Belgium is one of the most reliable allies when it comes to defending and safeguarding Taiwan’s territorial integrity amidst authoritarian threats.
The Belgian coalition government’s agreement, signed in February, included language supportive of maintaining peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait and the South China Sea. This topic was addressed from two perspectives: Chinese threats to Taiwan’s sovereignty and the consequences arising from a conflict between the two Asian nations.
The Belgian government referred to Beijing’s “military maneuvers, provocations” around Taiwan and “internal destabilization actions” as examples of its intention to conquer the nation through diplomacy or force.
The coalition government pointed out that the potential effects stemming from a direct invasion or a gradual strangulation of Taiwan by China “would have considerable political and economic consequences,” given “the prominent place” Taiwan occupies in the semiconductor market.
Brussels’ proactive approach toward the multilayered issue of a potential confrontation between Taipei and Beijing is by no means axiomatic. Various European countries, even if strong economically and financially, are afraid of the consequences arising from addressing China in a proactive and strategic way.
That is why Belgium’s case could lay the foundations for a renovated EU’s approach toward China, both economically and from a security point of view. As the Belgian government said in its coalition agreement, “we must reduce our economic dependencies and effectively protect our economic potential.”
The Belgian government showed its awareness of the situation by referring to the risk of espionage, cyber and hybrid threats coming from China.
Brussels emphasizes the need to act as a counterbalance to China’s different vision of the multilateral world order and universal values. In particular, Belgium regards its role, within this context, as grounded on “closely monitoring and raising the human rights issue with China.”
This approach is a brilliant example of the new Belgian government’s foreign policy agenda, in line with those of the past, as regards human rights, democracy and liberal values. This commitment was reaffirmed in the Belgian Ministry of Foreign Affairs’ “2025 Policy Statement,” which notably mentioned Chinese military drills around the nation as a way of “deliberately undermining social stability in Taiwan.”
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Taipei welcomed this statement by asserting that it was “looking forward to deepening bilateral exchanges and cooperation with Belgium as to jointly safeguard the rules-based international order and advance peace and prosperity in the Indo-Pacific.”
Last month, the Belgian parliament once again showed its willingness to deepen ties with Taiwan by adopting a resolution unanimously, calling for Brussels to strive “together with the governments of the federated entities for more economic, scientific, cultural and parliamentary exchanges between Belgium and Taiwan.”
It also went beyond the common language used by European parliaments as regards Chinese threats to peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait and the South China Sea by urging Beijing to “immediately cease all actions and intrusions into Taiwan’s air defense identification zone and violations over Taiwan’s peripheral islands, as well all other gray zone military actions, including cyber and disinformation campaigns.”
Given the bipartisan support for the resolution, the latter can be deemed as an emblematic manifestation of Belgium’s posture toward China’s assertive agenda regarding Taiwan, the South China Sea and the subversion of the existing global order.
With Russia, Iran and North Korea on its side, Beijing is looking to use sharp power activities to implement its vision of a multilateral global order lacking in the international liberal values it is opposed to.
As Belgium increases awareness of how the situation might unfold, there is a general understanding that other European countries should follow in its footsteps as regards the adoption of a proactive approach. China and Russia are two sides of the same coin: It is only through such awareness that a different future can be written than the one anti-Western powers intend to achieve.
Michele Maresca is an analyst at Il Caffe Geopolitico, an online international law journal, and the think tank Geopol21.
As the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and its People’s Liberation Army (PLA) reach the point of confidence that they can start and win a war to destroy the democratic culture on Taiwan, any future decision to do so may likely be directly affected by the CCP’s ability to promote wars on the Korean Peninsula, in Europe, or, as most recently, on the Indian subcontinent. It stands to reason that the Trump Administration’s success early on May 10 to convince India and Pakistan to deescalate their four-day conventional military conflict, assessed to be close to a nuclear weapons exchange, also served to
The recent aerial clash between Pakistan and India offers a glimpse of how China is narrowing the gap in military airpower with the US. It is a warning not just for Washington, but for Taipei, too. Claims from both sides remain contested, but a broader picture is emerging among experts who track China’s air force and fighter jet development: Beijing’s defense systems are growing increasingly credible. Pakistan said its deployment of Chinese-manufactured J-10C fighters downed multiple Indian aircraft, although New Delhi denies this. There are caveats: Even if Islamabad’s claims are accurate, Beijing’s equipment does not offer a direct comparison
After India’s punitive precision strikes targeting what New Delhi called nine terrorist sites inside Pakistan, reactions poured in from governments around the world. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) issued a statement on May 10, opposing terrorism and expressing concern about the growing tensions between India and Pakistan. The statement noticeably expressed support for the Indian government’s right to maintain its national security and act against terrorists. The ministry said that it “works closely with democratic partners worldwide in staunch opposition to international terrorism” and expressed “firm support for all legitimate and necessary actions taken by the government of India
Minister of National Defense Wellington Koo (顧立雄) has said that the armed forces must reach a high level of combat readiness by 2027. That date was not simply picked out of a hat. It has been bandied around since 2021, and was mentioned most recently by US Senator John Cornyn during a question to US Secretary of State Marco Rubio at a US Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on Tuesday. It first surfaced during a hearing in the US in 2021, when then-US Navy admiral Philip Davidson, who was head of the US Indo-Pacific Command, said: “The threat [of military
RSS