China on Monday announced it was lifting a ban on importing pomeloes from Taiwan ahead of this year’s Mid-Autumn Festival. In doing so, China’s Taiwan Affairs Office emphasized that “Taiwan and China are one family and it is easier to negotiate things in the family.” It added that the two sides should interact on the basis of the so-called “1992 consensus” and oppose “Taiwan independence.” This clearly shows that the ban and its removal are politically motivated.
China imposed the ban on pomelo imports from Taiwan on Aug. 3, 2022, a move widely seen as a measure to retaliate against Taiwan for receiving then-US House of Representatives speaker Nancy Pelosi on Aug. 2 to 3. It is only one part of the economic prohibitions Beijing imposed that month, which included blocking imports of more than 2,000 Taiwanese products, ranging from agricultural and fishery goods to cooking oil and cakes.
This is part of China’s playbook of using coercive measures, including military threats and economic restrictions, to pressure Taiwanese sovereignty and democracy, and as revenge for engagement with the international community.
Flouting international regulations and cross-strait agreements to discuss bilateral trading issues through official channels, China has made it clear that selectively lifting bans on Taiwanese goods is a political tactic. In the case of pomeloes, China’s reopening is limited to a few farms in Hualien County and was announced right after a delegation of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers, led by KMT caucus whip and former Hualien County magistrate Fu Kun-chi (傅崐萁), echoed the “1992 consensus” and Beijing’s “one China principle” during a meeting with Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference Chairman Wang Huning (王滬寧).
The same playbook was used when China resumed imports of Taiwanese atemoyas and groupers last year. The removal of the import ban on Taiwanese atemoyas was limited to 25 farms in Taitung, which account for a mere 3 percent of nationwide farms, and was announced after KMT Taitung County Commissioner Yao Ching-ling’s (饒慶鈴) echoed the “1992 consensus” and opposed “Taiwanese independence” during a meeting with China’s Taiwan Affairs Office Director Song Tao (宋濤) in Beijing.
Additionally, China only resumed imports of Taiwan’s groupers from seven fisheries associated with KMT lawmakers, a move widely seen as a favor to the pro-China opposition party and to put pressure on the ruling Democratic Progressive Party before the nation’s crucial presidential and legislative elections.
Beijing’s coercive and arbitrary restrictions on Taiwanese imports have damaged cross-strait trading and driven Taiwan to diversify its export markets to reduce its dependence on China.
As the trade friction between Beijing and Washington escalated, and the Chinese economy slumped, Taiwan’s shift away from China, however, could be a silver lining, which has bolstered its economic resilience.
Taiwan’s exports reached historic peaks between 2021 and last year, including an all-time high of US$43.5 billion in March 2022 and a record trade surplus last year. China, including Hong Kong, accounted for 28.57 percent of Taiwan’s two-way trade last year, the lowest in 10 years and down from an average of more than 30 percent from 2015 to 2021, Ministry of Finance statistics showed.
The US (17.5 percent) and Japan (16.4 percent) have replaced China (13 percent) as the top export destinations for Taiwanese agricultural products since 2022. Taiwan’s pomelo exports have also expanded to new markets such as Singapore, Hong Kong and Canada.
By deploying coercive and “united front” tactics to bully Taiwan, China should learn that they only serve to alienate the two sides of the Taiwan Strait economically and emotionally.
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