In response to the political situation in the US, former US vice president Joe Biden, now the Democratic Party’s presidential candidate, picked US Senator Kamala Harris as his running mate.
As the Democratic ticket is likely to win the Nov. 3 election, Taiwan should come up with a plan for the possible changes in Taiwan-US relations in a timely manner.
Compared with the Republican Party, the Democratic Party’s foreign and China policies have three characteristics:
First, there is low tolerance for the risk of conflict in its China policy. For example, although Biden and Harris have criticized China’s predatory trade methods, they are opposed to a Sino-US “trade war” that could end up hurting both sides.
Second, to decrease the risk, Democrats prefer to seek common ground while holding back differences in US relations with China.
Third, their overall foreign policy does not rely on military deterrence, and they tend to solve problems through diplomacy.
These characteristics could have an impact on two aspects of Taiwan-US relations once the Democratic Party regains power: the exchange of visits by top officials and large arms sales, with the exception of the sales of weapons for asymmetric warfare.
In response to the possible changes, perhaps the Taiwanese government should consider taking action in the three following directions:
First, Taiwan should strengthen bilateral exchanges at the working level. A typical example is the new Taiwan Fellowship Act that was proposed by the US Congress in June, which would send 10 US federal officials to their counterpart agency in Taiwan annually.
The bill was proposed by US Senator Edward Markey, a Democrat, and co-signed by more Democrats in the US House of Representatives, which is not very common. This shows that the Democratic Party welcomes bilateral exchanges.
As for Taiwan-US security cooperation, instead of focusing on exchanges between key military officials, Taiwan should propose an increase in the quantity and frequency of Taiwanese officers receiving military training in the US annually.
Next, Taiwan should hedge its bets by calling for a trilateral high-level dialogue prior to a possible transfer of power.
Taiwan’s foreign affairs rely mainly on the US side, while other countries are much more cautious in their policy toward Taiwan.
Taiwan should request that the US and another friendly country establish a mechanism for trilateral high-level dialogue. The US should put pressure on the third country to ensure that it keeps up with Washington’s Taiwan policy.
This would not only reduce Taiwan’s risk, it would also reduce the US’ burden.
Finally, Taiwan should bolster exchanges with the US on soft issues.
Since 2016, the two countries have promoted exchanges on such issues. In particular, through the Global Cooperation and Training Framework (GCTF), they have improved discussion of various issues such as women’s empowerment, disease prevention and the digital economy.
Taiwan could propose that the US upgrade the status of the GCTF to gradually transform the platform into a multilateral organization with a policymaking function on specific issues.
For example, in the absence of a multilateral mechanism to discuss the housing of refugees in the Indo-Pacific region, the GCTF could — in addition to the agenda established a year in advance — arrange ad hoc meetings to discuss specific issues such as humanitarian relief for Hong Kongers.
Wu Dee is a congressional lobbyist in the US.
Translated by Eddy Chang
Taiwanese pragmatism has long been praised when it comes to addressing Chinese attempts to erase Taiwan from the international stage. “Taipei” and the even more inaccurate and degrading “Chinese Taipei,” imposed titles required to participate in international events, are loathed by Taiwanese. That is why there was huge applause in Taiwan when Japanese public broadcaster NHK referred to the Taiwanese Olympic team as “Taiwan,” instead of “Chinese Taipei” during the opening ceremony of the Tokyo Olympics. What is standard protocol for most nations — calling a national team by the name their country is commonly known by — is impossible for
India is not China, and many of its residents fear it never will be. It is hard to imagine a future in which the subcontinent’s manufacturing dominates the world, its foreign investment shapes nations’ destinies, and the challenge of its economic system forces the West to reshape its own policies and principles. However, that is, apparently, what the US administration fears. Speaking in New Delhi last week, US Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau warned that “we will not make the same mistakes with India that we did with China 20 years ago.” Although he claimed the recently agreed framework
The Office of the US Trade Representative (USTR) on Wednesday last week announced it is launching investigations into 16 US trading partners, including Taiwan, under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 to determine whether they have engaged in unfair trade practices, such as overproduction. A day later, the agency announced a separate Section 301 investigation into 60 economies based on the implementation of measures to prohibit the importation of goods produced with forced labor. Several of Taiwan’s main trading rivals — including China, Japan, South Korea and the EU — also made the US’ investigation list. The announcements come
Taiwan is not invited to the table. It never has been, but this year, with the Philippines holding the ASEAN chair, the question that matters is no longer who gets formally named, it is who becomes structurally indispensable. The “one China” formula continues to do its job. It sets the outer boundary of official diplomatic speech, and no one in the region has a serious interest in openly challenging it. However, beneath the surface, something is thickening. Trade corridors, digital infrastructure, artificial intelligence (AI) cooperation, supply chains, cross-border investment: The connective tissue between Taiwan and ASEAN is quietly and methodically growing
RSS