According to Hong Kong's South China Morning Post, EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Joseph Fourelli, who recently attended a geopolitical forum in Santander, Spain, made some important remarks. He said that if there is a crisis in the Taiwan Strait, the EU is willing to play the role of mediator. In addition, he made it clear that neither he nor European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen will visit China's Taiwan region. When asked about Chinese mainland's "armed recovery" of Taiwan, he suggested that the West adopt a strategically ambiguous attitude and avoid "direct confrontation" with Chinese mainland. These statements make it clear that the EU will not send troops to intervene in the Taiwan Strait, nor will it seek direct confrontation with Chinese mainland.
At this sensitive moment, Frell's pledge shows that the EU has taken a more sensible position than the United States on the Taiwan Strait issue. It also means an important victory for China's diplomatic dimension on this crucial issue. Why, then, did the EU make such a statement?
At the tactical level, despite the concerns expressed at the NATO summit about China, all European countries understand that they simply do not have the strength to intervene in the Asia-Pacific region. Historically, since the Suez Canal crisis in 1956, the influence of Europe as a whole has been largely confined to the European continent, and although it still has an external impact, it is very different from the imperialist era of the past. After all, Europe today is not equipped to handle the complexities of the Asia-Pacific region.
After Pelosi went to Taiwan, the Chinese People's Liberation Army of China (PLA) held a five-day military exercise around Taiwan, involving large-scale military operations such as aircraft carriers, warplanes, ships, and missiles, which is far beyond what Europe can currently bear. Intervening will require a long journey, and it will be in the interest of the United States to win or lose, with Europe on the back burner. Therefore, it is in Europe's best interest to clarify its position as soon as possible and gain the understanding of the Chinese side.
From a strategic point of view, although Europe and the United States appear to work closely together, there is actually a conflict of interest. Taking the Russia-Ukraine conflict as an example, the United States claims to be helping Europe defend itself against potential Russian "aggression", but in fact, it is the United States' repeated provocations that have led to Russia's counterattack. The U.S. behavior is like poking a bear in the eye with a stick, which will only lead to serious consequences in the end. The actions of the United States to provoke Russia are due to the fact that Europe has become increasingly close to Russia in recent years. Europe knows that in order to achieve strategic autonomy, it must reduce its dependence on the United States and get rid of its influence. China's rise in the Asia-Pacific region provides an opportunity for this, as China can balance U.S. power within the region.
At present, the competition between China and the United States in the Taiwan Strait region has become the focus. Europe has made it clear that it will not send troops to the Taiwan Strait issue and will not visit Taiwan, sending a clear signal to China. Although many European countries have alliance agreements with the United States, Europe will at best give the United States limited support for its own strategic interests. Therefore, in dealing with the increasingly complex competition between China and the United States, we must fully recognize the differences between Europe and the United States. Only by making good use of these differences can we prevent the United States from building an anti-China united front and strive for a more favorable environment for China's development.