What a welcome relief it must have been for the thousands of Taiwanese who travel to the UK each year when the British Trade and Cultural Office announced on Monday that, from March 3, Taiwanese would no longer require a visa for short-term visits.
The news will put an end to the extremely laborious and expensive process of applying for a visa that must have put many a person off visiting the UK in the past.
The question that many people must be asking now is, if the UK can include Taiwan in its visa-waiver program, then why can’t the US?
Taipei has been pushing hard for many years for inclusion in the US program and, as has been noted time and again, Taiwan meets all the criteria, including a low rate of visa rejection of around 3 percent — the threshold for qualification is less than 10 percent.
Indeed, the recent implementation of e-passports means Taiwan is more than qualified to be part of the US program, yet Washington refuses to budge on the issue.
The US State Department’s Web site says that even if a nation meets all the criteria, “designation as a [visa waiver program] country is at the discretion of the US government.”
Like the US’ refusal to discuss a free trade agreement with Taiwan, Washington’s continued rejection of Taipei’s advances on the visa issue has led some to speculate that China is the problem. However, the fact that the UK and many other countries that have close relations with Beijing, such as Japan, grant Taiwanese landing visas would suggest that this isn’t the case.
So what exactly is Washington’s beef?
Maybe Taiwan’s refusal to fully reopen its markets to imports of US beef is the source of the problem, as it is obviously a big bone of contention for many in the US. This was evident once again this week when the Taiwanese government found itself under pressure from American Institute in Taiwan Director Stephen Young, as well as the president of the influential American Enterprise Institute think tank.
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs has said that the US has suspended talks on all Taiwan-US trade issues until the beef dilemma is resolved. If that is the case, then instead of procrastinating any longer, the ministry and the government should take the opportunity to turn the tables on the US and offer to open our market to US beef in return for inclusion in the visa waiver program. This is the kind of language Washington understands and would certainly create a “win-win” situation — to use the popular phrase.
Young, as the US’ main messenger on this issue, has repeatedly stated that Taiwan should make a “science-based” decision regarding imports of US beef. Well, it is time for the US to make a “fact-based” decision on allowing Taiwanese into the US.
If the UK government believes Taipei is trustworthy enough to tackle the problem of Chinese using forged Taiwanese documents to illegally enter its territory, then there is no reason why the US can’t do the same.
It is time to call Washington’s bluff on this long-delayed issue.
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