China tellingly fails to retract damaging comments by its ambassador to France
Tom Rogan
China is adding a European target to its recent “Wolf Warrior” diplomatic strikes against South Korea and the Philippines.
Last week, China’s ambassador to Paris was asked about his position on the Russian-occupied Crimean peninsula in Ukraine. He suggested that Russia had a moral claim to the territory. But Lu Shaye, a gleeful “Wolf Warrior,” was just getting started. He added that the Baltic states of Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania are not actually sovereign democracies because they “do not have an effective status in international law, since there is no international agreement that would specify their status as sovereign countries.”
A CRITICAL DEBATE ON THE UKRAINE-TAIWAN WEAPONS TRADE-OFF
It was a ludicrously indefensible statement, at odds with both international law and diplomatic custom. It’s also utterly at odds with China’s oft-stated claim that its sacred foreign policy principle is respect for territorial sovereignty.
In a subsequent statement, the Chinese Embassy declared that Lu’s remarks were “not a statement of politics, but an expression of personal views during a televised debate. They should not be subject to over-interpretation.” That’s textbook Chinese diplomatic language, arrogantly deceptive in the face of plain facts. The embassy statement’s effective translation: “Do not cause problems and stir up trouble. Even though you heard what Lu said, you misheard what he said.”
Note, however, the absence of contrition for Lu’s declaration that these sovereign nations and EU members aren’t really countries. Instead, the statement included the even more absurd claim that “China has always worked to develop bilateral friendly and cooperative relations with [the Baltic States] based on the principles of mutual respect and equality.” This must be news to Lithuania, which has been subjected to a vicious Chinese trade war in retaliation for allowing a named Taiwan office to open in Vilnius.
In response to the comments, France summoned Lu to its Foreign Ministry, a diplomatic sign of displeasure that is about the most that can be expected from French President Emmanuel Macron’s otherwise Beijing-supplicant administration.
Still, Lu’s remarks quickly gained traction, leading to a showdown between various journalists and a Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson in Beijing on Monday.
Amusingly, the Russian state news agency Tass, which often serves as a cover for Russian SVR intelligence officers (including in the U.S.), was the first to make things complicated for Beijing. A Tass reporter asked for clarification. The spokesperson said China’s stance “remains unchanged,” adding that “as to issues related to territorial sovereignty, China’s position is consistent and clear. China respects all countries’ sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity.”
Western journalists followed up with other questions, all of which the spokesperson dodged. These included queries as to why China had not retracted Lu’s remarks and why the transcript of his interview was quietly removed from the Chinese Embassy’s website.
This incident underlines how the Chinese leadership thinks. They are not stupid. They know Lu’s comments are damaging and pointless. So, why aren’t they willing to do what other governments would do and retract his remarks? Why aren’t they withdrawing him? The answer is simple. Weakness. Or, more specifically, the fear of perceived weakness.
Xi and his Central Foreign Affairs Commission chief Wang Yi believe that China must never show weakness. To do so, in their mind, is to signal they have blood in the water and to invite challenge. Instead, they want to present China’s power and ambition as an inevitability the West must accept via lucrative short-term trade arrangements and Beijing’s insipid “win-win cooperation” rhetoric. The Chinese Communist Party is not one for real compromise or conciliation. Best evinced by Xi’s recent actions at home and in cyberspace, it is a party for absolute power.
Top line: Lu’s remarks are telling not for their content but for how his government has tolerated them.