Response to interpellation 2023/24:700 on the designation of Taiwan
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
The debate concerns the designation of Taiwan. M argues that the government uses the designation Taiwan and that authorities independently decide how names are stated in their application 1 2 3. M emphasizes that Sweden has a broad and long-term cooperation with Taiwan and that the government works to deepen this exchange 1 2. M argues that the authorities' writing rules refer to the EU institutions' common rules and that the Foreign Name Book only contains names of independent states that Sweden has recognized 3. M argues that the Foreign Minister cannot direct independent administrative authorities according to the Instrument of Government 4. SD considers the Swedish Tax Agency's designation of Taiwan as a province in China to be inappropriate, insulting, and supporting the communist regime's narrative 5 6. SD argues that the Foreign Minister should show leadership and express a disapproval of the designation so as not to worsen relations with Taiwan 6 7. SD considers the name change to be a scandal 5. SD considers that the Swedish Tax Agency should not conduct its own foreign policy and that the Foreign Minister must act to clarify the practice 8. SD argues that Sweden should stop calling Taiwan a province in China in order to recognize their freedom 8.
Written by AI in advance and may contain errors. The numbers lead to the speech a statement builds on; check against the text below.
Utrikesministern Tobias Billström (M)
Madam Speaker! Nima Gholam Ali Pour has asked me if I intend to work to ensure that Swedish government agencies do not undermine Taiwan's independence, if I will work to ensure that the Ministry for Foreign Affairs provides guidance to government agencies that does not worsen Sweden's relations with Taiwan, and if I will work to ensure that government agencies do not refer to Taiwan as a province of China.
It has been well known for some time that there are many names for Taiwan in various international contexts. The government has long used the designation Taiwan, which we have clarified on the government's website and inform those who submit questions to the Ministry for Foreign Affairs. There should therefore be no doubt as to how the government designates Taiwan. The EU also consistently uses the designation Taiwan. How the names of countries and regions are stated by Swedish authorities is decided independently in their application.
Sweden's cooperation with Taiwan is broad and long-term. Sweden's good relations with Taiwan have developed over many years in a number of areas. The Business Sweden office in Taiwan, for example, has been active since 1991 and was one of the Export Council's first offices in Asia. Sweden has held trade consultations at the state secretary level with Taiwan annually since the 1980s, which offers a platform for exchange on, among other things, trade, investments, green transition, health, and economic security. Within the framework of Sweden's one-China policy, the government works to further deepen the exchange.
Nima Gholam Ali Pour (SD)
Madam Speaker! On 28 February 2018, the Swedish Tax Agency announced that they are changing the name form of Taiwan from Republic of China (Taiwan) to Taiwan, province in China. In the geopolitical context we find ourselves in, this is a major and important change and marking. The communist regime in China aims to make Taiwan a province in China. Therefore, it is inappropriate for a Swedish authority to support the communist regime's narrative that Taiwan is a province in China.
Given that the People's Republic of China's military forces constantly conduct exercises to invade Taiwan, it becomes problematic that the Swedish Tax Agency describes Taiwan as a province in China. If one were to make a comparison, it would be as if an agency in another country began to designate Sweden as "Sweden, province in Russia." It would be offensive, degrading, and insulting.
Madam Speaker! I am sure that the Minister for Foreign Affairs understands this. It is a self-evident matter what the purpose of such a name change is. It is to undermine Taiwanese sovereignty and support the narrative that the communist regime in China promotes that Taiwan is nothing more than a province in China. The question is why this name change took place.
The interesting thing here is that no one wants to take responsibility for the name change. The Swedish Tax Agency does not want to take responsibility for it but argues that there have been contacts with the Ministry for Foreign Affairs regarding the name change and what the practice is, and that the name change has occurred accordingly. The Swedish Tax Agency's name change for Taiwan has thus occurred on the basis of guidance from the Ministry for Foreign Affairs.
This happened, as mentioned, in 2018, so Foreign Minister Billström is not responsible for the guidance that the then Ministry for Foreign Affairs provided. But if the name change originates in the Ministry for Foreign Affairs, the Foreign Minister can act so that the Ministry for Foreign Affairs gives different guidance to the Swedish Tax Agency, so that Taiwan can be referred to in a way that does not appear derogatory.
What is obvious is that the Swedish Tax Agency does not engage in foreign policy and does not have its own foreign policy, but this agency seeks guidance from the Ministry for Foreign Affairs. It actually means that it is sufficient for the Foreign Minister today to in some way comment and express a dislike of the designation Taiwan, province of China, for the Swedish Tax Agency to understand that this designation is inappropriate.
This very unnecessary problem began with a guidance from the Ministry for Foreign Affairs, and it can quite easily be concluded with a guidance from the Ministry for Foreign Affairs and a possible statement from the Minister for Foreign Affairs today where he generally expresses his disapproval of the designation Taiwan, province of China.
The Swedish Tax Agency is an independent authority, but the Foreign Minister may comment generally on how Taiwan should be designated given that the designation is generally a foreign policy issue.
Markus Wiechel (SD)
Madam Speaker! I would like to thank the Minister for Foreign Affairs for the answer to the interpellation and, of course, also thank my party colleague Nima Gholam Ali Pour, who raised this question.
Earlier today, I stood here in an interpellation debate with the Minister for Finance, who is responsible for the Swedish Tax Agency (Skatteverket). At the risk of repeating myself, I want to say that I think it is important to highlight that there are two different dimensions here – partly the responsibility that the Minister for Finance has on his desk when it comes to the Swedish Tax Agency, and partly the symbolic political marking that is required in this matter. That is where the Minister for Foreign Affairs comes in.
China has come to behave increasingly aggressively towards its neighbors. They have engaged in espionage, acquisitions of critical infrastructure, and pressure. This name change occurred, just as Nima mentioned, when the Social Democratic government led the Ministry for Foreign Affairs. Several signals suggest that pressure came from the Ministry for Foreign Affairs for the change to take place. It is, to put it mildly, worrying if that is the case. I naturally hope that such things no longer occur and that the Minister for Foreign Affairs takes action if there are any signs that is the case.
This name change is actually a scandal. It is not true that Taiwan is a province of China. In fact, many other countries in Europe that, just like the government, follow the one-China policy have chosen a different way to handle this. That was also the case in Sweden until February 2018, when for some strange reason they changed their minds to follow China's narrative.
I know that within the government and across the entire government base, there is broad support for Taiwan. Since the change of government in 2022, we have seen how the government has adopted a significantly more positive line towards Taiwan. This is, not entirely unexpectedly, something that I think is positive. The Foreign Minister, who has mentioned Taiwan several times in connection with various appearances, should agree with that.
I have great respect for the fact that the government should not micro-manage an agency, and that is not what I want either. Just as Nima Gholam Ali Pour said, however, guidance from the government may be required. I mean that the agency is not fulfilling its mandate when one is actually dealing with pure inaccuracies, as this is.
I hope that the government takes to heart what has been said and that one listens to the sound forces who have pointed out the bizarre nature of somehow engaging in an insult of Taiwan and Taiwanese people, because that is exactly what this is. I do not think it is correct.
Utrikesministern Tobias Billström (M)
Madam Speaker! Let me first emphasize to the participants in the debate that Sweden's cooperation with Taiwan is broad and long-term. Sweden's good relations with Taiwan have developed over many years and in a number of areas. I have previously mentioned the Business Sweden office in Taiwan; it is an excellent example of this.
We also have a broad trade exchange with Taiwan. Swedish companies have a long and very successful presence in Taiwan. Today, nearly 100 Swedish companies operate in this country. As I just said in my answer to Nima Gholam Ali Pour, the government, within the framework of Sweden's one-China policy, is working to further deepen this exchange.
I believe it is good to remind in the debate that there have been many names for Taiwan used in various international contexts. The Swedish government has long used the designation Taiwan, and this is clearly communicated to everyone who visits the government's website. It is also the Ministry for Foreign Affairs' message to everyone who asks which designation the government uses. Furthermore, it can be noted that the EU consistently uses the designation Taiwan. It is therefore very clear how the Swedish government designates Taiwan, and there should be no doubt about this.
The interpellor raised in their question which names the Swedish Tax Agency (Skatteverket) uses in the population register. How the names of countries and regions are stated by Swedish authorities is something they decide independently in their application. In this work, the Swedish Tax Agency applies the ISO 3166 standard regarding codes and names in Swedish. This is therefore not a matter for the Ministry for Foreign Affairs, but it is something that the Swedish Tax Agency itself decides in its application.
I also want to refer to the answer that Minister for Finance Elisabeth Svantesson gave on this issue here in the chamber earlier today, which Markus Wiechel touched upon. According to the Instrument of Government, I as an individual minister cannot govern Swedish administrative authorities in this application.
Nima Gholam Ali Pour (SD)
Madam Speaker! Taiwan is a free and democratic country today. If Taiwan were a province of China, as the Swedish Tax Agency designates Taiwan, the Taiwanese people would be oppressed just like the population in the People's Republic of China. That is why this is an important issue. The Swedish Tax Agency denies the Taiwanese people's freedom from the communist regime in China and anticipates an invasion that we all hope will never occur.
Sweden is now a member of Nato and has a greater responsibility for the West's freedom. Taiwan is not a member of Nato but is allied with the West and is threatened by an antagonist - the People's Republic of China - which conducts extensive espionage in Sweden and has threatened several Swedish politicians.
It is obvious that the Swedish Tax Agency's way of designating Taiwan as a province of China deteriorates the relations between Taiwan and Sweden. Furthermore, it supports the People's Republic of China's narrative that one should expand its borders by force.
Here, the Foreign Minister must show leadership. Here, the Foreign Minister must stand firm and simply say that Taiwan is not a province of China and that it is highly inappropriate to refer to Taiwan as a province of China. The Foreign Minister must be able to do this despite the fact that we have independent agencies.
Of course we have independent agencies, but we also have a relationship with Taiwan that must be nurtured. If it is the case that the Swedish Tax Agency unconsciously worsens our relations with Taiwan, because Taiwan is referred to as a province in China, then guidance is needed from the competent authority. The competent authority when it comes to our relations with the outside world is the Minister for Foreign Affairs.
Madam Speaker! The Minister for Foreign Affairs cannot mean that he will be passive when the actions of an individual authority, for which he does not take responsibility, worsen Sweden's relations with a country that has friendly relations with Sweden. The issue is that the Swedish Tax Agency designates Taiwan as the People's Republic of China sees Taiwan, namely as a province in China. The People's Republic of China is in a cold war with the Western world. Why should Swedish authorities at all support the People's Republic of China's narrative regarding Taiwan?
Would the Foreign Minister be just as passive if Swedish authorities questioned Ukraine's sovereignty and designated Ukraine as a province of Russia? It would cause an uproar; it would never be accepted. Why would Swedish authorities conduct such a hostile campaign against Ukraine? But that is precisely what is happening when the Swedish Tax Agency designates Taiwan as a province of China. Here, the Foreign Minister must step in, show leadership and guidance, and ensure that relations with Taiwan do not deteriorate because of this.
What reason does the Swedish Tax Agency have to designate Taiwan as a province in China? There is no reason. The only ones who see Taiwan as a province in China are the communist regime in Beijing.
Again: This is something the Foreign Minister can easily solve by standing up for the freedom of the Taiwanese people here and now and saying that the designation Taiwan, province of China, is not something he supports but something he dislikes. It is not more difficult than that.
Markus Wiechel (SD)
Madam Speaker! I can sign under every single word my fellow party member Nima Gholam Ali Pour has just said.
There is a long list of countries that, like Sweden, pursue a one-China policy and, like the Swedish Tax Agency, follow the international standard ISO 3166, which uses a specific designation. But despite the fact that these countries pursue a one-China policy, they have a completely different designation for Taiwan and use the correct designation, which does not make Taiwan a part of China. Returning to the designation that existed before would therefore not be a problem; it would not change the government's one-China policy.
Symbolic politics is important. Just as I hope that the Foreign Minister, without having to go in and interfere in an individual agency's operations, can clearly and distinctly stand up for Taiwan and make some statements that can guide this agency to do the right thing, because as it stands now, the agency is not doing its job.
Relations with Taiwan are becoming more and more important, not least when we see how authoritarian states such as Iran and China, among others, are tying themselves closer together. It is very important that the free, democratic states in the world stick together.
Utrikesministern Tobias Billström (M)
Madam Speaker! I completely agree with Markus Wiechel regarding the last part of his contribution. It is incredibly important that we stand up for democratic values and work for them.
The Swedish government considers its position on how it designates Taiwan to be very clear. How the names of countries and territories are stated by Swedish authorities is decided by them independently in their application.
Madam Speaker! In practical terms, it is such that in the currently applicable edition of the Authorities' Writing Rules, references are made for country names, population designations, nationality adjectives, and country codes to the recommendations in the Foreign Name Book or the Publication Manual, which are the EU institutions' common writing rules. In the latter, there are also names of territories, regions, and capitals. The Foreign Name Book, which the Ministry for Foreign Affairs is responsible for, contains Sweden's official names for independent states that Sweden has recognized as well as the Holy See. But it contains no names of other foreign areas or territories. This is important to remember in this debate because we are talking about how the authorities work when it comes to established writing rules.
As is known for Sweden, like the EU, a so-called one-China policy, which means that we only have diplomatic relations with the People's Republic of China.
Nima Gholam Ali Pour (SD)
Madam Speaker! I would like to summarize. A Swedish authority, Skatteverket, has undermined Taiwan's independence from the communist regime in Beijing by beginning to refer to Taiwan as a province in China. This occurred after the authority held talks with the Ministry for Foreign Affairs in 2018. During these talks, Skatteverket perceived that the practice is to refer to Taiwan as a province in China.
I mean that if the Foreign Minister considers that this is not practice, he should correct this mistake that the previous government made. This is actually not difficult. In the foreign policy declaration this year, the Foreign Minister mentioned Taiwan once, and then he said Taiwan, not Taiwan, province of China.
The Swedish Tax Agency should not conduct its own foreign policy. If we have a Foreign Minister who calls Taiwan Taiwan, the Swedish Tax Agency should do the same instead of following Beijing's lead. Our ally USA has built up a strong military capability to defend Taiwan and prevent Taiwan from becoming a province of China. The Swedish Tax Agency should therefore not refer to Taiwan as a province of China.
The Swedish Tax Agency is an independent authority. However, the relations with Taiwan and Sweden's position towards Taiwan in relation to the People's Republic of China fall within the Foreign Minister's area of responsibility. This responsibility cannot be delegated to others. Therefore, the Foreign Minister must act to clarify for Swedish authorities what the practice is regarding the designation of Taiwan.
Taiwan will not subordinate itself to the communist regime in China despite all threats and pressures from Beijing, so the least we can do is recognize their freedom and stop calling Taiwan a province of China.
Utrikesministern Tobias Billström (M)
Madam Speaker! I thank you for a good debate. I have great respect for the fact that one can have different opinions on the designation of Taiwan, but according to the Instrument of Government, I as an individual minister cannot, as it is said, govern Swedish administrative authorities. It would be very poor leadership of mine, in light of the interpellant's views on this, to do so.
How the government designates Taiwan and what messages the Ministry for Foreign Affairs gives to those who ask are, however, clear, and I think the circumstances have emerged from this interpellation debate. But how it is implemented in practice through the application by independent authorities is, in my opinion, not a matter for the Ministry for Foreign Affairs.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.