Twelve rounds of talks later, Taiwan and China have reached a consensus on several issues that are part of the cross-strait trade in goods agreement, such as customs procedures, trade remedies, sanitary measures and technical barriers to trade, among others.
However, there are still disagreements on issues such as the complete liberalization of trade in agricultural products, as well as rules of origin and trade rules, which require another round of talks.
The administration of President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) is desperately trying to finalize the negotiations by the end of the year, though Ma made a vow that he would not open Taiwan to 830 categories of Chinese agricultural products during his presidency. Agricultural products have, as expected, once again become the bone of contention in the talks and a cause for concern among Taiwanese.
According to media reports, the government intends to liberalize trade in 320 items of processed agricultural products and prepared foods in the secondary agriculture sector. The quality of these products might or might not equal the standards of Taiwanese products, but China has the advantage on price and quantity.
Will the liberalization of these products have an adverse effect on Taiwanese industries, sales of Taiwanese processed products, food safety, the supply chain and the government’s policy to integrate production, food processing and sales in the agricultural industry?
Government agencies must have credible assessment data and put in place comprehensive measures so that the public can have faith in the government’s decision, otherwise it will be another subject that candidates will capitalize on during their campaigns for next month’s presidential and legislative elections.
However, heated debate during elections is usually found wanting in objectivity and reasoning. Ultimately, this will not do the nation any good.
Since the government is unlikely to continue its ban on all the 830 categories of Chinese agricultural products, what measures would be most beneficial to the nation’s farmers and industries?
The government’s plan to liberalize trade in the 320 categories of processed agricultural products and prepared foods? Or, as experts and academics have advised, should imports of the products on the list of 830 banned categories that Taiwan does not produce be allowed to be imported from China, and should those imports then be controlled by applying WTO-approved import tariffs, quotas and special protective measures, while insisting on a continued ban on the import from China of certain sensitive agricultural products, such as vegetables, fruit, mushrooms, peanuts, garlic, tea, tilapia, common orient clams and adzuki beans?
These sensitive products can be produced in China at low cost and in big quantities. Moreover, many Taiwanese species have been taken to China by Taiwanese businesspeople. If they were to be sold back to Taiwan, it would have a devastating impact on Taiwanese farmers and industry. The difference in agricultural scale between Taiwan and China is striking and can easily lead to a trade gap. This matter must be dealt with carefully.
Because the government is likely to make concessions on agricultural products, groups such as the Economic Democracy Union, the Green Party Taiwan, the Taiwan Labor Front and the Taiwan Association of University Professors immediately expressed their opposition, stating that this would have a clear negative impact on the livelihood of Taiwanese farmers. They also said that the public should take note of the glaring crowding-out effect on industry as a result of the rise of China’s “red supply chain.”
The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), which usually advocates the rights of the disadvantaged and has prioritized an agricultural activist on its legislator-at-large list, has had a surprisingly ambiguous attitude.
After Ma affirmed the “one China” policy in his meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) in Singapore, the DPP criticized his weakness, without actually staging any protests. Is the DPP going to repeat the same detached strategy based on the principle of only doing things that will help it win the presidential election and nothing else?
Perhaps it even hopes that the ruling party will finalize the cross-strait trade in goods agreement by the end of the year so that the next government would not have to deal with the adverse impact that the agreement would have on Taiwanese agriculture and the related industries.
Meanwhile, People First Party presidential candidate James Soong (宋楚瑜) has not expressed his view on the Trans-Pacific Partnership, the cross-strait trade in goods agreement nor the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership.
Voters should demand that all the candidates, especially DPP presidential candidate Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文), take a stance. Do not let them get away with being ambiguous.
Lee Wu-chung is a professor of agricultural economics and a former director of the Yunlin County Department of Agriculture.
Translated by Ethan Zhan
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with