With the announcement last week that the UK would become the first place to use a COVID-19 vaccine, the war against the COVID-19 pandemic moved into a new stage.
Amid the threat of pandemics, vaccines have been a major weapon in the fight against them.
Given Taiwan’s complicated international status, the ability to make its own vaccines has been a plank in the government’s epidemic response policy for more than a decade, and the COVID-19 pandemic certainly shows that this policy is a step in the right direction.
In April, I was invited to attend a meeting of the government’s COVID-19 task force, during which a written statement was issued to the effect that in the current crisis, in the interests of ensuring public safety, government departments should put aside their differences and cooperate fully with industry to underwrite the risks of vaccine research and development.
This is the only way Taiwan would produce its own vaccine, unhampered by the attendant risks of such an endeavor.
The success of Pfizer demonstrates how crucial government resolve is in pandemic response efforts and vaccine development.
It was impossible to know at the stage of clinical trials that the Pfizer vaccine would turn out to be 94 percent effective, and yet the US government still announced in July that it would invest more than US$1.9 billion into purchasing 100 million doses.
This pre-purchase contract enabled the drugs manufacturer to expedite research and development, and the US government was assured that it could secure the vaccine as soon as possible, without being liable to pay a cent if the company was unable to produce a viable vaccine.
Taiwan has signed up for the COVAX allocation platform, and it would surely secure part of the vaccines it needs through the initiative. Had the Central Epidemic Command Center been quicker off the mark and proactively signed a pre-purchase contract with Taiwanese companies that can produce a vaccine, it would not only have done a lot to support the nation’s vaccine production industry, it would also have avoided being limited in its sourcing, and of having to pay sky-high prices charged by overseas companies.
It is not like there are no precedents for pre-purchase contracts being signed in Taiwan. During the H1N1 epidemic, the government, in the interests of national security, and before Taiwanese vaccine producers had secured approval, used NT$2 billion (US$70.23 million) from a special budget and emergency reserve fund to pre-purchase vaccines from domestic producers.
This meant that domestic producers were able to create a vaccine.
With Taiwan being prevented from entering the WHO, the biotech sector is in enough difficulty as it is, so why does the government continue to be sparing with its support, keeping the industry out in the cold?
The government is fond of saying: “Taiwan can help,” but it is about time that it started thinking in terms of acknowledging that “Taiwan can be helped.”
Vaccine research and development is important, but the crucial thing is the ability to produce vaccines in bulk. At the moment, Taiwan does not have the ability to do this, but only due to a lack of resolve.
Hopefully, Taiwan will be inspired by Pfizer’s example and suggest that the Central Epidemic Command Center, rather that just committing large amounts of money to purchasing vaccines produced overseas, could also initiate a system for pre-purchasing domestically produced vaccines, and give Taiwan’s biotech sector a much-needed shot in the arm.
Steve Kuo is president of National Yang-Ming University.
Translated by Paul Cooper
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath