It is hard to tell which idea is more problematic: a free trade agreement (FTA) with the US or the establishment of a Free-Trade Area of the Asia-Pacific (FTAAP).
Taiwan has been urging the US for years to establish a bilateral FTA, hoping it will set a diplomatic example to encourage other countries to sign FTAs with Taiwan in spite of China's constant bullying and intimidation.
Last week, Hu Sheng-cheng (
The very fact that Hu's speech was given in Washington should leave no doubt about the urgency of the call for closer economic relations with the US, the nation's strongest ally. It should also leave no question about Taiwan's deeply felt concern about the potential for economic marginalization in Asia.
But Washington's response was disappointing.
The US side has insisted on closer ties across the Taiwan Strait as a prelude to closer economic relations with the US -- witness recent remarks by US officials, including American Institute in Taiwan Director Stephen Young and Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Thomas Christensen.
This sort of truth-telling was not easy for Taiwan to digest. The question is, is the nation ready to face this reality and take the necessary policy steps?
First, US President George W. Bush's fast-track authority to negotiate free-trade pacts is due to expire on June 30 next year, and with the Democrats' win in last month's elections, this power is unlikely to be extended beyond that time.
Second, the Democrat-controlled Congress is unlikely to be as friendly a partner to Taiwan on trade issues as was its predecessor. Many of the winning candidates campaigned on domestic employment and are less liberal in their outlook on trade. It is possible that Democrats could slow down free trade talks with other countries and push for a harsher response to perceived cases of "unfair" trade.
Taiwan-US trade negotiations will go nowhere until both sides see evidence that there are some solid gains to be made from a bilateral free-trade pact.
Compared to a FTA with the US, the agreement reached by APEC leaders at the summit in Vietnam last month to commence work on a FTAAP is ambitious and may take years to achieve.
The nation originally initiated the idea of an Asian Pacific free-trade zone in 2004 at the APEC Business Advisory Council meeting in Taipei, and was encouraged to see the Bush administration get behind it. Once it materializes, the FTAAP will help offset China's attempts to marginalize Taiwan.
But as Taiwan Institute of Economic Research president David Hong (
While the proposed FTAAP may help jolt non-APEC members to restart stalled talks for a new global trade accord, the government must closely track its early development. The government has opened its arms to this initiative, but whether APEC's transformation into the FTAAP will bring good or bad fortune to the nation is difficult to assess.
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