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.
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS