No wriggle room on one-China principle

The Taipei 101 skyscraper commands the urban landscape in Taipei, China's Taiwan. [Photo/Xinhua]

This is an editorial from China Daily.

Although international luxury brand Bulgari apologized for wrongly listing Taiwan as a country on its overseas official website, it has continued to take flak on Chinese social media networks.

On Tuesday evening, Bulgari issued a statement of apology via its official Sina Weibo account that promised it would be contacting third-party agents to rectify their official overseas website. But its official Twitter account didn't carry the apology, which prompted many Chinese people to assert that the apology might be "tailored" simply to appease the ire of Chinese netizens rather than a sincere apology for its wrongdoing.

Considering the existence of quite strong anti-China political forces and the active moves of certain Taiwan secessionists in the West, wrongly listing Taiwan as a country rather than part of China is a sure way to incite the anger of Chinese netizens.

Only the brand knows whether Taiwan being identified as a country on its official overseas website was an intentional wrong or a careless mistake. Was it a misguided political message, a bid not to alienate those consumers who are ignorant or unconcerned about the truth of the Taiwan question, naivety, or an attempt to try and avoid the secessionists on the island causing trouble for the brand? Bulgari has 19 stores on the island, compared with 43 on the whole of the Chinese mainland. Whatever the case, it was nothing but folly.

Many Western brands seem to think that they can have their cake and eat it too. They identify the Chinese island as a country on their overseas websites, which Chinese residents seldom visit, then issue apologies saying that they respect China's sovereignty and territorial integrity after they are caught in the act.

The international public opinion field is filled with voices from the West hailing Taiwan's "independent status" as a "democratic country", not least the vehement China hawks in Washington, who spout nonsense as a matter of course, attempting to create the impression that there are "two Chinas" or "one China, one Taiwan". Chinese voices that defend the truth and the motherland's interests are denigrated as mindless executors of authoritarian censorship or purveyors of a false discourse.

Any international company that cherishes the Chinese market needs to adhere to the one-China principle and not do anything that implies that the island is anything but a part of one China under the governance of Beijing.

Brands might hope to walk a tightrope between the wrong side of history as hyped up by anti-China political forces in the West and the right side. But there is no wriggle room allowing them to walk such a line.

Any brand wishing to do business in China has to uphold the one-China principle unequivocably rather than try and profit as a gambler.