Oranges are just entering their peak season in Taiwan, but Beijing and Taiwan's pro-China forces have already joined hands and said that they want to buy Taiwanese oranges. One can't help but wonder whether this is not another one of Beijing's "united front" tactics.
Remember when there was a glut of bananas in Taiwan last October? Beijing announced then that it would purchase a total of 2,000 tonnes at a cross-strait forum on agriculture sponsored by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Chinese Communist Party. A report released recently by the Council of Agriculture, however, shows that China in effect bought a mere 118 tonnes -- or 5.9 percent of what it promised to buy -- for a total of less than NT$2 million (US$610,000).
At that time, quite a number of Taiwanese organizations offered to boost their banana orders, while consumers started purchasing more bananas on a daily basis to help struggling farmers. However, certain media outlets mocked these efforts, saying that "even if all Taiwanese stuff themselves with bananas, they are still not not going to help the situation improve."
Statistics say otherwise. Two weeks after the issue was made public, domestic orders for bananas increased by more than 200 tonnes, allowing the wholesale price of bananas to recover to a reasonable level.
Emergency exports of agricultural products during a glut is not a solution. It would certainly be a good thing if Taiwan could sell its surplus produce to China -- without politics involved. However, as the experience with trying to sell bananas to China shows, business opportunities created as part of Beijing's "united front" tactics are deceptive. They either quickly vanish when the political end is fulfilled, or never materialize.
Taiwan should adopt a pragmatic approach in liberalizing its produce market to ease the pressure on local farmers. The Chinese market could be one of the links in Taiwan's agricultural export chain, but it is not the most important link, nor is it the only link. Taiwanese should not put all their efforts into investing in a high-risk market like China. Nor should Taiwanese farmers harbor any illusion that China's offer comes with no strings attached or give up on concentrating their efforts on adjusting and upgrading the agricultural industry as a whole.
Ever since Japan adopted stricter measures to test for chemical residue in agricultural products last May, some Taiwanese farmers have turned their eyes to China, which has less stringent import measures. That's a short-sighted strategy. If Taiwanese farmers could upgrade their agricultural technology and quality control to meet Japan's strict criteria, they would have an edge over their rivals and avoid the cut-throat competition in lower end markets. This would increase their chances of breaking into markets that demand higher quality standards like the US and Europe.
Both the Taiwanese government and farmers should view China's failure to purchase 2,000 tonnes of Taiwanese bananas and Japan's move to raise its inspection criteria for agricultural products as a turning point rather than a crisis.
Roger Wu is professor of agriculture economics at National Taiwan University Translated by Daniel Cheng
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS