Poking the dragon

Written By: - Date published: 7:56 pm, April 24th, 2025 - 36 comments
Categories: China, Diplomacy, Free Trade, Pacific, Peace - Tags:

Seven cross-party New Zealand politicians have just paid a “private” visit to Taiwan. They were received publicly by the Taiwanese government, who paid for the trip. In the current geopolitical environment, it was extraordinarily foolish.

Reaction from the Chinese government was swift and strong. One wonders what the various Party leaderships were thinking. Group leader National MP Stuart Smith is the Chief Government Whip and Tangi Utikere has recently been promoted in Labour’s Shadow Cabinet so they can’t have been unaware of the likely implications.

The statement from the Chinese embassy in New Zealand was forthright, but added an extra dimension.

The visit by relevant New Zealand MPs to Taiwan province at this time has sent a gravely wrong signal to the separatist forces. It is not in line with the positive momentum of current China-New Zealand relations, and not conducive to the mutually beneficial cooperation between the two countries. It is not in New Zealand’s own interests either. We believe it is also not what the majority of the New Zealand people – who value stable and sound bilateral relations with China – wish to see.

A nation cannot stand without credibility. Commitments, once made, must be honoured. Repeating mistakes does not make them right; it only compounds the error. We strongly urge the New Zealand side to right the wrongs, seriously and sincerely implement its One-China commitment, and take concrete actions to fulfil its pledges. The Chinese side reserves the right to take further measures in response.

From the Chinese side, its dealings with New Zealand have been enormously beneficial for our country. Our current trade with them approaches $40bn, and their tourists are also crucial to our ability to earn foreign exchange.

On Chris Hipkins’ Prime Ministerial visit to China in 2023, Premier Xi Jinping offered the hand of friendship. This was not picked up; instead on his return to New Zealand Hipkins delivered the standard MFAT boilerplate speech about our “mature” relationship whereby we can benefit from the trade with China while giving them lectures about our form of democracy.


But things have now markedly and rapidly changed, and this kind of tin-ear diplomacy no longer comes without consequences. The United States has declared open trade war on China, and China has responded firmly, declaring it will not be bullied.
 And China can hit back. One example of this is the recent switch in its purchase of LNG from the US to Australia. China has just stopped buying US LNG. While this. may be good for the climate, it may not be that good for investors and donors in the United States.

In my opinion China is getting more than a little sick of being lectured about our wonderful neoliberal democracy. And they will not have been impressed by the fine distinctions used by our politicians from the Prime Minister on down about how senior Parliamentarians do not represent their parties or our government.

Charlotte Cook did a good job in today’s Midday Report in exposing Stuart Smith’s slippery language. In the context of the recent Defence Capability Review, which refers to China as the chief driver of instability in the IndoPacific, The Taipei Times report Stuart Smith MP as saying:

Both nations rely on imports and exports, necessitating freedom of navigation between the two, Smith said.

New Zealand sent navy vessels through the Taiwan Strait last year to express the importance of Taiwan’s security, he said.

When questioned on the implications of this reference to security by Charlotte Cook, Smith described it as “semantics.” Taking such a vacuous approach to the language of diplomacy and international relations in today’s fraught environment can be incendiary. Smith may not have thought that the visit had anything to do with the one-China policy New Zealand supposedly adheres to, but Taiwanese Chief Minister Lai certainly thought it did. The one-China policy for Beijing is embedded in their history and is the reddest of red lines. This is definitely not a time to treat it cavalierly.

There is a saying going the rounds at the moment about all of the dangerous crises facing the world at the moment from market collapse to nuclear war, that change first happens slowly, then suddenly. Western thinking is famously short-term, and that of the Chinese long-term. In my view the Chinese have been very patient with us. But the longer we show no signs of understanding their views or being receptive to their offerings, the more likely we are to face that sudden change to our detriment.

Then, also suddenly, we will face the reality of our options. They are few.

36 comments on “Poking the dragon ”

  1. tWig 1
    24 April 2025 at 10:17 pm

    The update on rnz 5pm news said basically Smith's words mean diddly squat because he's not a minister or key government/opposition member; and he is not speaking for the government, which continues with NZ's One China policy as set up by Clarke.

    The Embassy is being heavy-handed. In NZ individual MPs don’t have to stick with the party line when giving their opinion on a privately-organised tour.

    Reply
  2. SPC 2
    25 April 2025 at 5:55 am

    I have not come to challenge appeasement of China, but to any garden variety empire.

    Such are like creepy things that would bite you, if you stand in their imperial way. This is our human dominion.

    Reply
  3. SPC 3
    25 April 2025 at 6:02 am

    The only issue here is whether MP''s visiting Taiwan is collusion with separatism.

    The appropriate policy is to end public funding of such visits by MP's and not allowing MP's to go on visits funded by Taiwan.

    Reply
  4. Ad 4
    25 April 2025 at 10:20 am

    OMG I am in 100% agreement with Mike Smith.

    Reply
  5. bwaghorn 5
    25 April 2025 at 11:07 am

    So we're supposed to support freedom in Ukraine, 2 states in Palestine, but fuck Taiwan because tourists???!!

    Reply
    • Barfly 5.1
      25 April 2025 at 11:15 am

      Not tourists, just the largest export market that NZ has in the world. Also the support in Ukraine and Palestine is related to the death and destruction reigning there, at least there isn't war in Taiwan and with a 110 mile moat between them and China I don't see one in the near future.

      Reply
      • lprent 5.1.1
        25 April 2025 at 11:57 am

        just the largest export market that NZ has in the world.

        How is that relevant?

        And Taiwan is our 9th largest export market by value, with

        • a much smaller population
        • a higher value and profit per head of population
        • a much higher disposable income per head of population
        • probably better growth potential than the PRC because of its limited land area – they can’t build a massive local dairy industry

        It is also a major direct and indirect (often by plants owned and operated inside the PRC) source of our higher tech imports that allow our exports economy to grow. A high proportion of tech PRC imports into NZ are actually from Taiwanese owned sources and designs.

        Volume in terms of tonnage, or gross value is a virtually meaningless measure in trade, of little interest to anyone apart from freight companies because of their cut. Only a economically illiterate fool would consider that to be relevant.

        What counts is levels of profit, because ultimately that is what pays the bills for goods and services that are not the cost of production. Including taxes to sustain our local population in our tiny internal market.

        Taiwan, in particular, is a rapidly growing market for our e-commerce exports, which massively increases the profit levels by reducing the cost of sales. We get very little of that from the mainland.

        Basically, you appear to be a parrot who can’t think about trade without a silly slogan – one that ignores basic facts about trade.

        Reply
        • Darien Fenton 5.1.1.1
          28 April 2025 at 11:42 am

          I went as part of a Parliamentary delegation to Taiwan way back. We were conscious of the motivation, and the response from China was predictable. What I recall most about that visit was the long standing geneology connection between Maori and Taiwanese. I never felt bullied by Taiwan and they never sought to influence me and my fellow MPs. I came away with a deeper appreciation of them as a people and a distinct culture, different to China. BTW these delegations have been happening for years and years.

          Reply
      • bwaghorn 5.1.2
        25 April 2025 at 1:21 pm

        at least there isn't war in Taiwan….yet

        Reply
  6. Barfly 6
    25 April 2025 at 11:08 am

    I have the feeling if it was a funded tour they would attend an arsonists convention. Freedoms are fine, principles are wonderful to have, but NZ's second largest export market is now being run by a lunatic so lets go and piss off our largest export market for a junket by a bunch of never beens.

    Reply
  7. lprent 7
    25 April 2025 at 12:38 pm

    We strongly urge the New Zealand side to right the wrongs, seriously and sincerely implement its One-China commitment, and take concrete actions to fulfil its pledges.

    Utter and complete bullshit from the Chinese embassy. They really should take the time to learn about what has been committed to, and what has not.

    Mike should have known better than repeating the bullshit…

    Smith may not have thought that the visit had anything to do with the one-China policy New Zealand supposedly adheres to, …

    NZ has acknowledged that the PRC has a One-China policy. However we have never ever diplomatically acknowledged that we agree with it.

    This is exactly the same as what we have done with Taiwan, who also used to have (and probably still does have) a One-China policy with themselves as the legitimate government of China.

    As Don McKinnon said back in 1998 (my bold).

    "The New Zealand Government established diplomatic relations with China in 1972. At that time the Government acknowledged the position of the Chinese Government that Taiwan was an inalienable part of the territory of the People's Republic of China" Mr McKinnon stated. "That remains our firm position today".

    "The links we maintain with Taiwan are of an economic and cultural nature only and the extension of certain facilities to TECO does not depart from that."

    "I have just visited China and reiterated to all senior leaders I met New Zealand's continuing adherence to our 'one China' policy. New Zealand enjoys a close and substantial relationship with China and this is something we all value" the Minister concluded.

    Our NZ "One-China" policy is that the territories of the mainland China and that of Formosa are one territory, currently occupied by two different governments.

    This PR wrapper just makes the Chinese embassy look like dorks trying to tell us what we have said – and lying about it. Hardly a good way to get any respect.

    Basically the embassy needs to tone down their bullshit.

    Possibly their governments needs to start talking seriously to the Taiwanese government. However the way that the PRC government treated the inhabitants of Hong Kong in the 20+ years after 1999 as a previously separated part of the territory of China would hardly induce trust by the current inhabitants of the Formosan Islands to trust the PRC government to look after their welfare.

    Which is probably why the PRC government keeps waving the military option around.

    Reply
    • SPC 7.1
      25 April 2025 at 1:30 pm

      No, the government of Taiwan does not claim to be the government of China, that was the group in exile. Their giving up this claim, enabled elections for the self-governance of Taiwan.

      New Zealand has recognised the government in Beijing's representation of China in the UN since 1972.

      The one government of China (in China) recognised, since then.

      The links we maintain with Taiwan are of an economic and cultural nature only

      Reply
    • Res Publica 7.2
      25 April 2025 at 6:49 pm

      In any case, a One China policy is all diplomatic theatre. Although everyone is careful to maintain kayfabe in public, nobody takes it seriously in private.

      Reply
      • lprent 7.2.1
        25 April 2025 at 7:02 pm

        Exactly. Been that way for us explicitly since at least 1972, and in effect from 1948.
        Everyone understands that, except apparently the local PRC embassy.

        Reply
  8. KJT 8
    25 April 2025 at 12:50 pm

    Never again to invading territory inhabited by a population that doesn’t want your rule.

    Reply
  9. Richard 9
    25 April 2025 at 3:25 pm

    Tankies gonna tank.

    Reply
  10. Tiger Mountain 10
    25 April 2025 at 3:38 pm

    All the above being said…the cross party collection of bonehead MPs that embarked on this expenses paid “private trip” either have little awareness of real politik, or for whatever reason or advice decided to ignore it.

    Reply
    • mikesh 10.1
      25 April 2025 at 6:02 pm

      Perhaps they should have checked with the Chinese embassy before setting out, making it clear their trip was not intended as a provocation. Presumably they did not go there as tourists.

      Reply
    • Res Publica 10.2
      25 April 2025 at 6:46 pm

      Or maybe the assertion of New Zealand's foreign policy independence by maintaining a relationship with Taiwan is the whole point of the trip?

      Sure, the Chinese will piss and moan about it. But it's not a hill they are going to die on as long as we officially maintain a One China policy.

      Reply
      • mikesh 10.2.1
        25 April 2025 at 7:11 pm

        So the purpose of pursuing a two china policy, by not checking first with the chinese embassy, is to show how "independent" we are.

        Reply
  11. SPC 11
    25 April 2025 at 4:16 pm

    As the Roman General Vegetius once said ‘si vis pacem, para bellum.’ If you want peace, prepare for war.

    If you want a reason to prepare for war

    1.encourage those in Hong Kong to imagine that a 50 year period of separation from direct Chinese rule was a time to seek democracy.

    2.use a Chinese crackdown to legitimise a security build-up to defend another part of China, Taiwan.

    1a.separate Taiwan from the mainland in 1949.

    2a.send American forces to the Yalu River (beyond a mandate to secure South Korea) and have a plan to use nukes, if the Chinese get involved.

    1b.lead a group to Taiwan.

    2b.do the Anzac Day spiel in the media afterwards.

    Credit for not mentioning AUKUS Pillar 2, it knows restraint – so none of this was anything but a planned op.

    Clearly the pro American Winston and the anti-Chinese Smith are in some sort of weird dance-off.

    https://www.stuff.co.nz/politics/360665753/stuart-smith-geographic-isolation-no-longer-shelters-us-threats

    Reply
    • Gareth Wilson 11.1
      25 April 2025 at 8:40 pm

      When do you think Taiwan became part of China?

      Reply
      • Incognito 11.1.1
        25 April 2025 at 9:18 pm

        1683

        Reply
      • SPC 11.1.2
        26 April 2025 at 2:39 am

        In international law, let us count the ways in which this is so.

        1.The most incontrovertible.

        On 25 October 1945, Japan surrendered Taiwan to the ROC (probably because over 90% of the people were Han Chinese). Taiwan having had no history of independent island-wide government (local tribes, pre Han settlement during the Qing dynasty).

        China as a member of the UN, with territory including Taiwan, in 1945.

        While initially enthusiastic about the return of Chinese administration

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taiwan

        (Apparently they regarded the Qing Dynasty rule as Chinese, presumably because the Han Chinese residents regarded the Manchurian regime era as the Anglo-Saxon English did the Norman-Plantagenet dynasty ones that ruled there).

        Rule over the island by the ROC government 1945-49.

        The subsequent recognition of the ROC government as the representative of the China at the UN, while based on the island of Taiwan.

        The latter one of the PRC government as government of China by the UN in 1971. And lack of any recognition of Taiwan as a separate member state of the UN since then.

        The ROC government continuing to rule Taiwan from 1971 recognising that Taiwan remained part of China, so as to legitimise their continuing regime without a local electoral mandate.

        So basically Taiwan is a bit like Scotland (UK)(or Catalonia -Spain)(or Crimea-Ukraine), there may be a wish for independence, but a referendum requires the consent of the government of the UK. In this case, the consent of Beijing at the UN.

        Reply
        • Gareth Wilson 11.1.2.1
          26 April 2025 at 9:00 am

          Right, so Taiwan was part of China for less time than Babylon 5 was on TV.

          Reply
          • SPC 11.1.2.1.1
            26 April 2025 at 9:29 am

            Under rule from the mainland since 1683, and then by Japan till 1945. Then by ROC from 1945-1949 and by martial law on the island 1949-1987.

            Democratic self-government (the first in its history) did not emerge until the 1990's and one faction favoured unification with the mainland the other one did not. Now it more that one wants self-government within China and the other wants full independence.

            And international law is what it is. Once it is gone, there is nothing but relative force. And the way of kowtow and protection rackets.

            Reply
  12. Stephen D 12
    25 April 2025 at 6:19 pm

    Much like the police team that went to China.

    Reply
  13. Corey 13
    25 April 2025 at 7:14 pm

    Pure hypocrisy from our "friend" china who can't handle us visiting Taiwan but China can go behind our back in our own Realm and do dirty deals to get their fishing fleet access to our realms territory.

    The one-sidedness is cringe. when America tries to dictate our foreign policy it's bad but when China tries to control our foreign policy it's ok?

    No to both the USA and Chinas bullying tactics.

    You talk about China offering the hand of friendship, (as long as we don't say anything it doesn't like or talk to anyone it doesn't like or we shall face untold repercussions) that's not a friendship it's an abusive relationship.

    Real friendships can withstand strong criticism. China cannot.

    Taiwan is one of our largest trading partners, it is a democracy, it doesn't want to be part of china, it is one of the worlds largest economies.

    China doesn't own Taiwan no matter how much China bullies the world into thinking it does.

    The people of Taiwan do NOT want to be part of China.

    It is morally disgusting that Taiwan continues to live in this limbo.

    China is a valuable economic partner but it doesn't and will not dictate our foreign policy.

    If we cannot criticize Chinas brutal crackdowns on democracy in Hong Kong, it's horrific workers rights, it's environment record, it's disappearing of its citizens, it's tyrannical control of its citizens, it's illegal policing of expats (noone should forget about the Chinese expat secret police that were operating in NZ Australia Canada and the USA among others) and it's unfair trade policies then we ARENT friends.

    We are prisoners not friends

    We rightly criticize the United States diplomatically all the time and don't get the kinds of threats we get from China.

    Today is Anzac, as important as China is Id rather lose all of our trade with them no matter how devastating, than lose our sovereignty to them or the united states

    Reply
    • mikesh 13.1
      26 April 2025 at 9:08 am

      China is a valuable economic partner but it doesn't and will not dictate our foreign policy.

      Nor should we attempt to dictate China's foreign policy either. To appear to ignore China's one china policy might be seen as an attempt to do so.

      Reply

Leave a Comment