The other day, I had the opportunity to speak with Taiwan's representative to the EU, Chen Chien-jen (
China has two objectives regarding Taiwan and the WTO: to undermine Taiwan's sovereignty and to force Taiwan to accept a status equivalent to Chinese territories such as Hong Kong and Macao.
In 1992, under the government of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), muddle-headed officials came to an understanding with the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) -- the precursor to the WTO -- to enter the organization as a "separate customs territory" with the same standing as Hong Kong and Macao. When this concession came to the notice of the new Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) government, they went all out to remedy the situation at once.
Working through the WTO, representatives of allied governments and Taiwan's representatives overseas, the government managed to come to an arrangement that constituted a victory for Taiwan: While member nations endorsed the various details of the WTO agreement, representing a consensus, there was no consensus on Taiwan's status, and this was simply added to the record unilaterally by the chairman.
Who would have thought that our first representative to the WTO, Yen Ching-chang (
I was one of the people who was lobbied. Yen put forward various documents to support his argument, including the agreement over Taiwan's WTO entry, indicating that this proved that Taiwan had agreed to accept the "custom's territory" status. But as shown above, this was not in fact the case.
Yen failed in his mission to lobby for Chinese interests, and the government returned to its strategies of 2001, mobilizing all its resources and support, forcing Supachai to back down in his demands. This was another victory for Taiwan.
Despite these two victories, why is it that we have now been utterly defeated? I took the opportunity to ask Chen what diplomatic strategies would be adopted in the face of this challenge. He was silent at first, and then avoided answering the question. I was insistent, wanting to know what kind of support he was getting in Geneva. Clearly he felt the battle had been lost even before it had begun, the commander-in-chief having given up the fight.
His silence was full of sorrow. The past battles had been won with great effort, including his own, but now, under a new commander-in-chief, defeat had already been accepted before the troops could take to the field. Everything that had been gained was now being handed over to China.
And the tragedy doesn't end here. Even though Yen failed to fight off Chinese pressure, on his return he was still given the Order of the Brilliant Star, and then was handed the chairmanship of Fuhwa Financial Holdings -- in total violation of public service regulations, as Yen had formerly served as a minister of finance.
In Taiwan, defeated generals are not relegated to obscurity, but are given awards. What kind of standard does this set? Surely there is no hope for such a country.
Lin Cho-shui is a DPP legislator.
Translated by Ian Bartholomew
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion
RSS