Hallelujah! Somebody in Taiwan has finally seen the light about the WTO. After months of dire prognostications from the mainstream media about how the entry of Taiwan and China into the WTO will bring economic disaster for Taiwan, the good folks at the Council of Agriculture (COA) have gone and pricked the bubble.
The conventional wisdom is that in many areas, especially agriculture, but also many sectors of manufacturing, Taiwan faces an imminent deluge of cheaper Chinese products, leading to mass unemployment and the hollowing out of Taiwan's economy. This would certainly be an alarming prospect, so it's a good thing it's not true.
The key element in the true story is Beijing's continuing adamant refusal to allow any cross-strait matters, even purely trade-related ones, to be discussed under the WTO framework. To quote the irrepressible Zhang Mingqing (
What China absolutely wants to avoid is the invocation of the WTO dispute-settlement procedure, which not only would put the two sides on an equal legal footing, but -- horrors! -- would intersperse a neutral international party between them, ie: a WTO tribunal. China is obviously not even close to being mentally prepared for this eventuality.
Which brings us to the announcement by the COA on Nov. 20. What they said, in effect, is that they have no plans to open the market to Chinese agricultural products, but only to those of other WTO members (according, naturally, to the timetables laid out in the intricate accession agreements). Surely this would violate the WTO's core principle of non-discrimination.
Well, the COA officially says they don't believe it would, but that if China disagrees, it is welcome to initiate WTO procedures by requesting consultations with Taiwan. Bravo! Since the cadres in Zhongnanhai have no intention of doing so, they just have to swallow their objections, and thus Taiwan's behavior will stand unchallenged. This is wonderfully convenient.
What it means is that Taiwan can violate the WTO agreements with respect to China as much as it likes, and no need to fuss with the notorious "exclusionary clause" or anything. Although so far only the COA has gone public with this, there is no reason why the same tactic cannot be applied to, say, textiles, or education or really any Chinese goods and services at all.
Of course, eventually all these markets should be opened, and they will be in due course. But the fact is that Taiwan doesn't need to start moving until China acknowledges the reality that Taiwan is an equal member of the WTO. Only then will Taiwan have to make the hard adjustments, and at that point the pain will be at least partially balanced off by the diplomatic breakthrough.
In the meantime, the government and industries can spend their energies dealing with the competition from the rest of the WTO membership first, and take all the time they need to get ready for the Chinese. The only twist would be if some third country claimed that it was also being harmed by continued Taiwanese restrictions, and filed a separate complaint.
In theory this might occur if, for example, the goods in question were produced by a German company's factory in China. But this need not be disastrous. If any other WTO members requests consultations, Taiwan can be very polite and simply give in, at least on that particular case -- "sorry, we never intended to harm your interests, no hard feelings, right?"
Alternatively, if by that time Taiwan has decided it is ready for the Chinese competition, and feels the international respect is worth more than its "special" protections, one could try a different tack. Taiwan could argue, pretty justifiably, that the complaint cannot be heard properly without the participation of China, as an intimately involved party. Then the original complainant would have to go and request Beijing to join the action.
In fact, if one were clever, one could intentionally design such a test case. Slap an egregious restriction on some good that would definitely draw a complaint from a third country, but equally definitely require China's participation. Then sit back, smiling oh-so-reasonably ("we really want to help, we'd love to start consultations soon as possible, etc ..."), and let the other country do the dirty work of lobbying Beijing.
It seems like a fantastic vision to imagine, say, Airbus or Microsoft putting pressure on Beijing to get real about Taiwan, doesn't it? All in all, this looks like a win-win situation for Taiwan. Either you get the legal recognition from China that you crave, or you sit as long as you like on a "get-out-of-jail-free card" from the worst impacts of WTO entry. Enjoy!
Bo Tedards is a political commentator based in Taipei.
Father’s Day, as celebrated around the world, has its roots in the early 20th century US. In 1910, the state of Washington marked the world’s first official Father’s Day. Later, in 1972, then-US president Richard Nixon signed a proclamation establishing the third Sunday of June as a national holiday honoring fathers. Many countries have since followed suit, adopting the same date. In Taiwan, the celebration takes a different form — both in timing and meaning. Taiwan’s Father’s Day falls on Aug. 8, a date chosen not for historical events, but for the beauty of language. In Mandarin, “eight eight” is pronounced
In a recent essay, “How Taiwan Lost Trump,” a former adviser to US President Donald Trump, Christian Whiton, accuses Taiwan of diplomatic incompetence — claiming Taipei failed to reach out to Trump, botched trade negotiations and mishandled its defense posture. Whiton’s narrative overlooks a fundamental truth: Taiwan was never in a position to “win” Trump’s favor in the first place. The playing field was asymmetrical from the outset, dominated by a transactional US president on one side and the looming threat of Chinese coercion on the other. From the outset of his second term, which began in January, Trump reaffirmed his
US President Donald Trump’s alleged request that Taiwanese President William Lai (賴清德) not stop in New York while traveling to three of Taiwan’s diplomatic allies, after his administration also rescheduled a visit to Washington by the minister of national defense, sets an unwise precedent and risks locking the US into a trajectory of either direct conflict with the People’s Republic of China (PRC) or capitulation to it over Taiwan. Taiwanese authorities have said that no plans to request a stopover in the US had been submitted to Washington, but Trump shared a direct call with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平)
It is difficult to think of an issue that has monopolized political commentary as intensely as the recall movement and the autopsy of the July 26 failures. These commentaries have come from diverse sources within Taiwan and abroad, from local Taiwanese members of the public and academics, foreign academics resident in Taiwan, and overseas Taiwanese working in US universities. There is a lack of consensus that Taiwan’s democracy is either dying in ashes or has become a phoenix rising from the ashes, nurtured into existence by civic groups and rational voters. There are narratives of extreme polarization and an alarming
RSS