Chinese ambassador to Australia Xiao Qian says the relationship between the two countries has been "difficult" in recent times, but adds a change of government has provided an "opportunity to reset" relations.
Look back on the updates with our live blog.
Key events
- Expert: Australia's hopes for a reset with China remain unclear
- China is punishing Taiwan and not US over Pelosi visit, expert says
- Is China planning to establish a military base in the Pacific?
- What does 'all necessary measures' mean in these circumstances?
- Will China lift trade restrictions? Or release Cheng Lei?
- Where can I watch the ambassador's address?
- Got a question? Well we've got some expert answers
- Who is Xiao Qian?
- The ambassador's address comes at a complicated time for Australia-China ties
Live updates
By Shiloh Payne
We're closing the blog here
Thanks for joining us today, and a big thank you to our reporters Bang Xiao and Stephen Dziedzic for answering your questions, alongside our experts who offered their insight.
You can keep up-to-date on the ABC's website, by watching News Channel or listening to local radio here, and by subscribing to our mobile alerts.
See you next time.
By Shiloh Payne
Why does Australia recognise the People's Republic of China as the sole governing body?
Why does Australia recognise the People's Republic of China (Beijing) instead of the Republic of China (Taipei) as the sole governing body of china?
- Anonymous
Here's ABC reporter Bang Xiao to answer your question:
This complex issue represents a question for many, and the answer mainly involves economic, diplomatic and regional security concerns.
Today, Canberra is clearly not showing signs of change because of our national interests and potential consequences.
Let's take Lithuania as an example. China imposed economic sanctions and a diplomatic boycott after the country allowed Taipei to change the name of its office in Vilnius.
Today, China is one of Australia's largest trading partners and plays an increasingly important role in the world. Establishing formal diplomatic relations with Taiwan would likely mean losing access to the Chinese market.
In fact, political identity is also a controversial topic for the Taiwanese. Not everyone on the island supports a change in Taiwan's diplomatic status.
Official polls last year showed that 84.9 per cent of Taiwan's population wanted to remain status quo, and that included Taipei's diplomatic relations.
Like the United States, Australia also has a strategic ambiguity in its diplomatic relations with China and Taiwan. It means Canberra maintains close cultural and economic and trade ties with Taiwan, although it has no formal diplomatic relations.
Given this strategy has been adopted by almost all democratic countries around the world, it is very hard to believe Canberra would take a step forward and take the potential risk of more retaliation from Beijing.
By Shiloh Payne
Would a nuclear-armed Taiwan freeze China's intentions to invade?
Would a nuclear-armed Taiwan freeze any PRC intentions of invasion indefinitely?
- PM
Hi there, here's foreign affairs reporter Stephen Dziedzic:
If Taiwan ever managed to obtain nuclear weapons then yes, that would certainly make China pause.
It's worth noting that Taiwan did try and pursue a nuclear weapons program several decades ago but it has been dormant for the last thirty years or so.
And while it possesses quite a bit of the expertise(and infrastructure) needed to develop nuclear weapons in a relatively short period of time, there are some very big obstacles in the way.
For a start it's likely that the United States - which played a significant role hobbling Taiwan's initial nuclear foray - would still be opposed (although some observers wonder if that opposition is starting to shift).
More significantly, China has signalled that it will not accept a nuclear armed Taiwan. If Taipei tried to revive its nuclear weapons program covertly and Beijing caught wind of it then there is certainly a risk it would quickly take military action to disable the program or even seize the island.
Most observers seem to think that it's unlikely Taiwan would take this risk.
There could also be significant opposition within Taiwan.
Still, as its strategic circumstances continue todeteriorateand China's military strength swells, it's hard to be certain.
By Shiloh Payne
Expert agrees there's a lack of diversity in reporting on issues of China
Fan Yang, a research fellow in Chinese-Australian communities at Deakin University, said she tended to agree with the ambassador that "there was a lack of diversity in Australian journalists reporting on issues of China" because Australian interests and angles were applied to coverage on China.
She and her colleagues compiled more than 5,000 posts from public WeChat accounts in Chinese about the Australian federal election this year.
"[The ambassador] mentioned Australian media's assumption of Beijing’s political intervention in Australian federal election, in our database of 5,000 articles (the collection is still ongoing) we also didn’t identify the so-called Beijing intervention or sponsored articles by Beijing," she said.
By Shiloh Payne
More on the one-China policy
Our reporter Bang Xiao also had this to say on the one-China policy:
Australia stopped recognising Taiwan as a sovereign state when it established formal diplomatic relations with Beijing in 1972.
This was because Australia "acknowledged" Beijing's "one-china" policy that only one government in the world could represent China, which is Beijing. This can also be seen in the public information released by DFAT.
Diplomatic rhetoric is often subtle and vague, as the content can be often very sensitive. This precisely gives Beijing the opportunity to use the art of language to increase the legitimacy of its regime.
The "acknowledgement" of the one-China policy by Western countries such as Australia and the US has become "recognition" in Beijing's narrative. This is a point that is easy to miss, even for many people who read Chinese language.
The argument was originated from a language issue too.
Taiwan has called itself the Republic of China and China has called itself the People's Republic of China.
When the United Nations passed a resolution on October 25, 1971, recognising Beijing as the sole legitimate representative of China, Taipei's representatives were expelled.
Since then, the one-China policy has been "acknowledged" by more and more countries, but in the eyes of Taipei and Taiwanese people, it is one of the key means by which Beijing ruthlessly suppresses Taiwan's diplomatic development on the global stage
Taiwan is thus not allowed to join the World Health Organization, even two years after COVID-19 pandemic, and its athletes can only participate in international sporting events under the name of Chinese Taipei.
By Jessica Riga
Is China trying to change our policy and hope we don't notice?
the Ambassador described australia as having a one China principle- which we don’t. Are they trying to change our policy and hoping no one realises?
- Rose
Hi Rose, thanks for your question.
Here's our foreign affairs reporter Stephen Dziedzic:
That's right — the Chinese government deliberately blurs the line between a "one-China policy" and "one-China principle."
They don't just do this with Australia, they do it with several other countries which try to maintain some fine (but very important!) distinctions when it comes to China and Taiwan.
Australia has a policy that "recognises" the PRC as the sole legal government of China but only "acknowledges" the Chinese Government's position that Taiwan is a province of the PRC. This ambiguity was built in quite deliberately to make it easier for Australia to maintain unofficial ties with Taiwan, giving the federal government more room to manoeuvre on cross-Strait issues.
But China regularly tries to re-frame it as the "one-China principle" which implies that Australia accepts China's policy in its entirety, and agrees with Beijing that Taiwan is nothing more than a wayward Chinese province.
This framing is designed to undermine Australia's attempt to set the tone of its own policy and reinforce's China's own narrative on Taiwan.
By Shiloh Payne
How does the Chinese government view separatist attitudes in Taiwan?
How does the Chinese government view the separatist attitudes that the democratically elected government, and people who elected them, of Taiwan hold?
- Dave
Hi Dave,
Here's ABC reporter Bang Xiao to answer your question:
The Chinese government and state media's highly consistent rhetoric refuses to recognise Taipei as a democratically elected government.
Anyone who supports Taiwan's independence is viewed as a separatist by Beijing, which has introduced an anti-secession law to punish those who support Taiwan's democratic progression.
In China, you can't see a single official statement that calls Taipei as a reciprocal polity. They describe Taiwan as a province and see Taiwan's democratically elected government as local authorities.
Beijing has established a "delegation" for Taiwan province in China's National People's Congress.
However, the delegates are not elected by the people of Taiwan, but rather appointed from Taiwanese who support reunification or are running businesses in China.
They discuss Taiwan's affairs and cross-strait relations every year, without making any actual impact.
Taiwanese citizens traveling to China cannot use their passports because China does not recognise the Republic of China on the cover of their passports.
Therefore, they need to apply for additional Chinese-approved documents in order to visit families, work or travel to China.
By Jessica Riga
In pictures: Xiao Qian addresses the National Press Club
By Shiloh Payne
When will Australian journalists be able to return to China?
Is there any chance that Australian journalists will be allowed to work in China soon?
- Keith Brown
Hey Keith, thanks for your question.
Here's our foreign affairs reporter Stephen Dziedzic:
It's hard to be certain but at the moment it looks pretty unlikely.
There's no doubt that major Australian media organisations would love to get back into China as soon as possible.
But they'd also be very wary of the risks, and clearly remain anxious that their journalists could be caught up in the broader political tussle between Beijing and Canberra, or targeted by the Chinese government in the same way that the ABC's Bill Birtles and the Australian Financial Review's Michael Smith were in 2020.
I suspect Australian media companies would only send journalists back if they received a very firm commitment from the Chinese government that they would be allowed to work freely without the threat of arbitrary detention or arrest.
Even then, some organisations may not be willing to take the risk for the foreseeable future. It's also not clear if the Chinese government would give Australian journalists permission to enter even if a formal application was made.
In the meantime, Australian media organisations like the ABC have sent journalists to other countries including Taiwan and Singapore - to cover China and the broader region.
It's not a perfect solution but it might well be the best one available for now.
By Shiloh Payne
Opinion polls say Taiwan does not support unification with China
East Asia corrspondent Bill Birtles is speaking from Taipei on News Channel, he's described the Mr Xiao's comments on Taiwan as "predictable".
“On Taiwan specifically, [Mr Xiao] tried all sorts of comparisons, even mentioned imagining Tasmania was being siphoned off from Australia and how would Australians feel about it,” he said.
“Taiwan is unique situation. He tried to claim the majority of Taiwanese are in support of unification with China.
“Opinion polls here carried out by universities do not confirm that at all. Quite the opposite.
“He also tried to say that Australia has reaffirmed its commitment to the One China principal was Australia does not have a one China principal, that is Beijing's language.”
By Shiloh Payne
'Nothing new' came from today's address, expert says
Dr Feng Chongyi, an associate professor from the University of Technology, Sydney, told the ABC that "nothing new came out" from Mr Xiao's speech today.
"It was basically the same old cliches," Dr Feng said.
"The ambassador's tone was much friendlier and softer than previous ambassadors, but there was no change in content."
By Shiloh Payne
Expert: Speech 'does not see' how relations will improve
Dr Feng Chongyi, an associate professor from the University of Technology, Sydney,was disappointed "the ambassador did not elaborate on concrete measures to reset and improve Australia-China relations".
"He pretty much attributed all the reasons for the deterioration of Australia-China relations in the past few years to the policies of the previous Australian government, without suggesting that China had any responsibility, [and] even denying Chinese economic coercion in general, which is untrue.
"The policy of the previous Australian government was a bipartisan consensus, a fact the ambassador ignored."
"His speech does not hear China's intention to reflect and adjust, nor does it see how Australia-China relations will improve."
By Jessica Riga
What was it like in the room?
Here's our foreign affairs reporter Stephen Dziedzic with a quick update on what it was like in the room during the ambassador's address:
It is worth noting how sharply the tone shifted in this room after the prepared remarks when questions came up about Taiwan.
In the first half, you had the ambassador laying out some pretty familiar remarks about the fact that the new federal government in office offered a chance for a reset in the relationship.
After the speech finish, questions came and many of them focused on Taiwan. Right there, the tone shifted markedly.
The ambassador sounded much more defensive, much more belligerent and much more uncompromising.
By Shiloh Payne
Expert: Australia's hopes for a reset with China remain unclear
Dr John Garrick, a legal scholar from Charles Darwin University who has studied China for 20 years, said Mr Xiao's language during his addressss was more straightforward than "the 'olive branch' approach when the Albanese Labor government was newly elected".
"Ambassador Xiao's highly respectful speech was also required to reflect China's domestic political position," he said.
He said Australia's hopes to improve the relationship or for a "reset" remained "unclear and challenging".
Ambassador Xiao may have claimed China would never seek hegemony, acknowledged Australia and China's mutually beneficially trade relationship and said mutual co-operation remained a goal, he said.
But still, "these hopes are also linked to [Australia's] strategic relationship with the US and its other democratic alliances which are now extremely wary of the attempts [by China] to re-build and alter the rules-based order to better reflect the ambitions of authoritarian regimes and their overt desires for longevity."
By Shiloh Payne
China is punishing Taiwan and not US over Pelosi visit, expert says
Dr Lennon Chang, a senior lecturer at Monash University and President of the Australasian Taiwan Studies Association, noted that the ambassador emphasised the ongoing military drills were in response to Nancy Pelosi's visit.
"But it seems that the Chinese government is not doing anything to punish the US but Taiwan," he said.
He added that a poll showed more than 60 per cent of Taiwanese were not pro-unification.
"We don't support one China policy," he said.
"If China has such a confidence, why are they worrying about Pelosi's visit?"
By Jessica Riga
That wraps up the National Press Club address
Now let's turn to our experts who are going to answer your questions!
Remember, you can submit your question to the live blog using the big blue button.
By Jessica Riga
On China's failure to condemn Russia's invasion of Ukraine
Q: Given your focus on sovereignty and non-interventionism, how are we supposed to take that seriously from China given the failure to condemn Russia's invasion of Ukraine and continued cooperation with Russia? And how are we to take your condemnation of Australian media seriously given the quashing of dissents and disinformation around in China?
The ambassador starts his reply by saying "this is a very interesting question."
"It's been asked again and again for the past couple of months. My answer is, there's no simple answer to a question of complexity.
"If you look at what has happened in Ukraine, it involves many aspects.
"The relation between these two countries is rather complicated."
By Jessica Riga
Any reason why both leaders should not be able to have a formal meeting in Bali at G20?
"I think we're going to communicate with our Australian colleagues through the back channels to see when appropriate, or when we have the necessary condition and atmosphere, whether or not both sides have the willingness to get engaged in the top level meeting," Xiao says.
"As ambassador, I'm hoping for the best and I'm going to try to make my efforts towards that direction."
By Jessica Riga
Will there be an invitation to PM Albanese to meet with President Xi?
Q: "You said that this is a possibility for a reset in the relationship. Prime Minister Albanese has said he's prepared to meet President Xi in Bali. Will there be an invitation to the Prime Minister to meet with President Xi? You also given us quite a discursive admission to countries in the region about acting with mutual relationship, cooperation and friendship and then you said quote, 'Australia should handle the Taiwan question with caution.' That sounds like a threat. Is it?
Here's part of Xiao Qian's reply:
"On the the bilateral relationship, as I said, our policy towards Australiaremains unchanged," Xiao says.
"On the question of Taiwan: Caution is just to remind.
"It is important for the government in this country to stick to the commitment of One China policy. And this commitment should be not only words, but also in deeds. Not only in name, but also in essence. And it should be practised with absolute sincerity, but without discount."
By Jessica Riga
There are 23 million people in Taiwan, don't they get a say in what should happen to their future?
Q:" There were 23 million people in Taiwan. Don't they get a say in what should happen about their future? You talk about reunification, but it would be on China's terms, wouldn't it? I mean, One Country, Two Systems, the deal that was offered to Hong Kong, is dead. We have seen that in the last couple of years. That might have been a deal that the Taiwanese were tempted by in the '90s but would not be now. So you talk about, you know, the White Paper out today talks about leaving the option of taking Taiwan by force, but what about the 23 million Taiwanese people, don't they get a say in their future?"
The ambassador addresses Hong Kong first.
"Hong Kong had been applying for this one Country system. Generally there has been successful. There have been problems during the process. That is because there are some loopholes in this process and by taking necessary measures at the national constitution level, we solved the problem and we have full confidence that the future of Hong Kong will be even a brighter."
And now to the people of Taiwan.
"I think you're talking about the wishes of the Taiwanese people. Taiwan is part of China and 1.4 billion Chinese people are determined to protect that, to be affected, and the future of Taiwan will be decided by 1.4 billion Chinese people. And at the same time, I believe that the majority of the people in Taiwan believe they're Chinese. They believe Taiwan is part of China and Taiwan is a province of China. We do have a group of people or a hand of people, perhaps, that are seeking for Taiwan independence movement, gradual independence. Trying to remove… These are the people are... they're Chinese. These are activities that have been resisted by the majority of people in Taiwan."
He then called a recent poll, which showed most people in Taiwan prefer the status quo, not independence, not being part of China, as "misleading."
