Andreas Fulda 🇺🇦 🇹🇼

Review of my book in @FT: "Fulda amasses a welter of evidence to expose an alarming predicament undermining Europe’s largest economy: that decades of outsourcing manufacturing to China and energy needs to Russia have made Berlin increasingly beholden to authoritarian states."

It’s no exaggeration that Ukrainian public opinion is in an absolute firestorm after the parliament today approved a law essentially dismantling independent anti-corruption agencies, just days after SBU raided key investigators. The law isn’t enacted until Zelensky signs it — and…

In sum, I suggest we use frames like 'dialogue with dashboards' (monitor risks), 'partnership under audit' (scrutinise erosion), and 'bridges with guardrails' (safeguard ties). This middle ground targets CCP threats via critical engagement. Your thoughts, 🕊️doves & 🦅hawks? /End

What about 'bridge building'? 🕊️ doves see outreach as normatively desirable and an end in itself. But is it? Try 'bridges with guardrails' instead: Build ties with 🇨🇳, but add safeguards (e.g., scrutiny of united front work & influence ops) to prevent falls that serve no one /8

U.S.-Asia Law expert Katherine Wilhelm notes: 'No organization should compromise its mission for a China program.' This demands regular reviews via 'partnership under audit' to safeguard integrity in western 🇨🇳 engagement /7 chinafile.com/conversation/w…

Let's also talk about 'partnership with China'. The 2017 Overseas NGO Law shattered years-built trust networks between Western and Chinese civil society. 'Partnership under audit' is a smarter approach: Engage with 🇨🇳 but be willing to disentangle when mutual gains are eroded /6

Practically, this means monitoring restrictions on sensitive topics (e.g., human rights, ethnic minorities) via dashboards, pushing back against CCP censorship, and avoiding CCP instrumentalisation of such exchanges. Can🕊️ doves and 🦅 hawks agree on this middle ground? /5

Genuine dialogue with 'official China' demands free speech for both sides—not conditional on accepting CCP censorship upfront. We thus need 'dialogue with dashboards': Engage openly with 🇨🇳 but monitor risks in real-time for critical, cooptation-proof exchanges /4

First example: When 🕊️ doves push dialogue and cooperation with 🇨🇳 on climate change, 🦅 hawks scoff: Aren't they trapped by the CCP's restricted, politically managed communication channels, risking cooptation? How could we reframe this for more critical China engagement? /3

In my book 'Germany and China' I have argued that a middle ground between competing policy images exists, understood as a 'mixture of empirical information and emotive appeals' (Pal, 2014). This middle ground is marginalised as both camps use frames which seem non-compatible /2

Are you a 🕊️ dove or 🦅 hawk on dealing with the Chinese Communist Party? The polarisation between engagement / peaceful co-existence vs. containment / confrontation dominates western 🇨🇳 debates. But can we reframe the metaphors for a smarter middle ground? A short 🧵/1

A message from The King to Sarina Wiegman, the mighty @Lionesses and all in their support team, following their success in this evening’s Women’s Euros semi-final. #WEURO2025

Taiwan and the European Union share the same values of freedom and democracy, but both also face similar threats from “external infiltration”, President Lai Ching-te told visiting European lawmakers on July 22. straitstimes.com/asia/east-asia…

WE'RE IN THE #WEURO2025 FINAL! 🙌

WE NEVER GIVE UP. WE ARE #WEURO2025 FINALISTS.

We're going to extra-time!! 😅 COME ON ENGLAND!

AGYEEEMAAANNGGGGGG!!!!!!!!!!!

Despite increasing security challenges, #Taiwan has worked to maintain peace & stability in the region, while safeguarding our democracy & strengthening resilience. No matter the threats we face, Taiwan will continue to contribute to the world & stand up for democracy.

What a legend. Rest in Peace.