The incoming Democratic Progressive Party government will hopefully establish better connections with civil society in Europe. Civil society in Europe can be a vehicle for breaking barriers and rigid forms of cooperation between Taiwanese and European politicians, diplomacy and institutions. Taiwan’s future is likely to depend, among many other factors, on how well it connects with European citizens and other societies around the world. It is here that civil society, broadly speaking, can play an important role.
Direct conversations between civil society, academics and politicians can be facilitated by civil society in Europe. One example is the roundtable discussion at the European Parliament on March 15 about Taiwan’s democracy, which included all main political parties and civil society in Taiwan, academics and members of the European Parliament.
The event was organized by the European Parliament’s Taiwan Friendship Group and Taiwan Corner. Taiwan Corner used its network across political parties and academics in Taiwan and Europe, while the Taiwan Friendship Group ensured the interest of politicians.
Such successful events organized independently will hopefully be encouraged in the future. Openness would allow various channels in civil society to come forward with alternative, and perhaps better, ideas.
Political parties and European institutions need such ideas to move forward in new directions to benefit Taiwan’s future.
This new direction is not embraced by the current Taipei Representative Office in Brussels. It seems to have misunderstood the importance of civil society. After the office was invited to the roundtable discussion, it tried to remove a speaker addressing social movements, alter the title of the event and invite its own speaker. Even after the successful event, the office continued its negative campaign. Obviously, a new direction would require a new mindset among Taiwan’s representatives.
Moreover, a new direction would require the politicizing of European society about Taiwan’s political situation.
The reason is that alliances need to be created between politicians and European citizens that can add new dimensions on how to work for Taiwan’s future. People cannot expect that from the established political system. Politicizing means engagement in meaningful and open debate directly with European citizens about Taiwan’s place in the world and political situation.
This would perhaps only consist of small steps, but it would be steps in the right direction. This approach can be a new and exciting challenge for Taiwanese groups that tend to be Taiwan-centric, because the groups act as important social networks rather than as political activists connected directly to European politicians and citizens.
One way forward for civil society is to use Europe’s media landscape. Trustworthy and available knowledge is becoming increasingly important to journalists and politicians in Europe, because resources are scarce.
Taiwan is not well-covered by international media. One example is the Sunflower movement in 2014, which was not mentioned much in international media. This was in stark contrast with the coverage of Hong Kong’s Umbrella movement. However, in Denmark, the events were covered and debated when Taiwanese civil society in Denmark contacted journalists.
Taiwan shows its presence on many levels, including theater, music, movies, participation in various organizations, and exchanges between universities and high schools. A focus on politicization is not to exclude these vital initiatives, but to send a friendly reminder that politics changes life and it can change Taiwan’s future.
Michael Danielsen is chairman of Taiwan Corner, an independent member-based association.
US President Donald Trump has gotten off to a head-spinning start in his foreign policy. He has pressured Denmark to cede Greenland to the United States, threatened to take over the Panama Canal, urged Canada to become the 51st US state, unilaterally renamed the Gulf of Mexico to “the Gulf of America” and announced plans for the United States to annex and administer Gaza. He has imposed and then suspended 25 percent tariffs on Canada and Mexico for their roles in the flow of fentanyl into the United States, while at the same time increasing tariffs on China by 10
Trying to force a partnership between Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) and Intel Corp would be a wildly complex ordeal. Already, the reported request from the Trump administration for TSMC to take a controlling stake in Intel’s US factories is facing valid questions about feasibility from all sides. Washington would likely not support a foreign company operating Intel’s domestic factories, Reuters reported — just look at how that is going over in the steel sector. Meanwhile, many in Taiwan are concerned about the company being forced to transfer its bleeding-edge tech capabilities and give up its strategic advantage. This is especially
US President Donald Trump last week announced plans to impose reciprocal tariffs on eight countries. As Taiwan, a key hub for semiconductor manufacturing, is among them, the policy would significantly affect the country. In response, Minister of Economic Affairs J.W. Kuo (郭智輝) dispatched two officials to the US for negotiations, and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co’s (TSMC) board of directors convened its first-ever meeting in the US. Those developments highlight how the US’ unstable trade policies are posing a growing threat to Taiwan. Can the US truly gain an advantage in chip manufacturing by reversing trade liberalization? Is it realistic to
Last week, 24 Republican representatives in the US Congress proposed a resolution calling for US President Donald Trump’s administration to abandon the US’ “one China” policy, calling it outdated, counterproductive and not reflective of reality, and to restore official diplomatic relations with Taiwan, enter bilateral free-trade agreement negotiations and support its entry into international organizations. That is an exciting and inspiring development. To help the US government and other nations further understand that Taiwan is not a part of China, that those “one China” policies are contrary to the fact that the two countries across the Taiwan Strait are independent and
RSS