The controversy over US beef imports has yet to be resolved, but the issue has to be dealt with, because Washington has made it clear that it wants Taiwan to allow imports of US beef containing traces of the leanness-enhancing agent ractopamine, and that this will be a precondition for negotiating and resuming talks on the Trade and Investment Framework Agreement (TIFA).
The US beef issue has widespread implications. Aside from questions about food safety and health, its effects encompass economics, politics, diplomacy and Taiwan’s participation in the international community. Therefore, the issue is significant for the nation’s future prospects and development. If the battle lines over the US beef issue are extended indefinitely, it will not be a good thing for Taiwan.
Let us consider the international realities. When the US was negotiating trade agreements with Japan and South Korea, it also bundled up the issue of beef imports with the negotiations. Taking food safety considerations into account, the Japanese and South Korean governments both agreed to allow imports of US beef containing less than 10 parts per billion of ractopamine, and signed free-trade agreements (FTAs) on that basis.
However, Japan maintains a total ban on the use of ractopamine within its own borders and has strengthened various measures for protecting its citizens’ health.
Some people may insist that meat containing ractopamine is completely harmless, but consumer protection groups will definitely not agree.
As media reports have shown, the Democratic Progressive Party is not opposed to importing US beef or doing trade with the US; it is only opposed to importing beef that contains ractopamine. The government’s task then is to communicate better with the public, respecting expertise and assessing the issue according to technical data and risk management.
The government must promise that after it allows imports of beef containing ractopamine, it will set a rigorous standard for the permitted amount of ractopamine, in line with international practice.
It must include ractopamine and growth promoters in the list of substances for which meat has to be tested according to the law and ensure that imported meat is clearly labeled with its country of origin.
This way, suppliers, retailers and restaurant owners can keep consumers fully informed and consumers can refer to the labels when deciding what products to choose or reject. That would serve to protect the health of people living in Taiwan.
South Korea’s experience is that the impact of allowing US beef imports has not been as serious as was originally thought. Although local beef is three times more expensive than US beef, South Koreans still prefer to buy local beef whose safety is guaranteed by the government. Hence, high-quality South Korean beef is not threatened by US imports.
Newly slaughtered beef produced in Taiwan is fresh, sweet and tender. Imported frozen beef cannot compare with it. However, Taiwanese beef accounts for less than 10 percent of the supply, so consumers do not have much opportunity to choose it.
Agricultural policy departments will have to think long and hard about how to ensure that local beef producers can continue to develop sustainably.
Relaxing restrictions on US beef imports will cause many problems for Taiwan’s agriculture. Notably, the US beef issue is tied up with prospects for the TIFA and an FTA. Apart from beef, such agreements may also require Taiwan to lift restrictions on related imports of pork, rice and other products.
In other words, once Taiwan has got a ticket to a TIFA by allowing imports of US beef that contains ractopamine, Taiwanese agriculture will face pressure to liberalize completely.
So, when signing trade agreements, the government should consider the welfare of farmers and the agricultural industry. It should provide more agricultural subsidies, safeguards and complementary measures, as it did when Taiwan joined the WTO. In addition, steps must be taken to make producers more competitive. Even if Taiwan could get out of allowing imports of US beef containing ractopamine, it would not be able to avoid demands from future FTAs with other countries, as well as from the existing Cross-Strait Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA) with China. Upgrading the entire structure of Taiwan’s agricultural production is an unavoidable task.
To ensure that pork produced in Taiwan is safe to eat and to inspire consumer confidence, the government should persuade local livestock producers not to use ractopamine and encourage them to provide high-quality meat products that can be differentiated from ractopamine-treated imported meat.
Then consumers will have a choice. That would turn a crisis into an opportunity by establishing an image of Taiwanese livestock products as being healthy and of fine quality.
Doing that and building up consumer awareness are good ways to increase demand for local meat products and reduce meat imports.
Peng Tso-kwei is a chair professor at Asia University and a former minister of agriculture.
Translated by Julian Clegg
Congratulations to China’s working class — they have officially entered the “Livestock Feed 2.0” era. While others are still researching how to achieve healthy and balanced diets, China has already evolved to the point where it does not matter whether you are actually eating food, as long as you can swallow it. There is no need for cooking, chewing or making decisions — just tear open a package, add some hot water and in a short three minutes you have something that can keep you alive for at least another six hours. This is not science fiction — it is reality.
A foreign colleague of mine asked me recently, “What is a safe distance from potential People’s Liberation Army (PLA) Rocket Force’s (PLARF) Taiwan targets?” This article will answer this question and help people living in Taiwan have a deeper understanding of the threat. Why is it important to understand PLA/PLARF targeting strategy? According to RAND analysis, the PLA’s “systems destruction warfare” focuses on crippling an adversary’s operational system by targeting its networks, especially leadership, command and control (C2) nodes, sensors, and information hubs. Admiral Samuel Paparo, commander of US Indo-Pacific Command, noted in his 15 May 2025 Sedona Forum keynote speech that, as
In a world increasingly defined by unpredictability, two actors stand out as islands of stability: Europe and Taiwan. One, a sprawling union of democracies, but under immense pressure, grappling with a geopolitical reality it was not originally designed for. The other, a vibrant, resilient democracy thriving as a technological global leader, but living under a growing existential threat. In response to rising uncertainties, they are both seeking resilience and learning to better position themselves. It is now time they recognize each other not just as partners of convenience, but as strategic and indispensable lifelines. The US, long seen as the anchor
Kinmen County’s political geography is provocative in and of itself. A pair of islets running up abreast the Chinese mainland, just 20 minutes by ferry from the Chinese city of Xiamen, Kinmen remains under the Taiwanese government’s control, after China’s failed invasion attempt in 1949. The provocative nature of Kinmen’s existence, along with the Matsu Islands off the coast of China’s Fuzhou City, has led to no shortage of outrageous takes and analyses in foreign media either fearmongering of a Chinese invasion or using these accidents of history to somehow understand Taiwan. Every few months a foreign reporter goes to
RSS