Connect with us

Diplomacy

‘Taiwanese politician’s visit is part of US strategy to contain China’

Published

on

China’s Foreign Ministry on Sunday condemned Taiwan’s Vice President William Lai’s visit to the United States, saying Beijing will take strong steps to protect its sovereignty. Experts described the visit as part of the US strategy to “contain” China.

Lai, a candidate to become Taiwan’s next president in elections in January, landed in New York on his way to Paraguay for the swearing-in ceremony of newly elected President Santiago Pena.

Arriving in New York late Saturday, Lai was greeted by Ingrid Larson, Director of the Washington Office of the American Institute, the “de facto mission” of the United States in Taiwan, and Hsiao Bi-khim, representative of the Taipei Economic and Cultural Office in New York.

Lai met with Taiwanese living in the United States at a private dinner, where he delivered a speech advocating for the independence of the island.

Lai is also expected to make another “stopover” in San Francisco on his way back to Taipei on Wednesday.

Beijing: One-China principle and China’s sovereignty are violated

Shortly after Lai arrived in New York on a scheduled flight from Taipei, the Chinese Foreign Ministry issued a statement saying that it “opposes any visit to the United States by Taiwan independence supporters.”

Describing Lai as “clinging stubbornly to the separatist position for ‘independence’,” the statement said, “We firmly oppose any visit by ‘Taiwan independence’ separatists to the US in any name or under whatever pretext.”

The statement noted that the arrangements engaged by the US and Taiwan authorities for Lai’s political activities in the name of a “stopover” violate the principle of “one China” and undermine China’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.

Emphasizing that the Taiwan issue is the core of China’s core interests and a “red line” that must not be crossed, the statement said, “urge the US to abide by the one-China principle and to deliver on its commitment not to support Taiwan’s independence.”

The statement said that the incident “once again shows the fundamental cause of the continued tensions in the Taiwan Strait is the Taiwan authorities’ attempt to solicit US support for ‘Taiwan independence’ and that the US is bent on using Taiwan to contain China.” The statement added that China is closely following the developments and will “take resolute and strong measures” to safeguard its sovereignty and territorial integrity.

Election campaign

Laura Rosenberger, president of the American Institute in Taiwan, said on X (Twitter) that she will host Lai in San Francisco on his way home on Wednesday.

Currently a candidate for the separatist Democratic Progressive Party’s (DPP) 2024 election for Taiwan’s regional leader, Lai has been trying to persuade voters on the island and supporters in the United States with narratives of “Taiwan independence” versus “Chinese reunification” and “democracy versus authoritarianism.”

On the other hand, Lai’s visits come at a time when Beijing and Washington are trying to improve relations.

This also includes a possible visit to the United States by Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi, which could pave the way for a meeting between US President Joe Biden and Chinese President Xi Jinping later this year.

The Taiwan Foreign Ministry announced earlier this month that Lai would attend the August 15 inauguration of newly elected President Santiago Pena of Paraguay as a representative of Taiwanese leader Tsai Ing-wen and make “stopovers” in New York and San Francisco prior to and after his trip.

Paraguay is among the few countries that officially recognize Taiwan.

Taiwanese leader Tsai Ing-wen also made “stopovers” in the United States in early April before and after her visits to Guatemala and Belize and met with US House of Representatives Speaker Kevin McCarthy.

In response to the visit, the Chinese military organized a 3-day military drill around the island.

In the context of the “One China” principle, Beijing opposes Taiwan establishing independent diplomatic relations with countries around the world and considers these talks as “interference in its internal affairs”.

Prof. Dr. Hasan Ünal: Proxy war against China over Taiwan

Evaluating the Taiwanese leader’s visit and the US policy on Taiwan, Prof. Dr. Hasan Ünal said that the Washington administration is waging a proxy war against China over Taiwan.

Noting that especially if Biden is re-elected, the US will try to strengthen its position against China and accelerate the proxy war over Taiwan, Ünal stated that this is how he sees things going if there is no radical change in American foreign policy.

‘Ideal scenario for the American arms industry’

“From the point of view of the American arms industry, this is the ideal scenario,” Prof. Ünal said, adding, “Think of the investment in the arms industry in Ukraine, and think of the dimensions of a struggle against China. In addition, the US will arm its allies in the Asia-Pacific in such a situation, which it has already started to do. So the Pentagon budget would also be increased in such a situation,” he continued.

‘It would have a negative impact on the American economy and society’

Noting that this is a great scenario for the US deep state, Ünal emphasized that if they insist on this scenario, it will blow up in America’s hands: “Even if certain groups benefit from it, this scenario will have a fundamentally bad impact on the American economy. There is no budget for the basic expenses of the country, but there is a budget for weapons. Of course, this would deepen the problems in the country, accelerate social, social and economic disintegration.”

He added that if US expectations in Ukraine collapse, then it will be difficult for the US to engage in such a struggle with China.

Prof. Ünal also drew attention to the pro-independence groups in Taiwan and suggested that these groups may have forced the US to make these visits in order to confirm their last trump card against “reunification”.

Prof. Dr. Barış Doster: Part of Washington’s strategy to contain China

Stating that Lai’s visit should be read within the framework of broader US policies, Prof. Dr. Barış Doster said:

“First of all, this visit of the politician in Taiwan cannot be considered independently from the US strategy of provoking China and encircling and encircling China from its immediate vicinity, and in this context, the plans to include countries in China’s immediate vicinity in this strategy through organizations such as AUKUS and QUAD. Former US Speaker of the House Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan was one of the pioneering steps of this strategy. Obviously, such moves by the US will continue.”

Secondly, emphasizing economic factors, Doster said that the US is lagging behind in the economic race with China, and therefore Washington, aware of the fact that it cannot prevent Beijing economically, has no other leverage left but to increase such tensions and strengthen its military buildup to encircle China.

‘Contrary to US promises to China’

These actions are in violation of the agreements and promises the US has made with China, Doster said, adding that these provocations will continue, but the US has no intention of risking a direct confrontation and military escalation with China over it.

The US administration had adopted the ‘One China’ principle in its diplomatic recognition of China. In 1979, it declared this in writing. At the first meeting between China and the US in 1972, the US said, “I recognize Taiwan and China as one piece.” By 1979, the parties mutually recognized each other. In 1979, the US said, ‘I no longer recognize the government in Taiwan as the representative of China, but rather the People’s Republic of China established by the Chinese Communist Party. It recognized Taiwan as part of mainland China, that is, the one-China principle. “We respect the One China principle and will continue our relations with Taiwan at the economic, cultural and informal levels,” the United States said in 1979.

Since then, however, the US has taken many actions that violate this principle, systematically sending arms to Taiwan, quadrupling the number of troops on the island, the Pentagon allocating a special budget to support Taiwan, and Washington signing a trade agreement with Taiwan. Diplomatically, the United States has also continued to violate, hosting the leader of Taiwan in the country, as well as a visit by former House of Representatives Pelosi.

Diplomacy

Iran rejects Turkish foreign minister’s comparison of regional policy to Israel

Published

on

Iranian Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Esmaeil Baghaei strongly criticized Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan’s recent statements comparing Iran’s regional actions to those of Israel, calling the comparison “astonishing and incorrect” during his weekly press conference.

In a comprehensive briefing on Monday, Baghaei addressed a wide range of foreign policy developments and regional security matters, including relations with Türkiye, the current state of diplomatic understandings with the United States, and Iran’s nuclear program.

“Hakan Fidan’s comparison is astonishing and incorrect”

When asked about Fidan’s assertions regarding Iran and his comparison of Iranian actions to those of the Israeli government, Baghaei sharply rejected the assessment.

“It is astonishing that a figure of Mr. Fidan’s standing would make such an unwarranted comparison,” Baghaei said. “He knows very well that the Israeli regime is expansionist by nature and seeks to harm the entire region, including Türkiye. How they arrived at such a bizarre comparison remains a major question for us.”

Baghaei asserted that Iran maintains no proxy forces in the region and argued that Israel represents the only true proxy entity in the Middle East. “We ask our Turkish friends to align their analyses with existing realities and to avoid repeating analyses that serve the exploitative interests of the Israeli regime,” the spokesperson added.

The remarks follow recent statements by Fidan, in which he addressed the ongoing conflict involving Hezbollah and Hamas, describing them as Iranian proxies in the region.

“We need to return to a situation where the sovereignty and territorial integrity of every nation is fully recognized,” Fidan had stated. “Iran has long claimed to pursue a preventive security policy by maintaining proxies in these countries, just as the Israelis occupy the rest of the region as part of their own security.”

“The Islamabad Agreement has entered a crisis phase”

Responding to a question regarding the status of the Islamabad Agreement, Baghaei stated: “There is no doubt that this agreement has entered a crisis phase.”

While emphasizing that Iran approaches all negotiations with seriousness and precision, and fulfills its commitments in good faith once an agreement is reached, Baghaei accused the opposing party of failing to honor its pledges.

“They were so eager to breach the agreement that they did not even allow the one-month period specified in Article 5 regarding the Strait of Hormuz to run its course. They began backsliding from the very first days,” Baghaei said. “Looking at the 14 articles of the memorandum of understanding, the Americans dismantled different components of the agreement within this short timeframe. We have maintained from the beginning that it is a matter of ‘commitment for commitment.’ As long as the other party fulfills its obligations, we will remain committed to ours.”

“We reject the IAEA’s request to access damaged facilities”

Asked about the request by International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Director General Rafael Grossi for inspectors to return to Iran and visit damaged nuclear facilities, Baghaei delivered a flat rejection, stating that the request would not be granted.

Addressing separate reports regarding satellite imagery of nuclear facility reconstruction, Baghaei noted that he had not yet seen the satellite images in question and therefore declined to comment.

“We will not allow the Strait of Hormuz to be threatened by the US”

Commenting on maritime security in the Strait of Hormuz and allegations that the United States is providing military escorts to 20 vessels, Baghaei reiterated Iran’s opposition to the presence of extra-regional forces.

Baghaei stated that regional security can only be achieved without foreign intervention, through consultative mechanisms among regional countries. He added that the US military presence is a source of insecurity in the region.

“We will not allow the Strait of Hormuz to become an area of threat against Iran’s interests,” the spokesperson said. “We made genuine efforts to ensure navigation security, but the US was the party that undermined the process. The claims regarding vessel escorts demonstrate that the US is continuing its interventionist and aggressive policies in the region.”

Regarding the interpretation of Article 5 of the memorandum of understanding, Baghaei stated that the text is clear and leaves no room for interpretation.

He noted that provisions designating the management of the strait to Iran, in consultation with Oman, were included in the text to protect Iranian interests. He added that the US is attempting to establish parallel routes by provoking regional countries, which he warned causes environmental issues and jeopardizes maritime safety.

“The declaration by the three European countries is null and void”

Referring to a joint declaration issued by France, Germany, and the United Kingdom, Baghaei dismissed the statement as entirely invalid, accusing the European nations of attempting to distort facts.

He stated that the actions of the US and Israel are the source of instability and harm in both the region and the wider world, adding that such declarations do not contribute to any resolution.

Addressing claims made by the French Foreign Minister, Baghaei added that French officials should cease attempting to assume roles in matters that do not concern them.

“We have not conditioned cooperation with Afghanistan on recognition”

Baghaei provided details on a recent visit to Afghanistan by Alireza Jalalzadeh, the Deputy Foreign Minister for Consular Affairs, noting that discussions were conducted within the framework of consular affairs and people-to-people relations.

Highlighting that Iran shares a border of more than 900 kilometers with Afghanistan, hosts a large number of Afghan migrants, and maintains extensive commercial ties, Baghaei said: “We have not conditioned the official recognition of the Afghan administration on the cooperation necessary for the interests of both countries. The recognition process is a legal procedure, and a decision on this matter will be made when the time comes.”

“We do not make decisions on behalf of Lebanon”

Rejecting allegations that Iran is interfering in the internal affairs of Lebanon and Oman, Baghaei said: “We do not make decisions on behalf of anyone. The inclusion of Lebanon’s name in the memorandum of understanding demonstrates Iran’s sense of responsibility toward maintaining international security. In the first article of the text, we emphasized the need to end the war on all fronts, including Lebanon. This is not a matter of decision-making; the decision belongs to the Lebanese people.”

Addressing international pressure regarding the disarmament of Hezbollah, Baghaei stated that the Lebanese people are best positioned to understand the value of the resistance’s weapons in protecting their sovereignty, and that any decision on the matter rests solely with them.

“Trump’s claims are false”

Baghaei denied claims made by former US President Donald Trump regarding Iran’s conduct during nuclear negotiations.

“Lying has become a behavioral pattern and an addiction for the US,” Baghaei said. “The talks held in Muscat on Saturday focused exclusively on the Strait of Hormuz. We attempted to establish a mechanism to ensure the safe passage of vessels through Omani mediation, but this outcome was not reached due to pressure exerted on Oman.”

He added that alleged assassination plots against Trump were never a subject of negotiation.

“The death of Lindsey Graham will not grieve free people”

When asked to comment on the death of US Senator Lindsey Graham, Baghaei remarked:

“The Angel of Death is just. One cannot expect the peoples of the region to mourn a figure who built his life philosophy on aggression, war, and terror, and who boasted of being the greatest supporter of genocide. The death of this aggressive senator will not grieve the heart of any free person.”

Continue Reading

Diplomacy

NATO leadership sees no evidence of Russian preparations for attack on Baltics by 2030

Published

on

The military and political leadership of NATO sees no evidence that Russia is preparing for a potential attack on the Baltic states by 2030, according to a report by The Times, citing a senior alliance source.

“I see absolutely no sign that Russia is interested in engaging in any conflict with NATO,” the high-ranking source told the newspaper. The official added that they had no intention of speculating on the date of a potential conflict, as some other officials within the alliance have done.

The Times noted that rhetoric suggesting an open military conflict between NATO and Russia could begin in 2030 is primarily being used to mobilize the resources of the alliance’s member states. The report stated that this framing aims to encourage members to meet a defense spending target set at 5% of their gross domestic product (GDP) by 2035. Speaking to the newspaper on the sidelines of the NATO summit in Ankara, Martin O’Donnell, spokesperson for the Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe (SHAPE), said that allies currently have a “window of opportunity” to build up the capabilities already agreed upon.

Kremlin Spokesperson Dmitry Peskov has previously stated that the militarization of Europe would require Russia to take additional measures to guarantee its national security.

As the implications of these developments continue to play out in the military arena, Lithuanian President Gitanas Nauseda announced on July 9 that NATO leadership has converted the mandate of the Baltic air policing mission from air patrol to a combat footing.

The day before this decision, leaders attending the NATO summit in Ankara pointed to the “long-term threat Russia poses to Euro-Atlantic security and stability” in a joint declaration.

NATO has repeatedly expressed concerns over a potential conflict with Russia. NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte has urged member states not to be “naive” about threats coming from Russia and to increase their defense spending. Similarly, the commander of the German Army, Christian Freuding, asserted on June 12 that his country must “be ready for a Russian attack” by 2029 or sooner, stating, “We must be ready for war.”

In contrast, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Aleksandr Grushko claimed in a June 22 interview with the Izvestia newspaper that NATO and the European Union are preparing for a military conflict with Russia on the horizon of 2030. Grushko noted that from a military perspective, there is now little difference between NATO and the EU regarding aggressive ambitions toward Moscow, and that their main objective is to inflict a strategic defeat on Russia.

The Moscow administration has repeatedly emphasized that it has no intention of attacking Europe. Russian President Vladimir Putin has stated that there are no geopolitical, economic, or military reasons to fight the alliance. Nevertheless, Putin has also stated that “all NATO countries are virtually at war with Russia.”

Last year, representatives of NATO countries approved a declaration agreeing to raise military spending to 5% of GDP by 2035. Under this target, 3.5% of spending is projected to go directly to the military budget, while 1.5% is to be allocated indirectly to defense through cybersecurity and the modernization of highways.

Continue Reading

Diplomacy

Zelenskyy announces sweeping Ukrainian cabinet shakeup as Prime Minister Sviridenko resigns

Published

on

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has announced a sweeping structural overhaul of the government, confirming that a new prime minister will soon take office.

Following the announcement, the Ukrainian leader held a series of meetings over a two-and-a-half-hour period with potential candidates positioned to succeed Yulia Sviridenko as prime minister.

“Political strategy is changing”

Writing on his Telegram channel, Zelenskyy announced that the structure of the cabinet of ministers will change and that Sviridenko, who is stepping down from her post, will be assigned to a new role.

The Ukrainian president stated that the country is renewing its political strategy. Under the new approach, specific individuals with extensive experience will be put in charge of each priority foreign policy direction to implement agreements reached at the leadership level and to meet the expectations of the Ukrainian people.

Approximately one hour after Zelenskyy’s statement, Sviridenko confirmed her departure from the post of Prime Minister of Ukraine via a message on social media.

Thanking the president for his high valuation of her work, Sviridenko stated that she and Zelenskyy had discussed future steps.

Sviridenko began her career in the Ukrainian government in 2019 as Deputy Minister of Economy. Between 2020 and 2021, she served as deputy head of the presidential office, during which time she participated in negotiations regarding the Donbas.

In November 2021, she assumed control of economic management as First Deputy Prime Minister. In the spring of 2025, she signed a resource agreement with the US on behalf of Ukraine.

Zelenksyy proposed that Sviridenko lead the government in July 2025, and the Verkhovna Rada, Ukraine’s parliament, approved her candidacy with 262 votes in a session held on July 17, 2025.

Prior to Sviridenko, Denys Shmyhal had led the cabinet since March 2020. He currently serves as the Minister of Energy.

Priority targets of the new cabinet established

Zelenskyy outlined the primary areas of focus for the renewed government, listing relations with the US—specifically licensing agreements for the production of Patriot systems and security cooperation—as top priorities.

Other core objectives include the European anti-ballistic missile project, the European Union accession process, relations with neighboring states—particularly Poland and Hungary—cooperation with the Middle East, the Gulf countries, and China, as well as relations with international organizations.

The Ukrainian leader also stressed the need to strengthen operations along the front lines and border regions, increase weapons supplies, complete winter preparations, accelerate the transformation of state-owned enterprises, and implement agreements reached with partners regarding the reconstruction of Ukraine.

Who could succeed Sviridenko as prime minister?

The last major reshuffle in the Ukrainian government took place a year ago, with Sviridenko assuming the premiership in July 2025.

Under Ukrainian law, the candidate for prime minister must be proposed by the majority coalition in the Verkhovna Rada.

Once appointed, the prime minister submits the majority of the cabinet members to parliament for approval.

Russian President Vladimir Putin previously stated that the only legitimate power in Ukraine is the Verkhovna Rada. According to Putin’s assessment, the only authority qualified to participate in peace talks is the speaker of the Ukrainian parliament, asserting that Zelenskyy lacks legitimacy and therefore has no authority to sign any document.

According to a report by the Ukrainska Pravda newspaper, citing sources familiar with the matter, potential candidates being considered for the premiership include:

  • Sergiy Koretskyy, Chairman of the Board of Naftogaz and Director of Ukrnafta
  • Denys Shmyhal, Minister of Energy
  • Mykhailo Fedorov, Minister of Defense
  • Ihor Terekhov, Mayor of Kharkiv

Zelenskyy announced that he met with all of these officials, as well as Ukrainian Interior Minister Ihor Klymenko, during the day.

Sources familiar with the matter who spoke to RBC-Ukraine stated that the president’s decision to renew the government came as a surprise to many. The sources informing the publication also put forward Koretskyy’s name for the premiership.

Sources speaking to Bloomberg also pointed to Koretskyy alongside Shmyhal. The agency reported that both Koretskyy and Shmyhal possess extensive experience in the energy sector, which partially explains their candidacy to succeed Sviridenko.

Meanwhile, Verkhovna Rada Deputy Yaroslav Zheleznyak reported that the parliamentary vote on the prime minister’s resignation could take place on July 13 or 14.

Zheleznyak stated that following this vote, the entire government will function in an interim capacity, with Shmyhal temporarily leading the administration in his capacity as deputy prime minister.

According to information shared by Zheleznyak, Sviridenko will become Ukraine’s new ambassador to the US. The Financial Times also reported, citing two sources, that the outgoing prime minister will be appointed to this post.

Zelenskyy stated that he had offered Sviridenko the opportunity to head a new and important direction in relations with a key partner, though he did not share specific details regarding which country or organization this would involve.

Subsequently, a report by the Interfax-Ukraine agency, citing sources, stated that Olga Stefanishyna, who currently serves as Ukraine’s Ambassador to the US, wishes to end her diplomatic service due to personal reasons.

Stefanishyna has held the post for less than a year, with Zelenskyy having signed the decree for her appointment in August 2025.

Continue Reading

MOST READ

Turkey