China rejects comparisons between Ukraine conflict and Taiwan
Drawing parallels between Taiwan and the Ukraine conflict is 'unacceptible,' the Chinese Embassy in Singapore said in response to remarks by French President Emmanuel Macron.
Macron had delivered a speech at the Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore on Friday in which he rejected those who would frame the conflict as a purely European concern. 'If we consider that Russia could be allowed to take a part of the territory of Ukraine without any restriction… What could happen in Taiwan?' he said.
'Comparing the Taiwan question with the Ukraine issue is unacceptable. The two are different in nature, and not comparable at all,' the embassy said on Facebook on Saturday, reiterating that the issue of Taiwan is 'entirely China's internal affair.'
Crimea voted to join Russia shortly after the 2014 US-backed coup in Kiev, and four other former Ukrainian regions did the same following referendums in 2022. Moscow has demanded that, for a viable peace deal, Ukraine must recognize Russia's new borders and withdraw its troops from Russian territory.
Taiwan has had a separate government since 1949, when nationalists retreated to the island after losing a war with the Communists in mainland China. Beijing maintains that it will achieve 'national reunification' and has warned the authorities in Taipei against formally declaring independence.
Only a handful of countries recognize Taiwan as an independent country, while most states, including the US and Russia, adhere to the 'One-China' principle. Nevertheless, multiple Western countries maintain informal ties with Taiwan.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Russia Today
3 hours ago
- Russia Today
Russian memorandum on settlement of Ukraine conflict (FULL TEXT)
The Russian delegation presented its peace proposal to the Ukrainian side during the talks in Istanbul on Monday. Among the main points, Moscow's memorandum calls on Kiev to withdraw its troops from the former Ukrainian territories that have joined Russia and confirm its neutral and non-nuclear as of June 1, 2025 Key Parameters for a Definitive Settlement Commencement of complete withdrawal of the AFU and other Ukrainian paramilitary formations from the territory of the Russian Federation, including the DPR, LPR, and the Zaporozhye and Kherson regions, and their pullback from the borders of the Russian Federation to a distance agreed upon by the Parties, in accordance with Provisions to be approved.
Russia Today
5 hours ago
- Russia Today
Truce or trap? Ukraine makes sure peace talks go nowhere
On Sunday, in the Russian regions of Bryansk and Kursk, both bordering Ukraine, bridges collapsed on and under trains, killing seven and injuring dozens of civilians. These, however, were no accidents and no extraordinary force of nature was involved either. Instead, it is certain that these catastrophes were acts of sabotage, which is also how Russian authorities are classifying them. Since it is virtually certain that the perpetrators acted on behalf of Kiev, Western media have hardly reported these attacks. Moscow meanwhile rightly considers these attacks terrorism. On the same day, Ukraine also carried out a wave of drone attacks on important Russian military airfields. That story, trumpeted as a great success by Ukraine's SBU intelligence service, has been touted in the West. The usual diehard Western bellicists, long starved of good news, have pounced on Ukraine's probably exaggerated account of these assaults to fantasize once more about how Ukraine has 'genius,' while Russia is 'vulnerable' and really almost defeated. Despair makes imaginative. In the wrong way. The reality of Ukraine's drone strikes on the airfields is not entirely clear yet. What is certain is that Ukraine targeted locations in five regions, including in northern and central Russia as well as Siberia and the Far East. Kiev's drone swarms were launched not from Ukraine but from inside Russia, using subterfuge and civilian trucks. Under International Humanitarian War (aka the Law of Armed Conflict), this is likely to constitute not a legitimate 'ruse of war' but the war crime of perfidy, a rather obvious point somehow never mentioned in Western commentary. Yet at least, in this instance the targets were military: This was either an act of special-ops sabotage involving a war crime (the most generous possible reading) or plain terrorism or both, depending on your point of view. Three of the attacked airbases, it seems, successfully fended off the Ukrainian first-person-view kamikaze drones. In two locations, enough drones got through to cause what appears to be substantial damage. Ukrainian officials and, therefore, Western mainstream media claim that more than 40 Russian aircraft were destroyed, including large strategic bombers and an early-warning-and-control aircraft. Official Russian sources have admitted losses but not detailed them. Russian military bloggers, often well-informed, have quoted much lower figures ('in the single digits,' thirteen), while noting that even they still constitute a 'tragic loss,' especially as Russia does not make these types of aircraft anymore. In financial terms, Ukrainian officials claim that they have inflicted the equivalent of 'at least 2 billion' dollars in damage. Even if it should turn out that they have been less effective than that, there can be little doubt that, on this occasion, Kiev has achieved a lot of bang for the buck: even if 'Operation Spiderweb' took a long time to prepare and involved various resources, including a warehouse, trucks, and the cheap drones themselves, it is certain that Kiev's expenses must have been much less than Moscow's losses. In political terms, Russia's vibrant social media-based sphere of military-political commentators has revealed a sense of appalled shock and anger, and not only at Kiev but also at Russian officials and officers accused of still not taking seriously the threat of Ukrainian strikes even deep inside Russia. One important Telegram 'mil-blogger' let his readers know that he would welcome dismissals among the air force command. But he also felt that the weak spots exploited by Kiev's sneak drone attack have systemic reasons. Another very popular mil-blogger has written of 'criminal negligence.' Whatever the eventual Russian political fall-out of these Ukrainian attacks, beware Western commentators' incorrigible tendency to overestimate it. German newspaper Welt, for instance, is hyperventilating about the attack's 'monumental significance.' In reality, with all the frustration inside Russia, this incident will not shake the government or even dent its ability to wage the war. Probably, its real net effect will be to support the mobilization of Russia. Remember that Wagner revolt that saw exactly the same Western commentators predicting the imminent implosion not merely of the Russian government but the whole country? You don't? Exactly. In the case of the terrorist attacks on civilian trains, the consequences are even easier to predict. They will definitely only harden Moscow's resolve and that of almost all Russians, elite and 'ordinary.' With both types of attacks, on the military airfields and on the civilian trains, the same puzzling question arises: What is Kiev even trying to do here? At this point, we can only speculate. My guess: Kiev's rather desperate regime was after four things: First, a propaganda success for domestic consumption. Given that Zelensky's Ukraine is a de facto authoritarian state with obedient media, this may actually work, for a moment. Until, that is, the tragedy of mobilization, all too often forced, for a losing proxy war on behalf of a fairly demented West, sinks in again, that is, in a day or so. Second, with its combination of atrocities against civilians and an assault on Russia's nuclear defenses, this was Kiev's umpteenth attempt to provoke Russia into a response so harsh that it would escalate the war to a direct clash between NATO (now probably minus the US) and Russia. This is a Ukrainian tactic as old as this war, if not older. Call it the attack's routine aspect. Equally routinely, that plan went nowhere. Then there was the attempt to torpedo the second round of the revived Istanbul talks, scheduled for Monday, 2 June, by provoking Russia to cancel or launch such a rapid and fierce retaliation strike that Kiev could have used it as a pretext to do the same. That is, as it were, the tactical dimension, and it also failed. While the above is devious, it is also run-of-the-mill. States will be states, sigh. The fourth likely purpose of Kiev's wave of sabotage and terror strikes – the strategic aspect, as it were – however, is much more disturbing: The Zelensky regime – and at least some of its Western backers (my guess: Britain in the lead) – are signaling that they are ready to wage a prolonged campaign of escalating terrorist attacks inside Russia, even if the fighting in Ukraine should end. Think of the Chechen Wars, but much worse again. This, too, would not succeed. One lesson of the Chechen Wars is precisely that Moscow has made up its mind not to bend to terrorism but instead eliminate its source, whatever the cost. Regarding those Istanbul talks, they have taken place. Ukraine was not able to make Russia abandon them. Otherwise, the results of this second round of the second attempt at peace in Istanbul seem to have been very modest, as many observers predicted. Kiev, while losing, did its usual grimly comedic thing and offered Moscow a chance to surrender. Moscow handed over its terms in turn; and they have not changed and reflect that it is winning the war. Kiev has promised to study them. Given that the gap between Ukrainian delusions and Russian demands seems unbridgeable at this point, even a large-scale ceasefire is out of reach. And that may be, after all, what both the Zelensky regime and its European backers want. As to Moscow, it has long made clear that it will fight until it reaches its war aims. In that sense, the new talks confirmed what the attacks had signaled already: peace is not in sight. Russia's chief negotiator Vladimir Medinsky did, however, offer smaller, local ceasefires of 'two to three days' that, he explained, would serve to retrieve the bodies of the fallen for decent burial. In the same spirit, Russia has committed to hand over 6,000 bodies of Ukrainian soldiers and officers. There was something for the living as well: more prisoner exchanges, for those severely ill or injured as well as for the young, have been agreed. Figures are not clear yet, but the fact that they will take place on an 'all-for-all' basis reflects a Russian gesture of good will. Finally, Medinsky also revealed that the Ukrainian side handed over a list of 339 children that Russia has evacuated from the war zone. He promised that, as in previous cases, Russian officials will trace them and do their best to return the children to Ukraine. Medinsky pointed out that the number of children on Kiev's list massively contradicts Ukrainian and Western stories – as well as lawfare – about an immense, 'genocidal' Russian kidnapping operation. In that sense, the talks at least helped to deflate an old piece of Western information war. Perhaps that is all that is possible for now: truly incremental humanitarian progress and a very gradual, very slow working toward a more reasonable manner of talking to each other. Better than nothing. But that's a low bar, admittedly.
Russia Today
6 hours ago
- Russia Today
EU mulls blocking China's access to medical device procurement
The European Union is examining the possibility of imposing restrictions on public procurement contracts across the bloc for Chinese medical device producers, Bloomberg reported on Monday, citing a person familiar with the plans. Brussels and Beijing have recently been locked in an escalating tit-for-tat stand-off over trade protectionism. Earlier this year, the European Commission (EC) said that a probe launched last year into alleged unfair Chinese trade practices had revealed that Beijing has been limiting access for EU medical devices and suppliers to the Chinese procurement market. Last month, China's Ministry of Commerce announced that its anti-dumping investigation into brandy imports from the EU – initiated in response to a probe by the bloc – had been extended due to the complexity of the case. Members of the 27-nation bloc are expected to vote on the proposed measure on Monday, June 2, the unnamed source told Bloomberg. If approved, the step would mark Brussels' first action under the International Procurement Instrument (IPI), a regulation adopted in 2022 to promote reciprocity in access to public procurement markets, the news agency noted. The IPI enables the EC to introduce a range of restrictions on companies bidding for public contracts – from score adjustments in tenders to a full ban on participation. The news comes ahead of a meeting between the two sides' top trade officials. Maros Sefcovic and Wang Wentao are reportedly expected to meet on Tuesday on the sidelines of an Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) ministerial conference in Paris. If adopted, the restrictions could further fuel ongoing trade tensions between the EU and China, opening a new front in disputes between both parties, each of which is also engaged in mounting trade frictions with the US.
