Aside from economic topics, the meeting between Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Wu Poh-hsiung (吳伯雄) and Chinese President Hu Jintao (胡錦濤) reconfirmed plans for the “gift” of two giant pandas to Taiwan. In response to questions during a legislative interpellation session, Minister of Agriculture Chen Wu-hsiung (陳武雄) said that, in principle, the sooner the pandas arrive, the better.
But China’s gifts of giant pandas have almost always been related to political purposes — and Beijing has made little effort to disguise that fact. Taiwan has no zoo or research group that has made any contribution to the conservation of giant pandas. We are, in a sense, not fully deserving of these creatures. We could very possibly waste the breeding potential of the two pandas, for although Sichuan breeders have had impressive success in breeding, other facilities around the world have been very unsuccessful. Giant pandas are also very costly and would likely affect the budget for indigenous wildlife conservation.
In the last 20 years, Taiwan has more than once refused China’s pandas. The most common reason for rejecting them was political — such as resisting Beijing’s unification tactics, political penetration or attempts to denigrate Taiwan — rather than humanitarian or conservationist considerations. Even two years ago, it was not difficult to see the traces of political correctness in the findings of a team of experts organized by the Council of Agriculture.
In a situation where top policymakers can decide to welcome the pandas or not, it could be very difficult to conduct an objective and professional assessment of the issue. But several aspects should be taken into consideration.
Any pandas dispatched to Taiwan should not be fertile; otherwise the adopting agency must propose practical measures to ensure that their breeding potential will not be wasted. If a panda is fertile, applicants for adoption should have the ability to care for potential cubs adequately in the long term. Applicants must also make concrete and feasible promises to contribute to panda conservation, and they should do likewise toward conserving indigenous wildlife.
Even if authorities decide to reject the pandas, the decision should be made from the point of conservation, with the promise that efforts in conservation will be bolstered. Without the pandas, there is less political incentive to further conservation efforts, but it would nevertheless be an opportunity to exercise our spirit of conservation, which need not be reliant on other considerations.
In the early 1990s, Taiwan faced international criticism for its role in the smuggling of rhinoceros horns, tiger bones, bear gall and other traditional medicine materials to the point of facing trade sanctions from the US. The government responded positively to the wave of internal and external pressure and increased its regard and budget for wildlife conservation. Ever since, even without further crises or inducement, the government and the public have gradually increased their investment in conservation. Apparently we no longer consider the value of conservation from an entirely utilitarian perspective.
Although there is still much room for improvement in Taiwan in terms of wildlife conservation, we have nevertheless been heading in the right direction for the last decade and have in the process built a sound international reputation. It would not be worthwhile to go backward now. The pros and cons of adopting the pandas must be carefully weighed.
Kurtis Pei is a professor at National Pingtung University’s Institute of Wildlife Preservation.
Translated by Angela Hong
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
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
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II. The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan. It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not
RSS