The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) have recently tried to clarify that their opposition to importing US pork containing ractopamine is not the same as opposing the US, and accused President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) and her administration of linking the two in an attempt to distort their positions.
In late August last year, the Tsai administration announced that it would lift a ban on imports of US pork containing ractopamine and beef from cattle more than 30 months old. Then-US vice president Mike Pence said that Taiwan’s decision opened the door for further economic cooperation and stronger trade ties between the nations. Then-US secretary of state Mike Pompeo echoed Pence, saying that the US welcomed Tsai’s move and that this opened the door to bilateral trade and economic cooperation.
Late last year, the American Institute in Taiwan issued a statement stressing that US exports to Taiwan and other trade partners followed international and domestic US consumer standards, and that they were safe. Politicians spreading disinformation and inciting groundless concerns among Taiwanese consumers is not helpful to anyone.
In late June, Trade and Investment Framework Agreement talks were revived after several years of being moribund, and the office of the US Trade Representative issued a news release after the meeting saying that US and Taiwanese authorities “committed to intensify engagement aimed at addressing outstanding trade concerns, including with regard to market access barriers facing US beef and pork producers.”
Be it former US president Donald Trump or US President Joe Biden, the US thinks that enhancing bilateral trade and cooperation between the countries requires lifting import restrictions on US pork and beef.
The KMT and the TPP are contradicting themselves by being strongly opposed to an issue that the US government is taking for granted and is looking forward to, while at the same time insisting that they are not opposed to the US. Deceiving themselves and others in this way is not conducive to improving Taiwan-US relations.
Huang Wei-ping works in the public service industry.
Translated by Perry Svensson
Congratulations to China’s working class — they have officially entered the “Livestock Feed 2.0” era. While others are still researching how to achieve healthy and balanced diets, China has already evolved to the point where it does not matter whether you are actually eating food, as long as you can swallow it. There is no need for cooking, chewing or making decisions — just tear open a package, add some hot water and in a short three minutes you have something that can keep you alive for at least another six hours. This is not science fiction — it is reality.
A foreign colleague of mine asked me recently, “What is a safe distance from potential People’s Liberation Army (PLA) Rocket Force’s (PLARF) Taiwan targets?” This article will answer this question and help people living in Taiwan have a deeper understanding of the threat. Why is it important to understand PLA/PLARF targeting strategy? According to RAND analysis, the PLA’s “systems destruction warfare” focuses on crippling an adversary’s operational system by targeting its networks, especially leadership, command and control (C2) nodes, sensors, and information hubs. Admiral Samuel Paparo, commander of US Indo-Pacific Command, noted in his 15 May 2025 Sedona Forum keynote speech that, as
In a world increasingly defined by unpredictability, two actors stand out as islands of stability: Europe and Taiwan. One, a sprawling union of democracies, but under immense pressure, grappling with a geopolitical reality it was not originally designed for. The other, a vibrant, resilient democracy thriving as a technological global leader, but living under a growing existential threat. In response to rising uncertainties, they are both seeking resilience and learning to better position themselves. It is now time they recognize each other not just as partners of convenience, but as strategic and indispensable lifelines. The US, long seen as the anchor
Kinmen County’s political geography is provocative in and of itself. A pair of islets running up abreast the Chinese mainland, just 20 minutes by ferry from the Chinese city of Xiamen, Kinmen remains under the Taiwanese government’s control, after China’s failed invasion attempt in 1949. The provocative nature of Kinmen’s existence, along with the Matsu Islands off the coast of China’s Fuzhou City, has led to no shortage of outrageous takes and analyses in foreign media either fearmongering of a Chinese invasion or using these accidents of history to somehow understand Taiwan. Every few months a foreign reporter goes to