So China did end up having to do damage control over the incident. Its as a I said, it runs counter to the MO China has been promoting, diplomacy is a game where you sometimes have to swallow a bitter pill for the sake of professionalism and by extension your country's interests.
Simply put, if you think its as simple as telling countries you don't like to go f themselves, then write a web novel rather than comment on international diplomacy.
It was her decision, and hers alone
Biden has publicly stated "defend Taiwan" four times since taking office，the White House clarified and reaffirmed that the United States has not changed its "One China" policy;
A delegation of Lithuanian lawmakers visited Taiwan, and the Lithuanian Foreign Ministry reiterated its adherence to the one-China policy;
A cross-party delegation of U.S. lawmakers visited Taiwan, with member Khanna emphasizing "no intention to provoke China";
A visit to Taiwan by parliamentarians from three Baltic countries, all of which stated that they "adhere to the one-China policy";
There were also visits to Taiwan by members of parliament from Poland, the Czech Republic, and Canada, whose countries also stated that they "support one China.
The U.S. and the West have been playing the game that "personal" does not mean "official" for a long time, so China can play that game too.:"You like doing that, don't you? How do you feel now?"
PLUS
First of all, the Soviet Union was a federal state,
which as a whole had the status of international law, which denying that "the Soviet Union was a union of republics" and that "the Soviet Ukrainian Republic was a sovereign state because it was a member of the Union".
Only the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics as a whole was a legal person under international law, and when the USSR was not dissolved, its republics were only
part of its federal state. China recognizes only the independent republics after the dissolution as sovereign states
As an aside, Gorbachev's "New Union Treaty" was to rename the Soviet Union as the "Union of Soviet Sovereign Republics" or even the "Union of Soviet Sovereign States", and if the treaty had been implemented, the republics would have been considered sovereign states.
As to why Soviet Ukraine was admitted to the United Nations in the first place, the Soviet Union opposed the admission of India (a British colony, which became the Republic of India in 1947) and the Philippines (a U.S. colony, which was transferred to the United States in 1946) to the United Nations in 1945, and the Soviet Union considered the admission of India and the Philippines to the United Nations as a flagrant violation of the United Nations Charter, which states that only sovereign states may be admitted to the United Nations. As a result, the General Assembly allowed Ukraine and Belarus to become members as a compensation, so this only means that Ukraine and Belarus were
not sovereign states.
To sum up these countries became independent legal entities, but
their borders were not demarcated as they should have been. For countries that deny the history of the Soviet Union, it is even more important not to use the administrative divisions of the Soviet Union to demarcate national borders.
Metaphorically speaking, a family owned an estate and lived in a number of houses, but later they split up and continued to live in the same house. Now next door says, you are separated from the family to the family, you can be an independent person (sovereignty), but you have not done the property license, just continue to live in the original house, you now live in the house is not your (territory).
Lets take Lithuania for example
Although the Soviet Union explicitly provided in its Constitution for the right of each Union Republic to withdraw from the USSR, it made no provision for the withdrawal of Union States from the USSR. The result was that there was no further subdivision of this constitutional right as an implementing law until 1990, when the Soviet Union urgently enacted the Law on the Procedure for Withdrawal from the USSR.
Although Lithuania declared its independence from the Soviet Union, neither the Lithuanian authorities nor the Soviet Union itself had thought or had time to think about the question of what to do with Soviet assets in the independent union states. The Soviet Union, from various factories and enterprises down to various cooperatives, were [Soviet] state assets. And not the joining countries themselves.
Therefore, after the independence of Lithuania, the attitude of the Soviet Union is that the joining country has the right to independence, but you have to return my state assets to me. As well as your territory after independence needs to be redrawn because there may be [Soviet] territory in it.
Because at the time of independence, Lithuania declared itself restored to the Lithuanian Constitution and
territory of the 1938 independence period. But Lithuania in 1938 did not own the Klaipeda Border District, the southwestern part of Lithuania, and Vilnius. Especially the Klaipeda border area, which was allocated to Lithuania by the Soviet Union after the World War II.
