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.
There has been much catastrophizing in Taiwan recently about America becoming more unreliable as a bulwark against Chinese pressure. Some of this has been sparked by debates in Washington about whether the United States should defend Taiwan in event of conflict. There also were understandable anxieties about whether President Trump would sacrifice Taiwan’s interests for a trade deal when he sat down with President Xi (習近平) in late October. On top of that, Taiwan’s opposition political leaders have sought to score political points by attacking the Lai (賴清德) administration for mishandling relations with the United States. Part of this budding anxiety
The diplomatic dispute between China and Japan over Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi’s comments in the Japanese Diet continues to escalate. In a letter to UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, China’s UN Ambassador Fu Cong (傅聰) wrote that, “if Japan dares to attempt an armed intervention in the cross-Strait situation, it would be an act of aggression.” There was no indication that Fu was aware of the irony implicit in the complaint. Until this point, Beijing had limited its remonstrations to diplomatic summonses and weaponization of economic levers, such as banning Japanese seafood imports, discouraging Chinese from traveling to Japan or issuing
On Nov. 8, newly elected Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) and Vice Chairman Chi Lin-len (季麟連) attended a memorial for White Terror era victims, during which convicted Chinese Communist Party (CCP) spies such as Wu Shi (吳石) were also honored. Cheng’s participation in the ceremony, which she said was part of her efforts to promote cross-strait reconciliation, has trapped herself and her party into the KMT’s dark past, and risks putting the party back on its old disastrous road. Wu, a lieutenant general who was the Ministry of National Defense’s deputy chief of the general staff, was recruited
Tokyo-Beijing relations have been rapidly deteriorating over the past two weeks as China tries to punish Japan over Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi’s remarks about Taiwan earlier this month, and the off-ramp to this conflict is yet to be seen. Takaichi saying that a “Taiwan contingency” could cause a “situation threatening Japan’s survival” — which would allow Japan to act in self-defense — has drawn Beijing’s ire and sparked retaliatory measures. Her remark did not gain public attention until Chinese Consul General in Osaka Xue Jian (薛劍) made an apparent threat to behead her. The two sides lodged protests against each
RSS