China last week said that it was investigating what it called Taiwan’s “trade barriers,” which supposedly affect more than 2,400 Chinese imports spanning from agricultural products and textiles to minerals and petrochemicals. It is an unusual move that many in Taiwan say is politically motivated while China maintains its own bans on a range of Taiwanese goods.
If China retaliates and implements export bans on similar Taiwanese goods, it would have a limited effect on the nation’s economy, the Ministry of Economic Affairs said. Taiwan’s exports of the 2,455 products under Chinese investigation totaled US$4.43 billion last year, accounting for just 0.9 percent of the nation’s total China-bound shipments. Because the probe could last until Jan. 12 next year — one day before Taiwan’s presidential election — there are concerns that China might use the trade barriers issue for political leverage.
The investigation could also be a precursor for China terminating the Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement with Taiwan. Ending the cross-strait trade deal, introduced in 2010 to reduce tariffs and trade barriers between the two sides, would likely affect up to 10 percent of Taiwan’s exports to China, an estimate by the Taiwan Institute of Economic Research showed.
Trade barriers are restrictive measures imposed by a country on foreign goods. Any government regulations or policies that hinder international trade — such as tariffs, subsidies, quotas, and import and export licenses — could be considered trade barriers. In response, the affected party can initiate an investigation in an effort to rectify unequal trade conditions, and it should notify the affected parties of its intentions to initiate a probe.
The Ministry of Economic Affairs last week said it was not informed about the investigation before it was announced, and had only learned of it through the media, even though Taiwan and China are members of the WTO, which dictates that trade negotiations should be conducted in an equal and reciprocal manner.
Taiwan has placed import restrictions on Chinese goods determined to pose threats to national security or harm to domestic industries, based on the Regulations Governing Trade Between the Taiwan Area and the Mainland Area (台灣地區與大陸地區貿易許可辦法), which took effect in 1993.
When Taiwan and China sought access to the WTO (Taiwan joined in 2002, a year after China), the two sides did consult on the terms of trade across the Taiwan Strait, but have yet to complete such negotiations. China’s latest move to address trade restrictions two decades after they were implemented shows no constructive contribution to bilateral trade, but raises questions about Beijing’s motives.
Moreover, China appears to be changing its attitude toward trade with Taiwan as it seeks to increase exports to boost a faltering economy affected by tech tensions with the US and global macroeconomic uncertainty. Because Beijing’s suspensions of Taiwanese goods are often arbitrary and abrupt, Taiwanese businesses should consider the grave risks of maintaining China as a major export market. Meanwhile, the government should make further efforts to help Taiwanese exporters tap into other markets to avoid overreliance on one market.
As it would take time for businesses to develop new foreign markets, the government should establish a task force to address China’s trade barriers investigation and offer guidance to domestic industries. It should also develop long-term plans to help transform and upgrade affected industries to enhance their global competitiveness, as opening up to the world is an unavoidable trend.
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
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
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
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS