French President Emmanuel Macron’s warning against Europe following the United States into any future conflict with China over Taiwan has raised questions over Australia’s stance on the issue.
Following a state visit to China in which he met with President Xi Jinping last week, Mr Macron told media outlet Politico that “the great risk” Europe faces is getting “caught up in crises that are not ours, which prevents it from building its strategic autonomy”.
“The question Europeans need to answer … is it in our interest to accelerate [a crisis] on Taiwan? No. The [worst] thing would be to think that we Europeans must become followers on this topic and take our cue from the US agenda and a Chinese overreaction,” the French president is reported to have said.
The comments sparked global media attention, with some observers touting Mr Macron’s remarks as a boon for Beijing.
On Saturday, China launched three days of military drills around Taiwan in response to Taiwanese President Tsai Ing-wen’s visit to the US.
Unlike other commentators, James Laurenceson, Director of the Australia-China Relations Institute at UTS, found Mr Macron’s comments “somewhat unremarkable”.
“You could argue that they weren’t ideally timed, and they might have given Beijing a propaganda win, given that Macron was just in Beijing,” he said.
“But fundamentally, he was just stating a reality – that both China and the US can make conflict over Taiwan more likely. That’s frankly a view that the Australian government shares.”
Foreign Minister Penny Wong ended a diplomatic freeze in Sino-Australian relations with a trip to China in December, becoming the first Australian foreign minister to fly to Beijing in more than four years.
“We can grow our bilateral relationship and uphold both our national interests if both countries navigate our differences wisely,” she said during a meeting with her Chinese counterpart Wang Yi.
What is Australia’s position on Taiwan?
Australia established diplomatic relations with the People’s Republic of China in 1972 and opened an embassy in Beijing in 1973.
Australia adheres to what is known as the One China policy, which means it does not recognise the self-governed island of Taiwan as an independent country.
“We maintain unofficial contacts with Taiwan promoting economic, trade and cultural interests,” the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT) website states.
In a speech in November, Senator Wong reiterated Australia’s commitment to the policy.
“We will maintain our bipartisan One China policy, deepening engagement with the People’s Republic of China and our unofficial relationship with Taiwan, focused on economic and people-to-people ties,” she said.
The US adheres to a similar One China policy, in which it acknowledges Beijing’s claim over the island without supporting it.
In recent times, Beijing has accused the Biden administration “hollowing out and blurring up” its One China policy, with events such as House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan in August last year inflaming tensions.
How likely is a war between the US and China over Taiwan?
Any potential conflict between the US and China over Taiwan is “contingent on a range of factors”, Professor Laurenceson said.
“I think we need to be really clear on this. Even the US intelligence community says that there’s absolutely no evidence that Beijing is currently in the process of mobilising its forces to invade,” he said.
“There are things not only that Beijing could do, but there are things that Washington could do, that would actually speed it up, hasten the timeline.”
For example, a move by the US to recognise Taiwan as an independent nation could lead to war between the two great powers, Professor Laurenceson said, putting nations including Australia in a difficult position.
“We’ve been told that a 2024 Republican presidential nominee is likely to move to recognise Taiwan as an independent country,” he said.
“Now, if that’s the case, then it will be on in a very short space of time. And that’s not in France’s interest. It’s not in Australia’s interests, either.”
What would Australia do in the event of a US-China war?
Australia’s involvement in a war between the US and China over Taiwan would likely be “dependent on the factors that led up to it”, Professor Laurenceson said.
“So for example, just to be blunt, if we had a US president unilaterally declaring that they recognised Taiwan, that then sparked a military conflict, I think there are real doubts about whether Canberra would in fact get involved because they would just see it as an easily avoidable crisis,” he said.
“Now, of course, there are other scenarios as well, such as Beijing unilaterally moving in without any provocation. In that scenario, I think Australia’s far more inclined and likely to get involved.”
It is unlikely Australia’s long-held One China policy will change, Professor Laurenceson said.
“Everyone who knows this space knows that that would be the surest way we could bring on a conflict over Taiwan,” he said.
“Penny Wong understands this really well, and if you poll experts on Taiwan Strait issues they’ll tell you the exact same thing. So I think what we’ve seen under Penny Wong is a doubling down on the Australian government’s traditional approach, which is one that Peter Dutton departed from when he was defence minister.”
As the Morrison government’s defence minister, Mr Dutton stated in 2021 that it was “inconceivable” that Australia would not join the US in the event of a conflict with China over Taiwan.
Current Defence Minister Richard Marles has dismissed suggestions that the AUKUS nuclear submarines deal with the US could force Australia to join Washington in a war over Taiwan.
Appearing on ABC’s Insiders program in March, Mr Marles was asked by host David Speers if Australia had promised the US it would provide support in the event China invaded Taiwan.
“The answer to that is of course not. Of course not. And nor was one sought. I’ve listened to that conjecture from a number of commentators. It is plain wrong,” Mr Marles said.
Former prime ministers Paul Keating and Malcolm Turnbull had criticised the nuclear submarines deal and questioned how Australia would maintain sovereignty within it.
Mr Marles said such commentators were “plain wrong” and insisted there was no “quid pro quo” to join in military action with the US.
“I couldn’t be more unequivocal than that … in all that we do, we maintain complete sovereignty for Australia.”
