As the 11th round of Trade and Investment Framework Agreement (TIFA) trade talks between Taiwan and the US finally took place on Wednesday after a five-year hiatus, many Taiwanese wondered what progress could be made and what Taiwan might gain from it. As the nearly eight-hour videoconference was held behind closed doors, the meeting’s atmosphere could only be gleaned from the Executive Yuan’s news release and government officials’ remarks to reporters afterward.
The Executive Yuan said that the two sides discussed a wide range of topics, including intellectual property rights, supply chains, medical equipment, digital trade, trade facilitation, financial services, agriculture, the environment, labor and international collaboration. Moreover, it said that both sides agreed to continue deepening bilateral trade ties through additional working group meetings.
Minister Without Portfolio John Deng (鄧振中), who heads the Executive Yuan’s Office of Trade Negotiations, told the news conference that the lifting of a ban on the importation of US pork containing traces of ractopamine by President Tsai Ing-wen’s (蔡英文) administration in August last year was instrumental in turning the TIFA talks into a positive partnership.
Office of Trade Negotiations Deputy Trade Representative Yang Jen-ni (楊珍妮), who led the Taiwanese side of the meeting, told reporters that the US side, led by Assistant US Trade Representative for China Affairs Terry McCartin, affirmed Taiwan’s implementation of policy and reform over the past several years in line with international trade standards, and described the meeting as “fully successful.”
However, a closer look at statements by the Executive Yuan, Taiwanese officials and the Office of the US Trade Representative (USTR) also show contradictory responses to the meeting on the two sides.
While Deng and Yang said that Taiwan had expressed interest in a bilateral trade agreement and cooperation on a vaccine supply chain, the USTR did not mention a trade agreement or vaccine cooperation. The office said that the two sides had committed to addressing trade concerns — including market barriers to US beef and pork — copyright legislation, digital piracy, financial services, and investment and regulatory transparency.
Domestic steel and aluminum producers were disappointed that the meeting did not ease the so-called “232 tariffs” — punitive tariffs imposed by then-US president Donald Trump in 2018 on US imports of steel and aluminum products.
The meeting has led to different interpretations. Some fear that the US’ decision to continue the stalled talks was an attempt to pressure Taiwan into further concessions, while others believe that the talks’ resumption shows that US President Joe Biden is more interested than his predecessor in trade and investment between Taiwan and the US, especially as Taiwan plays an increasingly important role amid US-China tensions.
However, it is better to take a practical stance toward trade talks, rather than seek to determine the US’ motivations. For this framework, which was signed in 1994, to serve as a space for discussion on trade and to build bilateral trade ties, the talks should be held in a spirit of equal standing, two-way communication and full cooperation.
Taiwanese trade negotiators not only face the challenge of acting in Taiwan’s best interests in the working group talks, but also demonstrating Taiwan’s ability to comply with international trade standards.
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