Prior to US President Donald Trump’s visit to China in November last year, some in Taiwan were concerned that the United States would sacrifice the island’s interests for a “grand bargain” with China over North Korea. Fortunately, those worries never materialized.
Nevertheless, given both President Trump’s unconventional approach to foreign affairs and his casual inconsistency on Taiwan issues following his congratulatory call with President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) in December 2016, such concerns will be hard to fully extinguish.
Given anxieties about Trump’s conviction on Taiwan and Beijing’s steadily intensifying pressure on the island, now would be an opportune time for senior officials in Washington and Taipei to dedicate themselves to identifying and articulating a shared animating purpose for the relationship — a set of principles and priorities that would anchor and give direction to the relationship.
The upcoming unveiling of the American Institute in Taiwan’s new office compound could provide a useful platform for both sides to articulate such a shared affirmative vision for the relationship. First, a quick review of recent events:
Following President Trump’s “state visit plus” to Beijing in November, the Trump administration abruptly shifted its posture on China. Beginning with the White House’s National Security Strategy and carrying through in reports from the Department of Defense and the Office of the United States Trade Representative, the Trump administration described China as a strategic rival and vowed to take a more hard-nosed approach in pushing back against problematic Chinese behavior. As part of such efforts, President Trump has made clear he intends to launch stout unilateral trade actions to compel China to modify its statist economic model and bring about more fair and balanced bilateral trade.
Around the same time, “friends of Taiwan” on Capitol Hill pushed legislation to upgrade US-Taiwan relations, including by supporting naval port calls and encouraging visits by US and Taiwan officials at all levels. Both of these measures are largely symbolic, authorizing and encouraging the president to do things for which he already has authority to act.
Meanwhile, debate over how best to address North Korea’s nuclear and missile programs continues to dominate discussions in Washington. There has been active debate about whether the United States should launch preemptive or preventive military strikes against North Korea. President Trump has warned that “time is running out” for peaceful solutions, given the stubborn pace of Pyongyang’s nuclear and missile advances.
As the United States contends with the real risk of military conflict on the Korean Peninsula and intensifying trade friction with China, now is not a good time for Taipei to be pushing symbolic initiatives to reshape its relations with Washington. Any such lobbying risks being perceived as a sign of Taipei’s tone-deafness to the significant stresses Washington confronts.
The focus for Taiwan now should be on demonstrating it is in lockstep with the United States in confronting its most pressing challenges: denuclearizing North Korea and promoting more fair and balanced trade. Such actions would materially strengthen US-Taiwan ties, which would in turn widen the aperture for the United States to support Taiwan’s efforts to strengthen its economic competitiveness.
In fact, Taiwan already has made admirable moves to cut trade and financial ties with North Korea. It could consider further highlighting its efforts to bring its commercial sea fleet and its banking sector into compliance with all relevant United Nations sanctions, as well as its successes in blocking North Korean efforts to contravene sanctions. Taiwan also could offer technical assistance and training to help its diplomatic allies enforce United Nations-mandated sanctions against North Korea.
On the trade front, Taiwan similarly could take proactive steps to demonstrate it is part of the solution, not the problem. Potential steps could include declaring support for the principle that technology transfer should not be used as a condition for entry into any market. Taiwan also could find ways to highlight its prioritization on protecting intellectual property. Additionally, Taiwan could proactively improve market access for foreign companies as part of a push to kick-start negotiation of an investment agreement with the United States.
At a broader level, the benefits of cooperation will need to reciprocal in order for cooperation to be enduring. With this principle in mind, both sides could work together to define a sweet spot for both side’s efforts. As an example, both sides could commit to prioritize initiatives that (A) promote the shared interests of the United States and Taiwan, (B) are beneficial on their substantive merits (and are not hollowly symbolic), and (C) do not pick at differences over sovereignty issues. There are a host of possible projects in the fields of trade, investment, education, energy, security, and science and technology that could fit within these parameters.
Such efforts would generate momentum in US-Taiwan relations that realistically could be channeled toward President Tsai’s priority of fostering a thriving, vibrant, innovative economy and society. Over the long-term, centering US-Taiwan cooperation on strengthening the attractiveness and competitiveness of Taiwan will pay lasting and significant dividends. That is where both sides should focus their attention.
Ryan Hass is a David M. Rubenstein Fellow in the Foreign Policy program at Brookings, where he holds a joint appointment to the John L. Thornton China Center and the Center for East Asia Policy Studies.
Minister of Labor Hung Sun-han (洪申翰) on April 9 said that the first group of Indian workers could arrive as early as this year as part of a memorandum of understanding (MOU) between the Taipei Economic and Cultural Center in India and the India Taipei Association. Signed in February 2024, the MOU stipulates that Taipei would decide the number of migrant workers and which industries would employ them, while New Delhi would manage recruitment and training. Employment would be governed by the laws of both countries. Months after its signing, the two sides agreed that 1,000 migrant workers from India would
In recent weeks, Taiwan has witnessed a surge of public anxiety over the possible introduction of Indian migrant workers. What began as a policy signal from the Ministry of Labor quickly escalated into a broader controversy. Petitions gathered thousands of signatures within days, political figures issued strong warnings, and social media became saturated with concerns about public safety and social stability. At first glance, this appears to be a straightforward policy question: Should Taiwan introduce Indian migrant workers or not? However, this framing is misleading. The current debate is not fundamentally about India. It is about Taiwan’s labor system, its
Japan’s imminent easing of arms export rules has sparked strong interest from Warsaw to Manila, Reuters reporting found, as US President Donald Trump wavers on security commitments to allies, and the wars in Iran and Ukraine strain US weapons supplies. Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi’s ruling party approved the changes this week as she tries to invigorate the pacifist country’s military industrial base. Her government would formally adopt the new rules as soon as this month, three Japanese government officials told Reuters. Despite largely isolating itself from global arms markets since World War II, Japan spends enough on its own
On March 31, the South Korean Ministry of Foreign Affairs released declassified diplomatic records from 1995 that drew wide domestic media attention. One revelation stood out: North Korea had once raised the possibility of diplomatic relations with Taiwan. In a meeting with visiting Chinese officials in May 1995, as then-Chinese president Jiang Zemin (江澤民) prepared for a visit to South Korea, North Korean officials objected to Beijing’s growing ties with Seoul and raised Taiwan directly. According to the newly released records, North Korean officials asked why Pyongyang should refrain from developing relations with Taiwan while China and South Korea were expanding high-level
RSS