The controversy over imports of US beef is a typical example of a storm in a tea cup. Thanks to the government’s neglect of public opinion, inability to implement party discipline and persuade the legislature, what was originally one of many items on the US-Taiwan trade talk agenda has created a backlash and prompted a strongly worded US statement warning Taiwan not to break the agreement. US-Taiwan tensions have now developed into a full-blown political storm.
Taiwan still hasn’t made a final decision on the issue, nor has the US decided how to respond, but the administration of President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) has made several guesses at what the US measures might be. These include delaying a bilateral trade and investment framework agreement, delaying an arms deal and suspending talks about visa exemptions for Republic of China citizens. The situation has caused the government to fear changes to the Taiwan-US strategic relationship.
Although the legislature is planning to amend the Act Governing Food Sanitation (食品衛生管理法) to ban the importation of US beef innards and ground beef, this only makes up a small part of US beef imports. It will have a minor impact on import volumes and value, but could help improve public acceptance of US beef, which is a lot better than possible boycotts and stagnant sales because of quality concerns and consumer fears. The US government should take a hard look at what is the better alternative for US beef farmers.
Although the legal amendment violates the import protocol, thus causing Taiwan to break it, the US response must follow the principle of proportionality. Business is business, and any repercussions should be strictly related to business. The US must not hurt long-term trade and strategic relations lest it hurt not only the Taiwanese public, but also US business interests in Taiwan.
In a recent report, US-Taiwan Business Council president Rupert Hammond-Chambers criticized the US government for what he called their unclear Taiwan policies and for delaying the approval of arms sales to Taiwan. He also warned that if negotiations on a trade and investment framework agreement are not resumed, Taiwan will be pushed toward China.
Government policy is clearly pro-Chinese, with its diplomatic truce, the push for signing an economic cooperation and framework agreement (ECFA) and attempts to initiate cross-strait political talks. This leaves foreign observers with the impression that Taiwan is throwing itself into China’s embrace, but these are only the tendencies of government policy and lack mainstream support.
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) did badly in last year’s legislative by-elections and the year-end three-in-one local elections and Ma’s approval ratings remain low at around 30 percent, all clear evidence of a lack of public support for government policy. In addition, many opinion polls show that support for maintaining the “status quo” remains steady at around 70 percent, and even government opinion polls show that opposition to an ECFA is increasing.
All this implies that the public does not approve of such all out pro-China policies. The beef controversy must not be allowed to affect the US-Taiwan alliance and Washington should consider the wisdom of pushing Taiwan, an important strategic bargaining chip for the US, closer toward a China that is about to become a great power.
The FBI on Sunday arrested Wanying “Heather” Chang (張婉瑩) on suspicion of surveiling the family of the son of President William Lai (賴清德) on behalf of China, an example of “transnational repression” to suppress dissent in Taiwan and abroad. Zhang, a 34-year old realtor in California, was arrested on charges of working as an unregistered agent for China. She and an accomplice were accused of taking photos and videos of Lai’s son and his family, and sending information about their whereabouts and license plates to Chinese officials. “The information could be used by China to gain leverage over the Taiwanese president
On Oct. 10, 1911, gunfire in Wuchang (武昌) shattered the stillness of late-Qing China. What began as a regional uprising quickly ignited a chain reaction across the empire, toppling a dynastic order that had endured for more than two millennia and ushering in one of Asia’s first republics — the Republic of China (ROC). From that moment, the 10th day of the 10th month became a date of epochal significance, not merely in Chinese history, but in the broader arc of Asia’s encounter with modernity. Yet today, as Taiwan marks Double Ten National Day, the holiday’s meaning has undergone a transformation
Taiwan might just give up. That’s the argument Simon Shuster made in The Atlantic’s October issue. The US is unreliable, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) leadership is aligned with the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and Taiwan does not have the military capability to defend itself in a prolonged war without help. What hope does Taiwan have? Quite a bit more, in fact, than Shuster lets on. Shuster points to genuine problems. The first Donald Trump administration had a mostly positive record on Taiwan policy. It regularized the arms sales process, enhanced the military-to-military relationship, and treated Taiwan more like a normal
A few days ago, we left our breakfast midway to catch a glimpse of the fighter jets in formation. It was a spectacular sight. We knew it was part of practice drills for Double Ten National Day celebrations and reminded us of the Annual Republic day celebration in India. While channel surfing, I came across a news debate about immigration laws, where an academic asked a fellow panelist: “Why should we be interested in your point of view when you don’t even belong here?” That got me thinking. Was our enthusiasm about the upcoming Double Ten celebrations unwarranted? Was this
RSS