united front” strategy. Despite the strongest earthquake to hit the nation in 25 years striking Hualien on April 3, which caused
In the 2022 book Danger Zone: The Coming Conflict with China, academics Hal Brands and Michael Beckley warned, against conventional wisdom, that it was not a rising China that the US and its allies had to fear, but a declining China. This is because “peaking powers” — nations at the peak of their relative power and staring over the precipice of decline — are particularly dangerous, as they might believe they only have a narrow window of opportunity to grab what they can before decline sets in, they said. The tailwinds that propelled China’s spectacular economic rise over the past