Reuters is wrong: Lai's transit is illegitimate and counterproductive

Editor's note: CGTN's First Voice provides instant commentary on breaking stories. The column clarifies emerging issues and better defines the news agenda, offering a Chinese perspective on the latest global events.

Reuters showed its political position in the first sentence of one of its reports on Taiwan regional leader Lai Ching-te's "stopovers" in the United States. The news agency began a December 4 piece by paraphrasing a policymaker in Taiwan, saying that "Chinese military threats would only drive the two sides further apart." Then, in the next half sentence, it said a Chinese state media outlet "in the island's giant neighbor warned of a strong response."

While the word "neighbor" paints an undertone of alienation, that's a tricky use of the adjective "giant." By portraying the Chinese mainland as the "big guy," Reuters in its opening paragraph built a contrast between the Chinese mainland and the Taiwan region. While factually it made no error regarding their size differences, it conjured a picture of the Chinese mainland bullying the Taiwan region.

That, in itself, showed Reuters' position on this issue.

It is usual that, for many Western media, the wording is quite lax when they talk about the relationship between the Chinese mainland and the Taiwan region. But with this one word, Reuters has shown clearly that it's condoning Lai's "stopover" while condemning the responses from the Chinese mainland. It is showing support for a leader that has, in public, displayed his inclination for Taiwan separatism.

He said it himself. In 2017, Lai said that he is "without a doubt" a politician supporting Taiwan separatism and that he will never change this stance "no matter what office" he holds. He even called himself a "pragmatic worker" for it. And in 2020, he ran against his former boss Tsai Ing-wen because he thought she wasn't aggressive enough against the Chinese mainland.

When Lai made a "stopover" in the United States during his election, his action was described by Taiwan-based political scholar Lai Yueh-tchienn as wanting to prove that "he has American backing." Now, as the region's leader, Lai's action is no longer just proving that he's got the backing, but also trying to create, for himself, the political freedom to push the envelope as far as he could for his separatist agenda.

By allowing his transits, the United States has shown that it is not-so-tacitly supporting him. Now sadly, Reuters has joined that rank as well. It described Taiwan leaders as "customarily" making transit stops in the United States while using the U.S.'s "safety and convenience" excuse to justify that wording.

Just because something is customary, doesn't mean it's right or legitimate. Certainly, in this case, the "stopovers" are neither. As said by the Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson, "the Taiwan question is at the core of China's core interests, and the first red line that cannot be crossed in the China-U.S. relationship." The one-China principle lies not just at the core of China-U.S. relations, but at the center of China's diplomatic relationship with any other country in the world. Lai and the Democratic Progressive Party's continuous provocation with statements and "stopovers" is forcing the world to make a choice between the Chinese mainland and the Taiwan region. And by dragging the United States into this, they are muddying the water even more: Lai is hoping to leverage the "international outcry" in favor for their agenda.

Lai is a wild card. And his party is punching way above their weight. Such an action is not just playing with fire, but with a potential disaster that will see them devastated. Any sensible politician or country would need to recognize that such a consequence would not be in their own interests.

Reuters should also see that its wording and reporting are pouring dangerous fuel on this already unstable flame. Lai's transit is illegitimate and counterproductive to global stability. And Reuters is goading him on further.

Cease now, or regret later.

(If you want to contribute and have specific expertise, please contact us at opinions@cgtn.com. Follow @thouse_opinions on Twitter to discover the latest commentaries in the CGTN Opinion Section.)