Switzerland of the East
Jerome Keating writes how Taiwan could become the “Switzerland of the East” (“Becoming a Switzerland of the East,” Jan. 15, page 8) and bases this claim pretty much entirely on Taiwan adopting a neutral stance in international affairs. I have myself endorsed this view in a piece in the Taipei Times (“Neutrality is Taiwan’s best option,” Oct. 6, 2008, page 8).
As I made clear in that piece, I very much agree that a neutral stance in Taiwan would be a peaceful and fruitful development, and I would still argue this is true. However, I think there may be even more similarities between Switzerland and Taiwan, and these should also be considered.
In terms of culture, education and economy, considerations of similarities with Switzerland are in some ways already largely true, in the broadest sense. Taiwan has in some senses an economy based in part on agriculture, combined with small and larger industries, and a services/banking sector. These are all functioning well in Taiwan (similar to Switzerland, although we might add that Taiwan’s electronics industry is far in the lead).
The GDPs of Switzerland and Taiwan are almost equal, according to the International Monetary Fund.
In some senses Taiwanese culture can be seen as almost equivalent to Swiss culture, with a notable history that even predates the establishment of Switzerland as a nation, and has had many prominent developments in music, visual arts and literature. In some ways, the Taiwanese connection with Chinese culture — via opera, art, spiritual values, language and cuisine — is even more ancient than Switzerland.
The population of Taiwan is much larger than Switzerland, and in this way, I think Taiwan is seen as an even more prominent nation.
In terms of education, Switzerland probably has the edge, but certainly we have seen some fairly impressive rankings of Taiwanese universities, and globalization is moving Taiwan higher and higher.
Probably more important is the similarity between Taiwan and Switzerland in terms of constitutional government, democracy and freedom. Certainly, the nations are identical in these respects, and Taiwan, every bit as much as Switzerland (and perhaps even more so), has attracted international attention for its progress in these values and liberties.
The Swiss Federal Constitution declares the preservation of Switzerland’s independence and the preservation of the welfare of the people as the highest objectives of Swiss policy. The same can be seen in Taiwan.
Switzerland’s constitution broadly sets five policy objectives, which include the safeguarding of peace and coexistence of nations; the advancement of human rights, democracy, and the rule of law; the alleviation of poverty in the world and the protection of people during natural disasters or any other harm that is being done; and the conservation of the environment and precious natural resources.
In my mind, Taiwan is doing exactly the same in its national and foreign affairs, and this places this nation on a similar plane with a leading country such as Switzerland. Were Taiwan to add to this by announcing its neutrality with accompanying peaceful aims, then so much the better.
In sum, there is much indeed that is “Switzerlandesque” about Taiwan, and these values can be taken into a promising and rewarding future. To be sure, such as Switzerland in the West, Taiwan can be something great.
David Russell Pendery
Taipei
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers