Sepia

cross-posted from: https://mander.xyz/post/41719386

"France's BBC reported that Taiwan donated eight billion euros (US$9.2 billion) so the vice president can go up and spout nonsense for 20 minutes," reads a Threads post written in traditional Chinese and shared November 9, 2025.

"Using it for cash handouts would surely be better than just standing there spouting empty words!"

The featured photo shows Hsiao speaking in the European Parliament, overlaid with Chinese text that reads: "Venue: rented by me; conference: sponsored by me; reputation: went to me; expenses: paid for by the people."

...

The post surfaced after Hsiao travelled to Brussels to address the summit of the Inter-Parliamentary Alliance on China (IPAC), an organisation composed of lawmakers from various countries.

Taiwan's Central News Agency called the address "historic", saying Hsiao was the first Taiwanese vice president to deliver a speech in a European parliament while in office (archived link).

During her speech, she urged Europe to boost security and trade ties with the self-ruled island and support its democracy in the face of growing threats from China (archived link).

...

The Chinese mission to the European Union slammed IPAC for letting Hsiao take the stage, saying in a statement on November 8 that her appearance "seriously erodes the political mutual trust" between Beijing and the bloc (archived link).

The claim that Taiwan donated billions to IPAC was also shared on Facebook, with some social media users criticising the Taiwanese government for supposedly wasting public funds.

...

Taiwanese authorities and IPAC separately dismissed the posts, which were earlier debunked by news organisations Taiwan FactCheck Center and MyGoPen (archived here and here).

"This is a malicious rumour and has been handed over to the police for investigation in accordance with the law," Taiwan's presidential office spokesperson Karen Kuo wrote on her Threads account on November 10 (archived link).

"The IPAC invitation was relayed through our foreign mission, and the vice president attended upon invitation."

Two men are under investigation for spreading the claims (archived link).

Taiwan's representative office in France has similarly refuted the allegation in a statement shared on Facebook on November 9 (archived link).

"We appreciate everyone's confidence in Taiwan's financial strength, but the imagination is higher than the Eiffel Tower," the office said, reminding people to fact-check before sharing posts on social media.

...

cross-posted from: https://mander.xyz/post/41719386

"France's BBC reported that Taiwan donated eight billion euros (US$9.2 billion) so the vice president can go up and spout nonsense for 20 minutes," reads a Threads post written in traditional Chinese and shared November 9, 2025.

"Using it for cash handouts would surely be better than just standing there spouting empty words!"

The featured photo shows Hsiao speaking in the European Parliament, overlaid with Chinese text that reads: "Venue: rented by me; conference: sponsored by me; reputation: went to me; expenses: paid for by the people."

...

The post surfaced after Hsiao travelled to Brussels to address the summit of the Inter-Parliamentary Alliance on China (IPAC), an organisation composed of lawmakers from various countries.

Taiwan's Central News Agency called the address "historic", saying Hsiao was the first Taiwanese vice president to deliver a speech in a European parliament while in office (archived link).

During her speech, she urged Europe to boost security and trade ties with the self-ruled island and support its democracy in the face of growing threats from China (archived link).

...

The Chinese mission to the European Union slammed IPAC for letting Hsiao take the stage, saying in a statement on November 8 that her appearance "seriously erodes the political mutual trust" between Beijing and the bloc (archived link).

The claim that Taiwan donated billions to IPAC was also shared on Facebook, with some social media users criticising the Taiwanese government for supposedly wasting public funds.

...

Taiwanese authorities and IPAC separately dismissed the posts, which were earlier debunked by news organisations Taiwan FactCheck Center and MyGoPen (archived here and here).

"This is a malicious rumour and has been handed over to the police for investigation in accordance with the law," Taiwan's presidential office spokesperson Karen Kuo wrote on her Threads account on November 10 (archived link).

"The IPAC invitation was relayed through our foreign mission, and the vice president attended upon invitation."

Two men are under investigation for spreading the claims (archived link).

Taiwan's representative office in France has similarly refuted the allegation in a statement shared on Facebook on November 9 (archived link).

"We appreciate everyone's confidence in Taiwan's financial strength, but the imagination is higher than the Eiffel Tower," the office said, reminding people to fact-check before sharing posts on social media.

...

cross-posted from: https://mander.xyz/post/41719386

"France's BBC reported that Taiwan donated eight billion euros (US$9.2 billion) so the vice president can go up and spout nonsense for 20 minutes," reads a Threads post written in traditional Chinese and shared November 9, 2025.

"Using it for cash handouts would surely be better than just standing there spouting empty words!"

The featured photo shows Hsiao speaking in the European Parliament, overlaid with Chinese text that reads: "Venue: rented by me; conference: sponsored by me; reputation: went to me; expenses: paid for by the people."

...

The post surfaced after Hsiao travelled to Brussels to address the summit of the Inter-Parliamentary Alliance on China (IPAC), an organisation composed of lawmakers from various countries.

Taiwan's Central News Agency called the address "historic", saying Hsiao was the first Taiwanese vice president to deliver a speech in a European parliament while in office (archived link).

During her speech, she urged Europe to boost security and trade ties with the self-ruled island and support its democracy in the face of growing threats from China (archived link).

...

The Chinese mission to the European Union slammed IPAC for letting Hsiao take the stage, saying in a statement on November 8 that her appearance "seriously erodes the political mutual trust" between Beijing and the bloc (archived link).

The claim that Taiwan donated billions to IPAC was also shared on Facebook, with some social media users criticising the Taiwanese government for supposedly wasting public funds.

...

Taiwanese authorities and IPAC separately dismissed the posts, which were earlier debunked by news organisations Taiwan FactCheck Center and MyGoPen (archived here and here).

"This is a malicious rumour and has been handed over to the police for investigation in accordance with the law," Taiwan's presidential office spokesperson Karen Kuo wrote on her Threads account on November 10 (archived link).

"The IPAC invitation was relayed through our foreign mission, and the vice president attended upon invitation."

Two men are under investigation for spreading the claims (archived link).

Taiwan's representative office in France has similarly refuted the allegation in a statement shared on Facebook on November 9 (archived link).

"We appreciate everyone's confidence in Taiwan's financial strength, but the imagination is higher than the Eiffel Tower," the office said, reminding people to fact-check before sharing posts on social media.

...

"France's BBC reported that Taiwan donated eight billion euros (US$9.2 billion) so the vice president can go up and spout nonsense for 20 minutes," reads a Threads post written in traditional Chinese and shared November 9, 2025.

"Using it for cash handouts would surely be better than just standing there spouting empty words!"

The featured photo shows Hsiao speaking in the European Parliament, overlaid with Chinese text that reads: "Venue: rented by me; conference: sponsored by me; reputation: went to me; expenses: paid for by the people."

...

The post surfaced after Hsiao travelled to Brussels to address the summit of the Inter-Parliamentary Alliance on China (IPAC), an organisation composed of lawmakers from various countries.

Taiwan's Central News Agency called the address "historic", saying Hsiao was the first Taiwanese vice president to deliver a speech in a European parliament while in office (archived link).

During her speech, she urged Europe to boost security and trade ties with the self-ruled island and support its democracy in the face of growing threats from China (archived link).

...

The Chinese mission to the European Union slammed IPAC for letting Hsiao take the stage, saying in a statement on November 8 that her appearance "seriously erodes the political mutual trust" between Beijing and the bloc (archived link).

The claim that Taiwan donated billions to IPAC was also shared on Facebook, with some social media users criticising the Taiwanese government for supposedly wasting public funds.

...

Taiwanese authorities and IPAC separately dismissed the posts, which were earlier debunked by news organisations Taiwan FactCheck Center and MyGoPen (archived here and here).

"This is a malicious rumour and has been handed over to the police for investigation in accordance with the law," Taiwan's presidential office spokesperson Karen Kuo wrote on her Threads account on November 10 (archived link).

"The IPAC invitation was relayed through our foreign mission, and the vice president attended upon invitation."

Two men are under investigation for spreading the claims (archived link).

Taiwan's representative office in France has similarly refuted the allegation in a statement shared on Facebook on November 9 (archived link).

"We appreciate everyone's confidence in Taiwan's financial strength, but the imagination is higher than the Eiffel Tower," the office said, reminding people to fact-check before sharing posts on social media.

...

cross-posted from: https://mander.xyz/post/41718801

Archived link

• The EU lacks a clear “China conditionality” in its enlargement policy with Western Balkan countries—that is, defining and implementing conditions for candidates to engage with China—and the topic of China remains largely absent from accession talks.
• The EU’s own hesitant China policy is in part to blame. The union’s official stance of balancing cooperation and rivalry no longer reflects EU actions in practice, which lean towards confrontation.
• As membership talks stall, China’s influence in the Western Balkans grows, raising fears that new member states could act as promoters of Chinese interests and veto actions against Beijing in the EU.
• The EU must clarify its China policy and embed it as a clear conditionality in the accession process.

...

In 2021, one instance of China’s involvement in the Western Balkans set off the EU’s alarm bells: Montenegro was heading towards financial collapse after a huge loan from China’s Exim Bank for a controversial highway project swelled into a debt mountain—at one point topping a third of the country’s annual budget. The EU sprang into action. It rapidly mapped developments on the ground, strengthened its China teams and eventually stepped in to prevent Montenegro from falling into debt bondage with China.

The episode was a wake-up call for the EU on Beijing’s expanding footprint in the bloc’s periphery. Yet, four years later, the EU still does not have a clear “China conditionality” for EU aspirant countries, and the topic of China remains noticeably absent from formal accession talks. The void is made larger by the EU’s own hesitant and ambiguous China policy.

More than two decades since the EU granted a perspective for membership to Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo, Montenegro, North Macedonia and Serbia, accession seems to have drifted ever farther from sight. What was once a time-bound political and institutional effort with a clear goal has shifted into an open-ended, multi-generational journey buffeted by geopolitical headwinds and mounting frustration.

...

cross-posted from: https://mander.xyz/post/41718801

Archived link

• The EU lacks a clear “China conditionality” in its enlargement policy with Western Balkan countries—that is, defining and implementing conditions for candidates to engage with China—and the topic of China remains largely absent from accession talks.
• The EU’s own hesitant China policy is in part to blame. The union’s official stance of balancing cooperation and rivalry no longer reflects EU actions in practice, which lean towards confrontation.
• As membership talks stall, China’s influence in the Western Balkans grows, raising fears that new member states could act as promoters of Chinese interests and veto actions against Beijing in the EU.
• The EU must clarify its China policy and embed it as a clear conditionality in the accession process.

...

In 2021, one instance of China’s involvement in the Western Balkans set off the EU’s alarm bells: Montenegro was heading towards financial collapse after a huge loan from China’s Exim Bank for a controversial highway project swelled into a debt mountain—at one point topping a third of the country’s annual budget. The EU sprang into action. It rapidly mapped developments on the ground, strengthened its China teams and eventually stepped in to prevent Montenegro from falling into debt bondage with China.

The episode was a wake-up call for the EU on Beijing’s expanding footprint in the bloc’s periphery. Yet, four years later, the EU still does not have a clear “China conditionality” for EU aspirant countries, and the topic of China remains noticeably absent from formal accession talks. The void is made larger by the EU’s own hesitant and ambiguous China policy.

More than two decades since the EU granted a perspective for membership to Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo, Montenegro, North Macedonia and Serbia, accession seems to have drifted ever farther from sight. What was once a time-bound political and institutional effort with a clear goal has shifted into an open-ended, multi-generational journey buffeted by geopolitical headwinds and mounting frustration.

...

Archived link

• The EU lacks a clear “China conditionality” in its enlargement policy with Western Balkan countries—that is, defining and implementing conditions for candidates to engage with China—and the topic of China remains largely absent from accession talks.
• The EU’s own hesitant China policy is in part to blame. The union’s official stance of balancing cooperation and rivalry no longer reflects EU actions in practice, which lean towards confrontation.
• As membership talks stall, China’s influence in the Western Balkans grows, raising fears that new member states could act as promoters of Chinese interests and veto actions against Beijing in the EU.
• The EU must clarify its China policy and embed it as a clear conditionality in the accession process.

...

In 2021, one instance of China’s involvement in the Western Balkans set off the EU’s alarm bells: Montenegro was heading towards financial collapse after a huge loan from China’s Exim Bank for a controversial highway project swelled into a debt mountain—at one point topping a third of the country’s annual budget. The EU sprang into action. It rapidly mapped developments on the ground, strengthened its China teams and eventually stepped in to prevent Montenegro from falling into debt bondage with China.

The episode was a wake-up call for the EU on Beijing’s expanding footprint in the bloc’s periphery. Yet, four years later, the EU still does not have a clear “China conditionality” for EU aspirant countries, and the topic of China remains noticeably absent from formal accession talks. The void is made larger by the EU’s own hesitant and ambiguous China policy.

More than two decades since the EU granted a perspective for membership to Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo, Montenegro, North Macedonia and Serbia, accession seems to have drifted ever farther from sight. What was once a time-bound political and institutional effort with a clear goal has shifted into an open-ended, multi-generational journey buffeted by geopolitical headwinds and mounting frustration.

...

cross-posted from: https://mander.xyz/post/41714298

Archived link

Freedom on the Net 2025: An uncertain future for the global internet (opens pdf)

Internet freedom: Advocacy group calls for 'countermeasures' to fight censorship amid persistent authoritarian repression, backsliding in democracies

A new report published by the advocacy group Freedom House found that governments around the world increasingly deploy advanced and widespread measures to control the digital sphere over the past decade and a half, relying on sophisticated censorship technology to suppress online dissent. As new technology and repressive tactics are exported around the world, investment in internet freedom—and the researchers, technical tools, and civil society organizations working to safeguard it—is sorely needed to preserve the promise of an open, global internet.

Key Findings

• Global internet freedom declined for the 15th consecutive year. Of the 72 countries assessed in Freedom on the Net 2025 , conditions deteriorated in 28, while 17 countries registered overall gains. Kenya experienced the most severe decline of the coverage period, after authorities responded to nationwide protests over tax policy in June 2024 by shutting down internet connectivity for around seven hours and arresting hundreds of protesters. Bangladesh earned the year’s strongest improvement, as a student-led uprising ousted the country’s repressive leadership in August 2024 and an interim government made positive reforms. China and Myanmar remained the world’s worst environments for internet freedom, while Iceland held its place as the freest online environment.

• Half of the 18 countries with an internet freedom status of Free suffered score declines during the coverage period. Only two countries in this group received improvements. People in Georgia experienced the most significant decline in the Free cohort, followed by Germany and the United States, as the ruling Georgian Dream party enacted repressive measures targeting civil society. Authorities in Germany pursued criminal prosecutions against people who criticized politicians, while threats from far-right actors further encouraged self-censorship online. In the United States, growing restrictions on civic space threatened to stifle digital activism, marked by the detention of foreign nationals for nonviolent online expression.

• Control over online information has become an essential tool for authoritarian leaders seeking to entrench their regimes. Governments in the countries that suffered the most extreme declines over the 15 years of global deterioration in internet freedom—Egypt, Pakistan, Russia, Turkey, and Venezuela—intensified their control over the online environment in response to challenges to their rule. Authorities in these settings expanded restrictions on content, escalated surveillance of electronic communications, and imposed more severe penalties on those who expressed dissent online, particularly during protests and elections. The pattern illustrates how digital repression has proven essential for regime security in authoritarian states.

• Online spaces are more manipulated than ever, as authorities seek to promote favored narratives and warp public discourse. Of the 21 indicators covered by Freedom on the Net, the one that assesses whether online sources of information are manipulated by the government or other powerful actors has undergone the most consistent global decline over the past 15 years. Information manipulation campaigns have reshaped online spaces, with common methods including paid commenters who masquerade as ordinary internet users, news sites mimicking trusted outlets, misleading content generated by artificial intelligence (AI), and prominent social media influencers who post progovernment content without clear or formal affiliation.

The report also defines measures to combat censorship and improve internet freedom:

• Counter restrictions on freedom of expression: Governments should maintain access to internet services and digital platforms, as imposing outright or arbitrary bans on social media and messaging platforms unduly restricts free expression. Legal frameworks that address online content should uphold internationally recognized human rights and adhere to the standards of legality, necessity, and proportionality.

• Combat manipulation of the online environment: Governments should encourage a whole-of-society approach to fostering a high-quality, diverse, and trustworthy information space. Companies should invest in staff who work on public policy, access to reliable information, trust and safety, and human rights, and consistently adopt processes to ensure that engagement with government officials regarding online content does not undermine free expression and other fundamental rights. Across the board, support for independent media outlets and local civil society organizations that disseminate credible information is sorely needed.

• Counter disproportionate government surveillance and restrictions on privacy: Governments should ensure that surveillance programs are grounded in human rights principles and work together to create interoperable privacy regimes that comprehensively safeguard peoples’ data. Laws should include guardrails that limit the ways in which private companies can use personal data for AI development and in their AI systems. Companies should mainstream end-to-end encryption in their products, support anonymity software, and uphold other robust security protocols, including by notifying victims of surveillance abuses and resisting government requests to provide special decryption access.

...

Archived link

Freedom on the Net 2025: An uncertain future for the global internet (opens pdf)

Internet freedom: Advocacy group calls for 'countermeasures' to fight censorship amid persistent authoritarian repression, backsliding in democracies

A new report published by the advocacy group Freedom House found that governments around the world increasingly deploy advanced and widespread measures to control the digital sphere over the past decade and a half, relying on sophisticated censorship technology to suppress online dissent. As new technology and repressive tactics are exported around the world, investment in internet freedom—and the researchers, technical tools, and civil society organizations working to safeguard it—is sorely needed to preserve the promise of an open, global internet.

Key Findings

• Global internet freedom declined for the 15th consecutive year. Of the 72 countries assessed in Freedom on the Net 2025 , conditions deteriorated in 28, while 17 countries registered overall gains. Kenya experienced the most severe decline of the coverage period, after authorities responded to nationwide protests over tax policy in June 2024 by shutting down internet connectivity for around seven hours and arresting hundreds of protesters. Bangladesh earned the year’s strongest improvement, as a student-led uprising ousted the country’s repressive leadership in August 2024 and an interim government made positive reforms. China and Myanmar remained the world’s worst environments for internet freedom, while Iceland held its place as the freest online environment.

• Half of the 18 countries with an internet freedom status of Free suffered score declines during the coverage period. Only two countries in this group received improvements. People in Georgia experienced the most significant decline in the Free cohort, followed by Germany and the United States, as the ruling Georgian Dream party enacted repressive measures targeting civil society. Authorities in Germany pursued criminal prosecutions against people who criticized politicians, while threats from far-right actors further encouraged self-censorship online. In the United States, growing restrictions on civic space threatened to stifle digital activism, marked by the detention of foreign nationals for nonviolent online expression.

• Control over online information has become an essential tool for authoritarian leaders seeking to entrench their regimes. Governments in the countries that suffered the most extreme declines over the 15 years of global deterioration in internet freedom—Egypt, Pakistan, Russia, Turkey, and Venezuela—intensified their control over the online environment in response to challenges to their rule. Authorities in these settings expanded restrictions on content, escalated surveillance of electronic communications, and imposed more severe penalties on those who expressed dissent online, particularly during protests and elections. The pattern illustrates how digital repression has proven essential for regime security in authoritarian states.

• Online spaces are more manipulated than ever, as authorities seek to promote favored narratives and warp public discourse. Of the 21 indicators covered by Freedom on the Net, the one that assesses whether online sources of information are manipulated by the government or other powerful actors has undergone the most consistent global decline over the past 15 years. Information manipulation campaigns have reshaped online spaces, with common methods including paid commenters who masquerade as ordinary internet users, news sites mimicking trusted outlets, misleading content generated by artificial intelligence (AI), and prominent social media influencers who post progovernment content without clear or formal affiliation.

The report also defines measures to combat censorship and improve internet freedom:

• Counter restrictions on freedom of expression: Governments should maintain access to internet services and digital platforms, as imposing outright or arbitrary bans on social media and messaging platforms unduly restricts free expression. Legal frameworks that address online content should uphold internationally recognized human rights and adhere to the standards of legality, necessity, and proportionality.

• Combat manipulation of the online environment: Governments should encourage a whole-of-society approach to fostering a high-quality, diverse, and trustworthy information space. Companies should invest in staff who work on public policy, access to reliable information, trust and safety, and human rights, and consistently adopt processes to ensure that engagement with government officials regarding online content does not undermine free expression and other fundamental rights. Across the board, support for independent media outlets and local civil society organizations that disseminate credible information is sorely needed.

• Counter disproportionate government surveillance and restrictions on privacy: Governments should ensure that surveillance programs are grounded in human rights principles and work together to create interoperable privacy regimes that comprehensively safeguard peoples’ data. Laws should include guardrails that limit the ways in which private companies can use personal data for AI development and in their AI systems. Companies should mainstream end-to-end encryption in their products, support anonymity software, and uphold other robust security protocols, including by notifying victims of surveillance abuses and resisting government requests to provide special decryption access.

...

cross-posted from: https://mander.xyz/post/41671739

Archived/unpaywalled version

Over the past week, two moves in East Asia and Europe clearly signal that the handling of the ‘Taiwan question’ is entering a new phase. It is one in which neither Tokyo nor Brussels is prepared simply to abide by a carefully calibrated diplomatic equilibrium coordinated from Beijing.

The emergence of Japan’s new prime minister, Sanae Takaichi, with her hawkish remarks about Taiwan, in which she said any blockade of the country by Chinese forces would be tantamount to a “national survival crisis situation”, coupled to the European Union’s decision to allow Taiwan’s vice-president, Hsiao Bi‑khim, to speak at the European Parliament where she became the first ever sitting Taiwanese vice-president to do so, represent a bolder posture by both Tokyo and Brussels and a more direct than usual challenge to the diplomatic norms that Beijing has long counted on.

...

Takaichi’s comments in Japan’s Diet, that a Chinese military move against Taiwan might constitute “a situation threatening [Japan’s] survival” and subsequently trigger Japan’s own self-defence mobilisation, depart from Tokyo’s longstanding strategy of ambiguity.

Historically, Japanese prime ministers have avoided naming Taiwan in scenarios deemed to trigger Japan’s exercise of collective self-defence as was widely reported in the hours and days after she spoke, but her move signals a willingness to link Japan’s regional security directly with Taiwan’s status after years of bilateral parliamentary exchanges between the two.

...

[In response to Takaichi's comment] the Chinese consul-general in Osaka, Xue Jian, issued a now-deleted social media post threatening Takaichi’s “dirty neck”. Such language by Chinese officials underscores how volatile the region has become even if national leaders shake hands and smile for cameras at regional and global events.

...

Simultaneously, across Eurasia, the EU has taken a notable step with Taiwan’s vice-president, Hsiao Bi-khim addressing the annual summit of the Inter‑Parliamentary Alliance on China (IPAC) held at the European Parliament in Brussels.

...

While the speech by Hsiao was delivered in an unofficial parliamentary gathering rather than at a formal EU foreign-policy event, the symbolism matters. Hsiao told the gathering: “Europe has defended freedom under fire. And Taiwan has defended democracy under pressure” ABC News reported, at the same time urging deeper trade, technology and security ties with EU partners while warning that peace in the Taiwan Strait was “a cornerstone of global prosperity.”

To a standing ovation, Hsiao added “In an era marked by increasing fragmentation, volatility and rising authoritarianism, this gathering affirms something vital - that democracies, even when far apart, are not alone” the ABC report added.

For Brussels, the decision to let Hsiao speak appears to signal two things: one, a recognition that Taiwan is no longer a peripheral “China issue” but integral to global democratic and technological supply-chains; and two, a willingness to test the limits of the conventional “one-China policy” façade by offering Taiwan high-visibility diplomatic space.

...

In sum therefore, what we are witnessing is not merely isolated diplomatic provocation of China, by Tokyo and Brussels, but the establishment of a new set of alliances and postures in East Asia’s Taiwan-China equation.

Japan, under Takaichi, is openly signalling that the fate of Taiwan, a 50-year colony run from Tokyo from 1895 to 1945, is no longer someone else’s business - it is a matter of Japanese survival. The EU, by elevating Taiwan’s voice in Brussels, is signalling that the island matters to the global democratic community – a group China is not qualified to join.

...

cross-posted from: https://mander.xyz/post/41671739

Archived/unpaywalled version

Over the past week, two moves in East Asia and Europe clearly signal that the handling of the ‘Taiwan question’ is entering a new phase. It is one in which neither Tokyo nor Brussels is prepared simply to abide by a carefully calibrated diplomatic equilibrium coordinated from Beijing.

The emergence of Japan’s new prime minister, Sanae Takaichi, with her hawkish remarks about Taiwan, in which she said any blockade of the country by Chinese forces would be tantamount to a “national survival crisis situation”, coupled to the European Union’s decision to allow Taiwan’s vice-president, Hsiao Bi‑khim, to speak at the European Parliament where she became the first ever sitting Taiwanese vice-president to do so, represent a bolder posture by both Tokyo and Brussels and a more direct than usual challenge to the diplomatic norms that Beijing has long counted on.

...

Takaichi’s comments in Japan’s Diet, that a Chinese military move against Taiwan might constitute “a situation threatening [Japan’s] survival” and subsequently trigger Japan’s own self-defence mobilisation, depart from Tokyo’s longstanding strategy of ambiguity.

Historically, Japanese prime ministers have avoided naming Taiwan in scenarios deemed to trigger Japan’s exercise of collective self-defence as was widely reported in the hours and days after she spoke, but her move signals a willingness to link Japan’s regional security directly with Taiwan’s status after years of bilateral parliamentary exchanges between the two.

...

[In response to Takaichi's comment] the Chinese consul-general in Osaka, Xue Jian, issued a now-deleted social media post threatening Takaichi’s “dirty neck”. Such language by Chinese officials underscores how volatile the region has become even if national leaders shake hands and smile for cameras at regional and global events.

...

Simultaneously, across Eurasia, the EU has taken a notable step with Taiwan’s vice-president, Hsiao Bi-khim addressing the annual summit of the Inter‑Parliamentary Alliance on China (IPAC) held at the European Parliament in Brussels.

...

While the speech by Hsiao was delivered in an unofficial parliamentary gathering rather than at a formal EU foreign-policy event, the symbolism matters. Hsiao told the gathering: “Europe has defended freedom under fire. And Taiwan has defended democracy under pressure” ABC News reported, at the same time urging deeper trade, technology and security ties with EU partners while warning that peace in the Taiwan Strait was “a cornerstone of global prosperity.”

To a standing ovation, Hsiao added “In an era marked by increasing fragmentation, volatility and rising authoritarianism, this gathering affirms something vital - that democracies, even when far apart, are not alone” the ABC report added.

For Brussels, the decision to let Hsiao speak appears to signal two things: one, a recognition that Taiwan is no longer a peripheral “China issue” but integral to global democratic and technological supply-chains; and two, a willingness to test the limits of the conventional “one-China policy” façade by offering Taiwan high-visibility diplomatic space.

...

In sum therefore, what we are witnessing is not merely isolated diplomatic provocation of China, by Tokyo and Brussels, but the establishment of a new set of alliances and postures in East Asia’s Taiwan-China equation.

Japan, under Takaichi, is openly signalling that the fate of Taiwan, a 50-year colony run from Tokyo from 1895 to 1945, is no longer someone else’s business - it is a matter of Japanese survival. The EU, by elevating Taiwan’s voice in Brussels, is signalling that the island matters to the global democratic community – a group China is not qualified to join.

...

cross-posted from: https://mander.xyz/post/41671739

Archived/unpaywalled version

Over the past week, two moves in East Asia and Europe clearly signal that the handling of the ‘Taiwan question’ is entering a new phase. It is one in which neither Tokyo nor Brussels is prepared simply to abide by a carefully calibrated diplomatic equilibrium coordinated from Beijing.

The emergence of Japan’s new prime minister, Sanae Takaichi, with her hawkish remarks about Taiwan, in which she said any blockade of the country by Chinese forces would be tantamount to a “national survival crisis situation”, coupled to the European Union’s decision to allow Taiwan’s vice-president, Hsiao Bi‑khim, to speak at the European Parliament where she became the first ever sitting Taiwanese vice-president to do so, represent a bolder posture by both Tokyo and Brussels and a more direct than usual challenge to the diplomatic norms that Beijing has long counted on.

...

Takaichi’s comments in Japan’s Diet, that a Chinese military move against Taiwan might constitute “a situation threatening [Japan’s] survival” and subsequently trigger Japan’s own self-defence mobilisation, depart from Tokyo’s longstanding strategy of ambiguity.

Historically, Japanese prime ministers have avoided naming Taiwan in scenarios deemed to trigger Japan’s exercise of collective self-defence as was widely reported in the hours and days after she spoke, but her move signals a willingness to link Japan’s regional security directly with Taiwan’s status after years of bilateral parliamentary exchanges between the two.

...

[In response to Takaichi's comment] the Chinese consul-general in Osaka, Xue Jian, issued a now-deleted social media post threatening Takaichi’s “dirty neck”. Such language by Chinese officials underscores how volatile the region has become even if national leaders shake hands and smile for cameras at regional and global events.

...

Simultaneously, across Eurasia, the EU has taken a notable step with Taiwan’s vice-president, Hsiao Bi-khim addressing the annual summit of the Inter‑Parliamentary Alliance on China (IPAC) held at the European Parliament in Brussels.

...

While the speech by Hsiao was delivered in an unofficial parliamentary gathering rather than at a formal EU foreign-policy event, the symbolism matters. Hsiao told the gathering: “Europe has defended freedom under fire. And Taiwan has defended democracy under pressure” ABC News reported, at the same time urging deeper trade, technology and security ties with EU partners while warning that peace in the Taiwan Strait was “a cornerstone of global prosperity.”

To a standing ovation, Hsiao added “In an era marked by increasing fragmentation, volatility and rising authoritarianism, this gathering affirms something vital - that democracies, even when far apart, are not alone” the ABC report added.

For Brussels, the decision to let Hsiao speak appears to signal two things: one, a recognition that Taiwan is no longer a peripheral “China issue” but integral to global democratic and technological supply-chains; and two, a willingness to test the limits of the conventional “one-China policy” façade by offering Taiwan high-visibility diplomatic space.

...

In sum therefore, what we are witnessing is not merely isolated diplomatic provocation of China, by Tokyo and Brussels, but the establishment of a new set of alliances and postures in East Asia’s Taiwan-China equation.

Japan, under Takaichi, is openly signalling that the fate of Taiwan, a 50-year colony run from Tokyo from 1895 to 1945, is no longer someone else’s business - it is a matter of Japanese survival. The EU, by elevating Taiwan’s voice in Brussels, is signalling that the island matters to the global democratic community – a group China is not qualified to join.

...