The controversy over US beef imports has yet to be resolved, but the issue has to be dealt with, because Washington has made it clear that it wants Taiwan to allow imports of US beef containing traces of the leanness-enhancing agent ractopamine, and that this will be a precondition for negotiating and resuming talks on the Trade and Investment Framework Agreement (TIFA).
The US beef issue has widespread implications. Aside from questions about food safety and health, its effects encompass economics, politics, diplomacy and Taiwan’s participation in the international community. Therefore, the issue is significant for the nation’s future prospects and development. If the battle lines over the US beef issue are extended indefinitely, it will not be a good thing for Taiwan.
Let us consider the international realities. When the US was negotiating trade agreements with Japan and South Korea, it also bundled up the issue of beef imports with the negotiations. Taking food safety considerations into account, the Japanese and South Korean governments both agreed to allow imports of US beef containing less than 10 parts per billion of ractopamine, and signed free-trade agreements (FTAs) on that basis.
However, Japan maintains a total ban on the use of ractopamine within its own borders and has strengthened various measures for protecting its citizens’ health.
Some people may insist that meat containing ractopamine is completely harmless, but consumer protection groups will definitely not agree.
As media reports have shown, the Democratic Progressive Party is not opposed to importing US beef or doing trade with the US; it is only opposed to importing beef that contains ractopamine. The government’s task then is to communicate better with the public, respecting expertise and assessing the issue according to technical data and risk management.
The government must promise that after it allows imports of beef containing ractopamine, it will set a rigorous standard for the permitted amount of ractopamine, in line with international practice.
It must include ractopamine and growth promoters in the list of substances for which meat has to be tested according to the law and ensure that imported meat is clearly labeled with its country of origin.
This way, suppliers, retailers and restaurant owners can keep consumers fully informed and consumers can refer to the labels when deciding what products to choose or reject. That would serve to protect the health of people living in Taiwan.
South Korea’s experience is that the impact of allowing US beef imports has not been as serious as was originally thought. Although local beef is three times more expensive than US beef, South Koreans still prefer to buy local beef whose safety is guaranteed by the government. Hence, high-quality South Korean beef is not threatened by US imports.
Newly slaughtered beef produced in Taiwan is fresh, sweet and tender. Imported frozen beef cannot compare with it. However, Taiwanese beef accounts for less than 10 percent of the supply, so consumers do not have much opportunity to choose it.
Agricultural policy departments will have to think long and hard about how to ensure that local beef producers can continue to develop sustainably.
Relaxing restrictions on US beef imports will cause many problems for Taiwan’s agriculture. Notably, the US beef issue is tied up with prospects for the TIFA and an FTA. Apart from beef, such agreements may also require Taiwan to lift restrictions on related imports of pork, rice and other products.
In other words, once Taiwan has got a ticket to a TIFA by allowing imports of US beef that contains ractopamine, Taiwanese agriculture will face pressure to liberalize completely.
So, when signing trade agreements, the government should consider the welfare of farmers and the agricultural industry. It should provide more agricultural subsidies, safeguards and complementary measures, as it did when Taiwan joined the WTO. In addition, steps must be taken to make producers more competitive. Even if Taiwan could get out of allowing imports of US beef containing ractopamine, it would not be able to avoid demands from future FTAs with other countries, as well as from the existing Cross-Strait Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA) with China. Upgrading the entire structure of Taiwan’s agricultural production is an unavoidable task.
To ensure that pork produced in Taiwan is safe to eat and to inspire consumer confidence, the government should persuade local livestock producers not to use ractopamine and encourage them to provide high-quality meat products that can be differentiated from ractopamine-treated imported meat.
Then consumers will have a choice. That would turn a crisis into an opportunity by establishing an image of Taiwanese livestock products as being healthy and of fine quality.
Doing that and building up consumer awareness are good ways to increase demand for local meat products and reduce meat imports.
Peng Tso-kwei is a chair professor at Asia University and a former minister of agriculture.
Translated by Julian Clegg
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