Speaking at the Copenhagen Democracy Summit on May 13, former president Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) said that democracies must remain united and that “Taiwan’s security is essential to regional stability and to defending democratic values amid mounting authoritarianism.”
Earlier that day, Tsai had met with a group of Danish parliamentarians led by Danish Parliament Speaker Pia Kjaersgaard, who has visited Taiwan many times, most recently in November last year, when she met with President William Lai (賴清德) at the Presidential Office. Kjaersgaard had told Lai: “I can assure you that ... you can count on us. You can count on our support [for Taiwan].”
A few days after Tsai’s speech, Danish Minister of Foreign Affairs Lars Lokke Rasmussen met with his Chinese counterpart, Wang Yi (王毅), in Beijing, to commemorate the 75th anniversary of diplomatic relations between their countries.
Taiwan Corner is a Danish organization that, according to its Web site, “supports Taiwan’s democracy, Taiwan’s right to self-determination, and membership of all international organizations.” Its chairman, Michael Danielsen, has contributed many articles to the Taipei Times. He has an article published on today’s page in which he writes that, following a parliamentary consultation on May 6, the Danish government decided to make Taiwanese list “China” as their nationality on residency permits.
This marks a change in Danish government policy. Taiwanese in Denmark had since 1978 been able to list their nationality as Taiwanese. Danielsen said that this move is tantamount to saying that Taiwan is part of China, and brings the official government position closer to Beijing’s.
Danish Minister for Immigration and Integration Kaare Dybvad said that the change is consistent with Denmark’s “one China” policy. That position is questionable, and is out of sync with the rest of the EU’s “one China” policies.
The timeline and the apparent mixed messaging coming out of Copenhagen could lead to accusations of hypocrisy and cynicism about politicians. The most likely interpretation is that the decision was based primarily on pragmatism, but the outcome is nevertheless a blow to Taiwan’s ability to control the narrative about its sovereign status and push back against the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) distortions.
What is a pragmatic decision for the Danish government serves as a boost to the CCP’s attempts to further its lawfare distortions. China’s creation of ambiguity over Taiwan’s sovereign status allows it to say that cross-strait relations are a “domestic affair,” and to consolidate its “normfare” — the promotion of its favored interpretations of international norms.
Danielsen expressed his disappointment about the decision, and one can only imagine that this response would be shared by pro-Taiwan Danish parliamentarians such as Kjaersgaard.
The difference in responsibilities and constraints faced by governments and parliamentary groups affords the latter a strong position from which they could draw attention to complex issues such as Taiwan’s. This is where international, cross-party bodies, such as the Inter-Parliamentary Alliance on China (IPAC), and countries’ Taiwan-friendly groups, such as the Taiwan-India Parliamentary Friendship Association, could make an impact.
The CCP’s reactions about groupings such as the IPAC and the World Parliamentarians’ Convention on Tibet — which was held in Tokyo last week and was attended by parliamentarians from 29 countries — shows that the CCP is aware of the challenge they present to its attempts to push its narrative of questionable claims over Taiwan and Tibet.
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) challenges and ignores the international rules-based order by violating Taiwanese airspace using a high-flying drone: This incident is a multi-layered challenge, including a lawfare challenge against the First Island Chain, the US, and the world. The People’s Liberation Army (PLA) defines lawfare as “controlling the enemy through the law or using the law to constrain the enemy.” Chen Yu-cheng (陳育正), an associate professor at the Graduate Institute of China Military Affairs Studies, at Taiwan’s Fu Hsing Kang College (National Defense University), argues the PLA uses lawfare to create a precedent and a new de facto legal
Chile has elected a new government that has the opportunity to take a fresh look at some key aspects of foreign economic policy, mainly a greater focus on Asia, including Taiwan. Still, in the great scheme of things, Chile is a small nation in Latin America, compared with giants such as Brazil and Mexico, or other major markets such as Colombia and Argentina. So why should Taiwan pay much attention to the new administration? Because the victory of Chilean president-elect Jose Antonio Kast, a right-of-center politician, can be seen as confirming that the continent is undergoing one of its periodic political shifts,
In the first year of his second term, US President Donald Trump continued to shake the foundations of the liberal international order to realize his “America first” policy. However, amid an atmosphere of uncertainty and unpredictability, the Trump administration brought some clarity to its policy toward Taiwan. As expected, bilateral trade emerged as a major priority for the new Trump administration. To secure a favorable trade deal with Taiwan, it adopted a two-pronged strategy: First, Trump accused Taiwan of “stealing” chip business from the US, indicating that if Taipei did not address Washington’s concerns in this strategic sector, it could revisit its Taiwan
Taiwan’s long-term care system has fallen into a structural paradox. Staffing shortages have led to a situation in which almost 20 percent of the about 110,000 beds in the care system are vacant, but new patient admissions remain closed. Although the government’s “Long-term Care 3.0” program has increased subsidies and sought to integrate medical and elderly care systems, strict staff-to-patient ratios, a narrow labor pipeline and rising inflation-driven costs have left many small to medium-sized care centers struggling. With nearly 20,000 beds forced to remain empty as a consequence, the issue is not isolated management failures, but a far more