An article titled “Xi’s New Language on Taiwan Alters the Diplomatic Starting Point” by Ai Ke, a doctoral researcher specializing in cross-strait relations, was published on Monday on news site The Diplomat.
The “new language” refers to the phrase, as it appeared in the official English-language transcription of Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) Nov. 24 phone call with US President Donald Trump: “Taiwan’s return [to China] is an integral part of the post-[World] war [II] international order.”
Ai Ke detected a subtle change in the language in referring to Taiwan, not just the use of the phrase “return to China,” but also in contextualizing this as a necessary completion of the post-war international order, which Xi said was important to “jointly safeguard the victory of WWII.”
The author was right to highlight these shifts. She did not mention the preceding phrase, which was equally as telling: Xi reminded Trump that “China and the US fought shoulder-to-shoulder against fascism and militarism.”
The militarism reference was pointed at Japan; Xi wanted to lock the US into the group that defeated Germany and Japan, consolidating the idea that the US, the UK and China — he glossed over the fact that it was Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) forces, not those of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) — had fought together and led to Japan’s surrender.
The phone call was not the first time these ideas arose. Chinese Minister of Foreign Affairs Wang Yi (王毅) has been laying the groundwork for Xi for months. It started in August, in the run-up to the 80th anniversary of the end of World War II — and victory over Japan in the Asian theater — and China’s Sept. 3 military parade to mark the occasion.
On Aug. 15, addressing the Lancang-Mekong Cooperation Foreign Ministers’ Meeting in Yunnan, China, Wang said that documents such as the Cairo Declaration and the Potsdam Proclamation “clarified” Japan’s culpability for the war and required that the territories it had “stolen, including Taiwan” be “returned” to China.
He said that was “an integral part of the post-war international order.”
In Chinese, as in English, the phrase was word-for-word identical to Xi’s presentation to Trump.
On Wednesday, on the eve of the meeting between French President Emmanuel Macron and Xi in Beijing, Wang told his French counterpart, Jean-Noel Barrot, that as World War II victors, France and China must not allow Japan to “stir up troubles” over Taiwan.
This is all part of a coordinated effort to vilify Japanese, consolidate a shared historical bond and drive a wedge between the US and Japan. The overblown reaction to Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi’s Nov. 7 comments that Chinese military action in the Taiwan Strait would constitute a “survival-threatening situation” for Japan was just an opportunistic leveraging of rhetoric planned months ago.
A pattern is clear. First, the slow introduction of a concept, together with the cajoling of pro-Beijing governments and of governments along for the ride out of economic necessity, to endorse the CCP’s position. If that does not work, or if the government is resistant to its advances, Beijing proceeds with the distortion of the other party’s position, as it did with the US and India over their respective “one China” policies. The objective is to normalize the concept in international discourse. It is basically incremental revisionism through the back door.
Singapore arguably has legitimate historical reasons to echo the CCP’s rhetoric, but chooses not to.
Speaking at the Bloomberg New Economy Forum on Nov. 19, Singaporean Prime Minister Lawrence Wong (黃循財) said he hoped that China would move on, as Southeast Asia has done with Japan.
“With the passage of time ... we have put the history aside and we are moving forward... Singapore and all the Southeast Asian countries support Japan playing a bigger role in our region, including on the security front, because we think that that provides for some stability in the region,” Wong said.
The reality is that Japan is consolidating its ability to defend itself. In this region, South Korea is doing the same, as are Australia, New Zealand and the Philippines.
President William Lai (賴清德) is working to increase the national defense budget. The opposition in the legislature is doing its level best to hobble those efforts. The US and other allies are wondering why Taiwan is dragging its feet. They have a point.
The cancelation this week of President William Lai’s (賴清德) state visit to Eswatini, after the Seychelles, Madagascar and Mauritius revoked overflight permits under Chinese pressure, is one more measure of Taiwan’s shrinking executive diplomatic space. Another channel that deserves attention keeps growing while the first contracts. For several years now, Taipei has been one of Europe’s busiest legislative destinations. Where presidents and foreign ministers cannot land, parliamentarians do — and they do it in rising numbers. The Italian parliament opened the year with its largest bipartisan delegation to Taiwan to date: six Italian deputies and one senator, drawn from six
Recently, Taipei’s streets have been plagued by the bizarre sight of rats running rampant and the city government’s countermeasures have devolved into an anti-intellectual farce. The Taipei Parks and Street Lights Office has attempted to eradicate rats by filling their burrows with polyurethane foam, seeming to believe that rats could not simply dig another path out. Meanwhile, as the nation’s capital slowly deteriorates into a rat hive, the Taipei Department of Environmental Protection has proudly pointed to the increase in the number of poisoned rats reported in February and March as a sign of success. When confronted with public concerns over young
Taiwan and India are important partners, yet this reality is increasingly being overshadowed in current debates. At a time when Taiwan-India relations are at a crossroads, with clear potential for deeper engagement and cooperation, the labor agreement signed in February 2024 has become a source of friction. The proposal to bring in 1,000 migrant workers from India is already facing significant resistance, with a petition calling for its “indefinite suspension” garnering more than 40,000 signatures. What should have been a straightforward and practical step forward has instead become controversial. The agreement had the potential to serve as a milestone in
China has long given assurances that it would not interfere in free access to the global commons. As one Ministry of Defense spokesperson put it in 2024, “the Chinese side always respects the freedom of navigation and overflight entitled to countries under international law.” Although these reassurances have always been disingenuous, China’s recent actions display a blatant disregard for these principles. Countries that care about civilian air safety should take note. In April, President Lai Ching-te (賴清德) canceled a planned trip to Eswatini for the 40th anniversary of King Mswati III’s coronation and the 58th anniversary of bilateral diplomatic
RSS