Concluding their summit in London last week, leaders of the G20 member states pledged to provide US$5 trillion in fiscal resources to counter the global economic crisis between now and the end of next year. They also promised to take action to eliminate tax havens and to curb excessive pay and compensation for company executives. They further pledged to provide US$1.1 trillion through the IMF and other global financial institutions to help countries with deeply troubled economies to weather the storm.
It is too early to say whether the measures will get the world out of the current economic crisis. Still, national leaders have expressed their sincere determination to overcome differences and take joint action. Hopefully this will boost lending, investment and consumer confidence. The summit statement is an important milestone on the road that may lead out of this recession. What remains to be seen is whether the actual steps taken by countries around the world can deliver on the pledges.
The G20 agreed to a US$1.1 trillion program of support to restore credit, growth and jobs in the world economy, including US$500 billion in concessional finance, a new allocation of US$250 billion for IMF special drawing rights (SDR) and US$250 billion in support of trade finance. How these astronomical sums will be amassed is not entirely clear, especially now that the financial crisis has swept across the world.
Taiwan is a significant economy, with foreign currency reserves of more than US$300 billion, fourth in the world behind China, Japan and Russia. Although Taiwan has felt the impact of the international financial storm, its finances remain fairly healthy when compared with many other countries. Taiwan is, therefore, in a position to provide financial assistance to other countries.
Some foreign commentators have complained that Taiwan, with its strong economy, should have been invited to join the G20. Taiwan did not take part in the summit and international actors would soon ask Taiwan to take a role in international efforts to counter the financial crisis or ask it to contribute funds to the IMF.
However, Taiwan’s economy is export-oriented and as such, it is closely linked to the international economy. That means that helping revive the global economy is in Taiwan’s own interest as much as it is in the interest of the rest of the world.
Because Taiwan’s particular international status precludes participation in many international organizations, the government should consider ways of taking part before the question arises.
The worst idea would be for Taiwan to simply provide funds through China, which would only reinforce the impression that Taiwan is part of China. The result would be a substantial loss to Taiwan. The government must avoid this scenario at all costs.
A better option would be for Taiwan to provide funds through the US. Although this might look peculiar from a diplomatic perspective, it would build mutual trust and strengthen Taiwan’s relationship with Washington.
A final option, though, is the Asian Development Bank (ADB), which is one of the few international organizations of which Taiwan is a member. The ADB also has a close working relationship with the IMF. Channeling aid through the ADB would allow Taiwan to exercise its rights as an independent member of the bank, reducing diplomatic entanglements. It would also strengthen Taiwan’s position within the ADB and demonstrate its commitment to the global effort. This is the best option for Taiwan to participate in international efforts to counter the financial crisis.
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
Every day since Oct. 7 last year, the world has watched an unprecedented wave of violence rain down on Israel and the occupied Palestinian Territories — more than 200 days of constant suffering and death in Gaza with just a seven-day pause. Many of us in the American expatriate community in Taiwan have been watching this tragedy unfold in horror. We know we are implicated with every US-made “dumb” bomb dropped on a civilian target and by the diplomatic cover our government gives to the Israeli government, which has only gotten more extreme with such impunity. Meantime, multicultural coalitions of US