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.
Taiwanese pragmatism has long been praised when it comes to addressing Chinese attempts to erase Taiwan from the international stage. “Taipei” and the even more inaccurate and degrading “Chinese Taipei,” imposed titles required to participate in international events, are loathed by Taiwanese. That is why there was huge applause in Taiwan when Japanese public broadcaster NHK referred to the Taiwanese Olympic team as “Taiwan,” instead of “Chinese Taipei” during the opening ceremony of the Tokyo Olympics. What is standard protocol for most nations — calling a national team by the name their country is commonly known by — is impossible for
India is not China, and many of its residents fear it never will be. It is hard to imagine a future in which the subcontinent’s manufacturing dominates the world, its foreign investment shapes nations’ destinies, and the challenge of its economic system forces the West to reshape its own policies and principles. However, that is, apparently, what the US administration fears. Speaking in New Delhi last week, US Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau warned that “we will not make the same mistakes with India that we did with China 20 years ago.” Although he claimed the recently agreed framework
The Office of the US Trade Representative (USTR) on Wednesday last week announced it is launching investigations into 16 US trading partners, including Taiwan, under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 to determine whether they have engaged in unfair trade practices, such as overproduction. A day later, the agency announced a separate Section 301 investigation into 60 economies based on the implementation of measures to prohibit the importation of goods produced with forced labor. Several of Taiwan’s main trading rivals — including China, Japan, South Korea and the EU — also made the US’ investigation list. The announcements come
Taiwan is not invited to the table. It never has been, but this year, with the Philippines holding the ASEAN chair, the question that matters is no longer who gets formally named, it is who becomes structurally indispensable. The “one China” formula continues to do its job. It sets the outer boundary of official diplomatic speech, and no one in the region has a serious interest in openly challenging it. However, beneath the surface, something is thickening. Trade corridors, digital infrastructure, artificial intelligence (AI) cooperation, supply chains, cross-border investment: The connective tissue between Taiwan and ASEAN is quietly and methodically growing
RSS