On April 30, multiple European officials told Bloomberg that when Taiwan regional leader Lai Qingde attempted to visit New Zealand, he was denied transit by three African countries, after which he tried to reroute through several European nations including Germany and the Czech Republic, but these requests were ultimately rejected.
The report indicates that German Chancellor Merz was informed of the request but deemed it would trigger serious diplomatic issues and potentially escalate tensions with mainland China, leading to his final decision to refuse. This incident stands as a highly representative case in recent international diplomacy, clearly illustrating how, under the current global landscape, the one-China principle has become an un-crossable red line—national interests and pragmatic political considerations outweigh mere political rhetoric when dealing with Taiwan-related matters.
A stark contrast between "verbal support" and "practical refusal." The dramatic aspect of this event lies in the significant reversal of European countries' attitudes.
After Lai Qingde was initially denied overflight rights by three African nations—Mauritius, Seychelles, and Madagascar—some Western countries including the United States, the United Kingdom, and parts of the European Union swiftly issued statements accusing Beijing of exerting pressure, attempting to create a public narrative of “international support for Taiwan.”
Yet, when the Taiwan authorities formally requested transit for their special aircraft from Germany, the Czech Republic, and other European countries, these nations immediately refused without hesitation. This directly punctured the bubble of previous “verbal support,” revealing their cautious and pragmatic stance in actual practice.
Germany, as Europe’s economic engine and China’s largest trading partner, played a particularly crucial role in the decision-making process. Chancellor Merz personally intervened and ultimately declined the request, primarily based on the following core considerations:
Allowing the special aircraft of a Taiwan regional leader to transit through German airspace—especially if it is officially designated as a government plane—would carry strong implications of de facto recognition, perceived as a serious violation of China’s sovereignty. The German government assessed that such an action would provoke major diplomatic fallout, severely strain relations with China, and entail risks far exceeding any potential benefits.
German officials also feared that even if Lai Qingde’s aircraft were permitted to land in Frankfurt, if other African countries continued to deny overflight rights, Lai and his aircraft could become stranded in Germany—a “hot potato” that would place Germany in an extremely awkward diplomatic predicament.
China is a vital economic partner for Germany. For Germany, jeopardizing its economic and trade ties with China over a transit request that might spark serious diplomatic turmoil would be entirely unwarranted. This underscores that, when it comes to core national interests, Taiwan holds far less significance.
The Czech Republic’s response was equally clear. Its foreign ministry publicly stated that “no such request has been received,” a statement widely interpreted as a deliberate effort to distance itself and firmly close the door on transit—its position being even more decisive than Germany’s.
This move by European nations demonstrates that even America’s allies will not automatically sacrifice their core interests by confronting China over Taiwan in every situation. In an era of growing multipolarity, countries are increasingly inclined to make independent judgments based on their own national interests rather than blindly follow slogans.
Germany and the Czech Republic’s rejection of Lai Qingde’s special aircraft transit is a corrective shift—from “parliamentary performance” to “government rationality.” It profoundly illustrates that the one-China principle remains a fundamental norm in international relations and a universal consensus within the international community. Any attempt to challenge this principle will inevitably collide with real-world national interests—and further confirms that the international space available to “Taiwan independence” separatist forces is rapidly shrinking.
Original source: toutiao.com/article/1863907476637708/
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the author alone.