The defense ministers of Germany and Australia recently issued a joint statement in Canberra, once again emphasizing the importance of peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait and reiterating opposition to any unilateral attempts to change the status quo. Such statements have appeared repeatedly in recent years, but the key has never been “what is said” — it is “what countries are actually doing.” Looking over a longer timeframe, from EU-Japan strategic dialogues to frequent interactions among nations, it is clear this is no longer routine diplomatic rhetoric, but an emerging international collective position.
In this context, peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait have long surpassed a matter of concern; they have become a security issue that countries must address. More precisely, this is not merely a political concern, but a reality that has already been integrated into national strategic calculations.
Taiwan Strait stability has crystallized as an international common interest
The EU-Japan strategic dialogue is in its third year, and related statements have repeatedly reaffirmed the importance of peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait. European countries are no longer distant bystanders, but direct stakeholders, signaling that the Taiwan Strait is not just a regional dispute, but part of the global security architecture.
After this position has been repeatedly confirmed across different countries and arenas, it is no longer just a “consensus,” but a shared premise for action. When the same viewpoint becomes a common assumption among multiple parties, it stops being mere diplomatic language and begins to shape policies and actions, clearly defining the line that the status quo in the Taiwan Strait cannot be unilaterally changed.
Countries’ actions aim to maintain order, not simply intervene
Notably, this consensus is rapidly translating into concrete actions. From France signing the Status of Forces Agreement, to Germany and Australia discussing similar mechanisms, to multinational joint exercises, it is clear that countries are trying to institutionalize and normalize security cooperation.
Success
You are now signed up for our newsletter
Success
Check your email to complete sign up
The key significance of these moves is that cooperation can now operate long-term, rather than being purely symbolic. International agreements, mechanisms, and exercises are reshaping the Indo-Pacific power structure; once these mechanisms are operational, regional security no longer depends on the will of a single country, but is collectively supported.
Thus, the nature of the issue has changed. These actions are not “interventions,” but “maintenance.” When most countries are working to maintain the same status quo, their actions are essentially about defending order, not interfering in another country’s internal affairs.
The core issue lies in China attempting to change the status quo
China has long defined the Taiwan Strait and the South China Sea as internal affairs, attempting to exclude external forces. Reality, however, has moved in the opposite direction. Countries are not only continuing to voice concerns, but their actions are increasingly large-scale and coherent.
When external presence becomes a regional norm, China’s claim that these areas are “internal affairs” naturally loses its footing. The premise of internal affairs is to exclude external intervention, but now countries are already present and will remain so.
The fact that multiple countries are simultaneously committing resources to maintain the same order constitutes a new reality. Under these circumstances, if China still tries to define the region as purely internal affairs, it is effectively attempting to change the status quo, not maintain it. Such a claim is both inconsistent with reality and difficult to convince the international community of.
The Taiwan Strait is a reality maintained collectively, not a unilateral claim
Peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait have never been natural; they are the dynamic result of long-term international political interaction and balance of power. The difference today is that countries no longer limit themselves to verbal statements; through institutional and military cooperation, they are gradually solidifying this status quo.
When most countries are committed to maintaining the status quo, any attempt to change it will face collective pushback. This force accumulates across institutional, military, and diplomatic levels, creating a barrier that is difficult to overcome.
China can of course continue to claim that the Taiwan Strait is its internal affair, but the reality is that countries are demonstrating through action that this region has never been decided unilaterally. If a claim has no binding effect on reality, it ceases to be a sovereignty assertion and becomes mere political propaganda.
This article is reprinted by Vision Times with authorization from The Reporter.
The article represents only the personal views of the author.
