On Jan. 1, during the coldest time of the year, Russia decided to cut the supply of natural gas to Ukraine.
The effects of this decision were not only felt in Ukraine, but also in other European nations, who had been hoping to mediate in the dispute, urging Russia and Ukraine in the strongest possible terms to come to some sort of understanding on the gas supply. This dispute, after all, threatens Europe's security and economic development.
Ukraine had previously paid Russia less than the market price for the gas supply. The problem started with the Orange Revolution in the winter of 2004, when the people elected a president more sympathetic to the West, who adopted policies that increasingly distanced the country from Russia. It was this situation that led to the decision to ussume such a strict energy policy, as Russia attempted to prevent Ukraine from moving beyond its sphere of influence.
In fact, this conflict will do little for Russian President Vladimir Putin's image in a year in which his country is to host a summit attended by seven other major industrialized nations. The main theme which Russia chose for the summit is none other than energy-supply security issues.
The first problem is that Western Europe relies on Russia for 25 percent of its supply of natural gas, and 80 percent of this is actually routed through Ukraine. As a result, the disruption of Ukraine's supply had a significant impact on Russia's supplies to Western Europe.
Ukraine was only able to hold out for three days before it reached a compromise with Russia, agreeing to a new price, set by Moscow, on Jan. 4. With this, the unit price for natural gas went up from US$50 to US$230, more closely reflecting the actual market price.
From Taiwan's point of view, this illustrates the threat posed to national security by over-reliance on a country with which we have geopolitical disputes.
Despite Ukraine's own geopolitical importance, which stems from the fact that a large part of Western Europe's energy supply runs through its territory, Russia still decided to disrupt the gas supply. Even the damage this would do to Russia's international image, not to mention the impact it would have on the close economic and energy ties it has with other nations, did nothing to make Russian decisionmakers change their minds.
Put another way, it was willing to place its own national interests ahead of geopolitical considerations. Taking this situation to the East-Asian context, we see Taiwan becoming ever more reliant on China.
Taiwan also has some geopolitical importance, as over 85 percent of Japan's crude energy supplies go via the Taiwan Strait and the Bashi Channel, which is controlled by Taiwan.
Nevertheless, if Taiwan does not keep a careful eye on economic and trade policies that are heading more and more in the China's direction, especially when we take into account the nationalist tendencies of that country, we may be facing a serious crisis in the foreseeable future.
Wu Chih-chung is an associate professor in the Department of Political Science at Soochow University.
TRANSLATED BY PAUL COOPER
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) challenges and ignores the international rules-based order by violating Taiwanese airspace using a high-flying drone: This incident is a multi-layered challenge, including a lawfare challenge against the First Island Chain, the US, and the world. The People’s Liberation Army (PLA) defines lawfare as “controlling the enemy through the law or using the law to constrain the enemy.” Chen Yu-cheng (陳育正), an associate professor at the Graduate Institute of China Military Affairs Studies, at Taiwan’s Fu Hsing Kang College (National Defense University), argues the PLA uses lawfare to create a precedent and a new de facto legal
In the first year of his second term, US President Donald Trump continued to shake the foundations of the liberal international order to realize his “America first” policy. However, amid an atmosphere of uncertainty and unpredictability, the Trump administration brought some clarity to its policy toward Taiwan. As expected, bilateral trade emerged as a major priority for the new Trump administration. To secure a favorable trade deal with Taiwan, it adopted a two-pronged strategy: First, Trump accused Taiwan of “stealing” chip business from the US, indicating that if Taipei did not address Washington’s concerns in this strategic sector, it could revisit its Taiwan
Chile has elected a new government that has the opportunity to take a fresh look at some key aspects of foreign economic policy, mainly a greater focus on Asia, including Taiwan. Still, in the great scheme of things, Chile is a small nation in Latin America, compared with giants such as Brazil and Mexico, or other major markets such as Colombia and Argentina. So why should Taiwan pay much attention to the new administration? Because the victory of Chilean president-elect Jose Antonio Kast, a right-of-center politician, can be seen as confirming that the continent is undergoing one of its periodic political shifts,
Taiwan’s long-term care system has fallen into a structural paradox. Staffing shortages have led to a situation in which almost 20 percent of the about 110,000 beds in the care system are vacant, but new patient admissions remain closed. Although the government’s “Long-term Care 3.0” program has increased subsidies and sought to integrate medical and elderly care systems, strict staff-to-patient ratios, a narrow labor pipeline and rising inflation-driven costs have left many small to medium-sized care centers struggling. With nearly 20,000 beds forced to remain empty as a consequence, the issue is not isolated management failures, but a far more
RSS