China quits Gwangju Biennale over “Taiwan Pavilion” name
SingTao · 2 SOURCESabout 1 hour ago2 MIN
Summary
China’s curatorial team announced on Thursday, September 3, that it would withdraw from the 16th Gwangju Biennale after organisers decided to use the name “Taiwan Pavilion” for the Taiwan entry. The team said it had prepared seriously for the event but was pulling out in unanimous protest because what it called an incorrect Taiwan-related designation had brought politics into the arts. The Chinese embassy in South Korea said the decision seriously violated the one-China principle and directly damaged the political foundation of China-South Korea relations. South Korea’s foreign ministry responded that Seoul’s basic position on Taiwan had not changed and described the naming issue as a decision made independently within cultural and artistic circles
Key Points
- The Chinese curatorial team held a press conference in Gwangju on Thursday, September 3, and said it had unanimously decided to withdraw from the exhibition
- According to the reports, organisers communicated with relevant parties over the Taiwan entry and ultimately chose to use “Taiwan Pavilion” as the official designation.
- China’s embassy in Seoul accused organisers of stubbornly persisting in a wrong approach by allowing Taiwan to exhibit under a name Beijing said did not fit its status.
- The embassy said Gwangju city had already issued a public apology over the Taiwan naming issue and reiterated adherence to the one-China principle
- South Korea’s foreign ministry said the government’s Taiwan policy was unchanged and hoped the dispute would not affect bilateral relations, exchanges or cooperation
Why It Matters
For Hong Kong readers, the dispute shows how cross-strait terminology can quickly spill from diplomacy into international cultural events, affecting participation and public messaging beyond formal government channels. It also matters because both Beijing and Seoul publicly stressed the wider relationship, suggesting even an arts event can become a test of how sensitive political red lines are managed in regional exchanges.