Pelosi in Taiwan
There are decisions that are not easy to understand, such as that of Pedro Sánchez changing his position on Western Sahara and making enemies with Algeria when electricity prices are sky-high (apart from other more important underlying problems), or that of the Speaker of the US Congress to visit Taiwan even in the midst of Russia's invasion of Ukraine.
Nancy Pelosi is the third highest-ranking personality in the US constitutional hierarchy, behind only President Joe Biden and Vice-President Kamala Harris in terms of protocol. There has not been an American visit to Taiwan at this level since 1997, when her predecessor Newt Gingrich made it. But then there was no war in Europe and China was much weaker.
With her trip, Pelosi affirmed America's "unwavering commitment" to "Taiwan's vibrant democracy", something she said was "more important today than ever, at a time when the world is divided between autocracy and democracy", and in this she is not wrong. On the other hand, Pelosi has in the past not hesitated to criticise the Tiananmen massacre, the "genocide" of the Uighurs or the lack of democracy in Tibet and Hong Kong. But is this really the time and the way to show this commitment to freedom and democracy?
The Chinese are furious because they understand that this visit, which has a broad global echo, will invite other leaders to visit Taiwan and that this will encourage the desire for independence already felt by 30% of Taiwanese (50% prefer to remain as they are), and because they also believe it undermines the "One China" principle that has been the cornerstone of Beijing's relationship with the world, and certainly with the United States since Nixon stunned Brezhnev with his ping-pong diplomacy in 1972. It is what was then called the "doctrine of Strategic Ambiguity" whereby Washington recognised Taiwan as part of China and Beijing refused to change the status of the island by force and without the agreement of its citizens. And that has worked well for many years... until today.
China's anger will have consequences, they have said, and we shall see what they are. For the moment, the Chinese have claimed sovereignty over the Taiwan Strait, which is international waters, including live-fire military manoeuvres near the island, and have sent their modern aircraft carriers Liaoning and Shandong to the area. Tension has risen sharply, an inadvertent mistake that is impossible to rule out makes it even more dangerous, and it has already been a few days since Xi Jinping, in a telephone conversation with Biden, warned him that playing with fire is dangerous because those who do so end up "getting burned". At the same time, Beijing reminded him that "completing the reunification of the country is a common aspiration of the 1.4 billion Chinese people and a duty". The White House meanwhile juggles to try to downplay the trip by saying that US policy does not change one iota as a result of the trip, although, in an admirable example of democracy, it has not tried to interfere in what is a sovereign decision of the legislature.
What I do not understand is this provocation - for it really is, whichever way you look at it - at a time when China has been stopped from sending weapons to Russia, which needs them in Ukraine. Especially drones, which it now seems to be looking for in Iran. So the US has delivered $8 billion worth of weapons to Ukraine, while China has so far not given them to its Russian ally. If it decided to do so now, it could complicate the military situation greatly, but it would also risk retaliation from Europe and the US, and the world economy would most likely suffer first. It would also raise tensions in the world several notches higher when we least need it.
Jorge Dezcallar, Spanish Ambassador.