A great deal of talk that goes on about Taiwan involves a degree of self-deception, which, while being convenient, prevents decisionmakers from seeing reality and fleshing out policies to secure the nation’s future. This was made all too clear at a conference in Taipei yesterday, where academics and officials from Taiwan, the US and Japan discussed the trilateral dialogue, with a strong emphasis on regional trade and integration.
From the presentations given by several panelists, one would conclude that Taiwan’s participation in East Asian economic integration is almost a fait accompli, thanks in part to the more stable relations across the Taiwan Strait and the signing in June 2010 of the Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA).
National Security Council (NSC) Secretary-General John Deng (鄧振中) conceded during a keynote speech that there had been political “bumps in the road” between Taipei and Beijing and he also vaunted the virtues of the ECFA and other agreements signed between the two sides under President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九), adding that economic relations remained strong.
Clearly, under Deng’s interpretation of the relationship with China, economics and politics are two distinct phenomena, with the latter having no influence on the former. One can only remain so optimistic through a conscious decision to ignore reality. As former NSC secretary-general Su Chi (蘇起) admitted at a different setting last week, the ECFA was not purely economics and had –– surprise, surprise –– political ramifications. And those politics are part of Beijing’s concerted efforts to pull Taiwan ever closer within its sphere of influence so as to make ultimate “reunification” unavoidable.
Democratic Progressive Party Legislator Mark Chen (陳唐山), who spoke first in the morning session, was right on the mark when he said that while economic integration is the future, Taiwan must approach the matter with caution given the unique situation it faces vis-a-vis China. Given this situation, Taiwanese negotiators must be aware that Taiwan’s efforts to participate in regional trade blocs will not occur in an apolitical vacuum, but rather in an environment where China, more than ever, exerts tremendous political influence which could be directly correlated with Taiwan’s stalled growth and industrial development. The Taiwan “miracle,” in fact, occurred at a time when China was comparatively much weaker. Now the “little dragon” is suffering and it needs to find a way out of its cage.
Though undoubtedly well-intentioned, most panelists, either out of lack of understating of Taiwan’s precarious position or a desire not to confront reality, focused on the nuts and bolts of multilateral free-trade agreements; the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), supply-chain security, cyberthreats and so on. While those topics are indeed important and of interest, they are ultimately meaningless when it comes to addressing the challenges ahead for Taiwan.
Most of the speakers spoke as if Taiwan were not facing an irredentist threat or the very high likelihood that Beijing will sabotage any effort by Taiwan to sign a major trade deal with an economic partner, let alone join a multilateral organization such as the TPP, which currently excludes China. One could counter that Taiwan was able to join APEC, but here again, it did so in 1991 when China had yet to “rise.”
Rather than act as if Taiwan’s situation were normal, Taiwanese negotiators and future conferences should instead seek to come up with strategies to work around the hurdles that China is expected to throw Taiwan’s way –– and the earlier such measures are discussed, the better. The longer Taiwan waits to take action, the more difficult it will be for it to catch up with other regional economies. It’s already lagging, what with its first negative foreign direct investment inflow in more than four decades.
It should also be made clear that without a full commitment by the US and Japan, Taiwan’s chances of earning the position it deserves within the future global trade architecture will be very slim.
President William Lai (賴清德) attended a dinner held by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) when representatives from the group visited Taiwan in October. In a speech at the event, Lai highlighted similarities in the geopolitical challenges faced by Israel and Taiwan, saying that the two countries “stand on the front line against authoritarianism.” Lai noted how Taiwan had “immediately condemned” the Oct. 7, 2023, attack on Israel by Hamas and had provided humanitarian aid. Lai was heavily criticized from some quarters for standing with AIPAC and Israel. On Nov. 4, the Taipei Times published an opinion article (“Speak out on the
Eighty-seven percent of Taiwan’s energy supply this year came from burning fossil fuels, with more than 47 percent of that from gas-fired power generation. The figures attracted international attention since they were in October published in a Reuters report, which highlighted the fragility and structural challenges of Taiwan’s energy sector, accumulated through long-standing policy choices. The nation’s overreliance on natural gas is proving unstable and inadequate. The rising use of natural gas does not project an image of a Taiwan committed to a green energy transition; rather, it seems that Taiwan is attempting to patch up structural gaps in lieu of
News about expanding security cooperation between Israel and Taiwan, including the visits of Deputy Minister of National Defense Po Horng-huei (柏鴻輝) in September and Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs Francois Wu (吳志中) this month, as well as growing ties in areas such as missile defense and cybersecurity, should not be viewed as isolated events. The emphasis on missile defense, including Taiwan’s newly introduced T-Dome project, is simply the most visible sign of a deeper trend that has been taking shape quietly over the past two to three years. Taipei is seeking to expand security and defense cooperation with Israel, something officials
“Can you tell me where the time and motivation will come from to get students to improve their English proficiency in four years of university?” The teacher’s question — not accusatory, just slightly exasperated — was directed at the panelists at the end of a recent conference on English language learning at Taiwanese universities. Perhaps thankfully for the professors on stage, her question was too big for the five minutes remaining. However, it hung over the venue like an ominous cloud on an otherwise sunny-skies day of research into English as a medium of instruction and the government’s Bilingual Nation 2030
RSS