Amid increasing concerns over China’s global rise, the EU has demonstrated its resolution to bolster economic security with the European Commission’s Chips Act, a list of 10 critical technologies crucial to economic security and an investigation into subsidies for imports of battery electric vehicles from China.
Like the US, Japan and other like-minded areas, the EU is wary of China’s advanced technological development and has implemented de-risking strategies.
Western countries have adopted countermeasures to slow China’s progress. They have prevented advanced technologies from military and civilian use in China, and have been pouring resources into the digital and green industries, as well as identifying flaws in their own systems and diversifying.
Then there are passive retaliatory measures, including tariffs and market restrictions imposed on rivals.
With shifts in the geopolitical landscape such as the Ukraine war, the partnership of Russia and China, and the escalating US-China rivalry, the EU has realized it can no longer afford to sit on the fence.
The Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill, the Creating Helpful Incentives to Produce Semiconductors and Science Act and Inflation Reduction Act governing 21st-century climate and resources technologies were apparently introduced by the US to bolster the green industry.
In addition, US President Joe Biden’s plans to tighten export curbs for artificial intelligence (AI) chips to China starting this month aims to cut it off from key technologies that can support its military.
Similarly, the EU’s risk assessment report could lower the risk of an outflow of its advanced semiconductor, AI, quantum and biological technologies to rival countries.
The EU has also moved to partner with allies to form closer collaborative ties and de-risk value chains.
The US’ share of global GDP is about 20 percent. It knows that only by teaming up with major allies such as the EU, Asian countries such as Japan, South Korea and Indonesia, and Australia can it reach 50 to 60 percent.
To do so, it must align its goals with its allies.
There are lessons that Taiwan can learn from this:
First, there should be massive investment and tight controls over core technologies developed in advanced technological areas.
Second, it should keep in mind that the EU and the US need trusted partners to build value chains by implementing de-risking strategies for national security.
Third, precautionary and preventive measures can only take effect when allies partner across several fields.
Fourth, the nation should protect its strategically advantageous industries.
As Western countries have gone out of their way to investigate subsidies on imports and impose penalties, Taipei should likewise publish a list of critical technologies that concern national interests and plan a well-rounded economic security strategy by increasing investment and seek opportunities to participate in the de-risking value chain network.
Chang Meng-jen is chair of the Department of Italian Language and Culture at Fu Jen Catholic University, and coordinator of the university’s diplomacy and international affairs program.
Translated by Rita Wang
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (傅?萁) has caused havoc with his attempts to overturn the democratic and constitutional order in the legislature. If we look at this devolution from the context of a transition to democracy from authoritarianism in a culturally Chinese sense — that of zhonghua (中華) — then we are playing witness to a servile spirit from a millennia-old form of totalitarianism that is intent on damaging the nation’s hard-won democracy. This servile spirit is ingrained in Chinese culture. About a century ago, Chinese satirist and author Lu Xun (魯迅) saw through the servile nature of
In their New York Times bestseller How Democracies Die, Harvard political scientists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt said that democracies today “may die at the hands not of generals but of elected leaders. Many government efforts to subvert democracy are ‘legal,’ in the sense that they are approved by the legislature or accepted by the courts. They may even be portrayed as efforts to improve democracy — making the judiciary more efficient, combating corruption, or cleaning up the electoral process.” Moreover, the two authors observe that those who denounce such legal threats to democracy are often “dismissed as exaggerating or
Monday was the 37th anniversary of former president Chiang Ching-kuo’s (蔣經國) death. Chiang — a son of former president Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), who had implemented party-state rule and martial law in Taiwan — has a complicated legacy. Whether one looks at his time in power in a positive or negative light depends very much on who they are, and what their relationship with the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is. Although toward the end of his life Chiang Ching-kuo lifted martial law and steered Taiwan onto the path of democratization, these changes were forced upon him by internal and external pressures,
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus in the Legislative Yuan has made an internal decision to freeze NT$1.8 billion (US$54.7 million) of the indigenous submarine project’s NT$2 billion budget. This means that up to 90 percent of the budget cannot be utilized. It would only be accessible if the legislature agrees to lift the freeze sometime in the future. However, for Taiwan to construct its own submarines, it must rely on foreign support for several key pieces of equipment and technology. These foreign supporters would also be forced to endure significant pressure, infiltration and influence from Beijing. In other words,
RSS