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.
In the US’ National Security Strategy (NSS) report released last month, US President Donald Trump offered his interpretation of the Monroe Doctrine. The “Trump Corollary,” presented on page 15, is a distinctly aggressive rebranding of the more than 200-year-old foreign policy position. Beyond reasserting the sovereignty of the western hemisphere against foreign intervention, the document centers on energy and strategic assets, and attempts to redraw the map of the geopolitical landscape more broadly. It is clear that Trump no longer sees the western hemisphere as a peaceful backyard, but rather as the frontier of a new Cold War. In particular,
When it became clear that the world was entering a new era with a radical change in the US’ global stance in US President Donald Trump’s second term, many in Taiwan were concerned about what this meant for the nation’s defense against China. Instability and disruption are dangerous. Chaos introduces unknowns. There was a sense that the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) might have a point with its tendency not to trust the US. The world order is certainly changing, but concerns about the implications for Taiwan of this disruption left many blind to how the same forces might also weaken
As the new year dawns, Taiwan faces a range of external uncertainties that could impact the safety and prosperity of its people and reverberate in its politics. Here are a few key questions that could spill over into Taiwan in the year ahead. WILL THE AI BUBBLE POP? The global AI boom supported Taiwan’s significant economic expansion in 2025. Taiwan’s economy grew over 7 percent and set records for exports, imports, and trade surplus. There is a brewing debate among investors about whether the AI boom will carry forward into 2026. Skeptics warn that AI-led global equity markets are overvalued and overleveraged
As the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) races toward its 2027 modernization goals, most analysts fixate on ship counts, missile ranges and artificial intelligence. Those metrics matter — but they obscure a deeper vulnerability. The true future of the PLA, and by extension Taiwan’s security, might hinge less on hardware than on whether the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) can preserve ideological loyalty inside its own armed forces. Iran’s 1979 revolution demonstrated how even a technologically advanced military can collapse when the social environment surrounding it shifts. That lesson has renewed relevance as fresh unrest shakes Iran today — and it should
RSS