It is high time that the ban on imports of Japanese food products from five prefectures after the March 2011 Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plant disaster is lifted in its entirety, and there is little disagreement on the matter from the governments of Taiwan and Japan.
At this year’s Taiwan-Japan Economic and Trade Conference, held via videoconference on Tuesday last week, Japan-Taiwan Exchange Association Chairman Mitsuo Ohashi urged Taiwan to “soon follow in the footsteps of the United States and European Union, and to properly address the issue according to scientific evidence and international standards.”
The following day, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) said that the government would proceed based on international standards and scientific evidence, while applying the principle of safeguarding public health. Taiwan-Japan Relations Association Chairman Chiou I-jen (邱義仁), who led Taiwan’s delegation in the conference with Ohashi, also evoked this principle, but added that the government currently had “no timeline” to resolve the issue.
The government’s position on safeguarding public health hardly needed to be stated, except that it was important to head off the political strategy it expects from the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT).
However, it had better have a more substantial grasp of its schedule, as it does not have much time left: Late next year, the government will have its hands full campaigning for the 2024 presidential election, and the Tsai administration should have learned from its first term that equivocating on a major policy issue is not advantageous, as the opposition is likely to exploit indecision.
The majority of the international community, including the US and the EU, is satisfied with Japan’s measures to ensure that potentially irradiated food is subject to strict testing before it can be exported.
Taiwan and Japan are also aware of the economic argument, and what the lifting of the ban would mean for Taiwan’s application to join the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership. They also know that the only obstacle is the political issue of how to convince the Taiwanese public to accept the idea.
The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) can expect no help from the KMT with this. Even though there is apparent division within the party on the matter, Broadcasting Corp of China chairman Jaw Shaw-kong (趙少康), who heads the “blue fighters” movement, seems to believe that opposition for opposition’s sake is some kind of sacred duty, and KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) on Saturday said that the KMT Central Standing Committee, KMT-led local governments and party think tanks would collect scientific evidence and data to “defend the people’s health.”
The government and the public must therefore prepare for cherry-picked and misleading data in the coming weeks.
However, the KMT is increasingly losing support, even among voters disinclined to vote for the DPP.
Taipei Mayor Ko Wen-je (柯文哲), chairman of the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), in 2019 referred to the 2018 referendum question on lifting the ban as “feeble-minded.” He said the issue should be solved scientifically and that a convincing reason would be needed to adopt different radiation level standards from the US and EU.
Ko and TPP legislators do not always agree on issues, but he is the party chairman.
If the government is to look for political support in relieving public concern about lifting the ban, it should look to the TPP, and not expect the KMT to offer any constructive opposition.
However, it must act quickly and decisively.
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
As former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) wrapped up his visit to the People’s Republic of China, he received his share of attention. Certainly, the trip must be seen within the full context of Ma’s life, that is, his eight-year presidency, the Sunflower movement and his failed Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement, as well as his eight years as Taipei mayor with its posturing, accusations of money laundering, and ups and downs. Through all that, basic questions stand out: “What drives Ma? What is his end game?” Having observed and commented on Ma for decades, it is all ironically reminiscent of former US president Harry