US President Donald Trump is an extremely stable genius. Within his first month of presidency, he proposed to annex Canada and take military action to control the Panama Canal, renamed the Gulf of Mexico, called Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy a dictator and blamed him for the Russian invasion. He has managed to offend many leaders on the planet Earth at warp speed.
Demanding that Europe step up its own defense, the Trump administration has threatened to pull US troops from the continent. Accusing Taiwan of stealing the US’ semiconductor business, it intends to impose heavy tariffs on integrated circuit chips or demand that Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) increase investments in the US and initiate tech transfers to Intel. This transactional approach, unconstrained by norms, morality, or conventional wisdom, is unpredictable and considerably undependable.
Trump is a tough negotiator. These could be his ways of getting what he wants. Democratic countries, accustomed to value-based instead of transaction-based leadership, are preparing for the worst, but hoping for a win-win scenario, which would only come by working together with mutual respect and through innovative alternatives instead of my way or your way.
Adjusting policies in this uncertain time, Canada has begun to replace Russia in supplying energy to Europe, which appears to be a win-win higher way.
Zelenskiy, a courageous and strong leader facing a most difficult war, has offered to resign as president in exchange for Ukraine’s NATO membership. Fighting in the front line for the democratic and free world with 80,000 killed and 400,000 wounded, Ukraine deserves unconditional support from all countries.
Inasmuch as the conventional wisdom to punish the aggressors for them to pay for war crimes and destruction, it is hard to ignore that imperialism has not gone away into history books when the US asks for Ukraine’s mineral rights.
However, in the reality of the transactional paradigm, if Ukraine offers US the right of first refusal to buy up to 50 percent of its rare earth minerals at fair market prices in exchange for the US’ security guarantee, that could be a win-win.
Russian President Vladimir Putin has over the past few days also suggested bringing Moscow back to the Western camp, which would undoubtedly be rejected. After all, fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me.
However, if Putin is willing to resign and allow Russia to become democratic in whole or in pieces, it could be another win-win.
TSMC dominates global high-end chip supply and US investors hold a majority of its shares.
Imposing heavy tariffs on chips would add inflationary pressure on electronic goods and hurt most of the magnificent-seven US companies, not to mention the artificial intelligence (AI) infrastructures during this AI revolution.
Making sure TSMC can continue running a prosperous business would only be a win-win for Taiwan and the US.
TSMC is fully supported by the dedicated talent in Taiwan, which is why it excels. It has also benefited from the free trade of crucial technologies among democratic countries, which need to unite to rid the world of dictators.
Protecting Taiwan’s sovereignty is crucial to secure TSMC’s chips for the free world, as its supply chain is firmly established in Taiwan. In this regard, President William (賴清德) has promised to purchase more military inventory from the US by increasing defense spending to more than 3 percent of GDP — higher than the 2.71 percent of NATO countries.
As Lai said: “Taiwan-US cooperation will create a shared win-win outcome.”
When the transactional paradigm delivers win-win deals to make thriving economy and peaceful resolutions, the world would become a better place.
James J. Y. Hsu is a retired professor of theoretical physics.
Having lived through former British prime minister Boris Johnson’s tumultuous and scandal-ridden administration, the last place I had expected to come face-to-face with “Mr Brexit” was in a hotel ballroom in Taipei. Should I have been so surprised? Over the past few years, Taiwan has unfortunately become the destination of choice for washed-up Western politicians to turn up long after their political careers have ended, making grandiose speeches in exchange for extraordinarily large paychecks far exceeding the annual salary of all but the wealthiest of Taiwan’s business tycoons. Taiwan’s pursuit of bygone politicians with little to no influence in their home
In a recent essay, “How Taiwan Lost Trump,” a former adviser to US President Donald Trump, Christian Whiton, accuses Taiwan of diplomatic incompetence — claiming Taipei failed to reach out to Trump, botched trade negotiations and mishandled its defense posture. Whiton’s narrative overlooks a fundamental truth: Taiwan was never in a position to “win” Trump’s favor in the first place. The playing field was asymmetrical from the outset, dominated by a transactional US president on one side and the looming threat of Chinese coercion on the other. From the outset of his second term, which began in January, Trump reaffirmed his
It is difficult not to agree with a few points stated by Christian Whiton in his article, “How Taiwan Lost Trump,” and yet the main idea is flawed. I am a Polish journalist who considers Taiwan her second home. I am conservative, and I might disagree with some social changes being promoted in Taiwan right now, especially the push for progressiveness backed by leftists from the West — we need to clean up our mess before blaming the Taiwanese. However, I would never think that those issues should dominate the West’s judgement of Taiwan’s geopolitical importance. The question is not whether
In 2025, it is easy to believe that Taiwan has always played a central role in various assessments of global national interests. But that is a mistaken belief. Taiwan’s position in the world and the international support it presently enjoys are relatively new and remain highly vulnerable to challenges from China. In the early 2000s, the George W. Bush Administration had plans to elevate bilateral relations and to boost Taiwan’s defense. It designated Taiwan as a non-NATO ally, and in 2001 made available to Taiwan a significant package of arms to enhance the island’s defenses including the submarines it long sought.
RSS