William Lai vows to protect Taiwan security and industry in speech marking year as leader
Taiwanese leader
William Lai Ching-te has pledged to protect interests of the island's various sectors in its ongoing tariff negotiations with the United States, while standing firm on security amid growing pressure from Beijing.
Advertisement
In a speech marking his first year in office on Tuesday, Lai reiterated his call for peace and dialogue with Beijing but emphasised that
Taiwan must continue strengthening its defence and self-reliance to ensure security and stability.
Facing both external and internal challenges over the past year, Lai has had to navigate tensions with Washington – despite what he described as the 'best-ever' US-Taiwan relations – alongside near-daily military threats from Beijing and sharp political divisions at home.
02:17
Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang unveils plan to build 'AI supercomputer' in Taiwan
Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang unveils plan to build 'AI supercomputer' in Taiwan
The administration was caught off guard last month when US President Donald Trump announced a sweeping
32 per cent tariff on Taiwanese imports , citing unfair trade practices and a large bilateral surplus.
'Friction between friends is inevitable, but it can be worked through,' Lai said. 'Taiwan has long engaged and cooperated with the United States and other democratic partners, growing together through mutual encouragement.'
Advertisement
Responding to mounting concern over the tariff talks, Lai said discussions were 'ongoing and proceeding smoothly' after a previous round of in-person negotiations.
'The government will uphold three core principles: protecting national interests, supporting industrial development, and never sacrificing any single sector,' he said. 'We will deepen Taiwan-US economic ties in a deliberate, balanced and strategic manner to secure the best possible outcome.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
HKFP
19 hours ago
- HKFP
US President Trump says deal with Chinese leader Xi ‘extremely hard' as steel tariffs double
Donald Trump said on Wednesday that it was 'extremely hard' to reach a deal with Chinese leader Xi Jinping, but the EU touted progress in its own trade talks with Washington even though the US president doubled global metal tariffs. Trump's latest trade moves came as OECD ministers gathered in Paris to discuss the outlook for the world economy in light of a US hardball approach that has rattled world markets. Trump's sweeping tariffs on allies and adversaries have strained ties with trading partners and sparked a flurry of negotiations to avoid the duties. The White House has suggested the president will speak to Xi this week, raising hopes they can soothe tensions and speed up a trade deal between the world's two biggest economies. However, early Wednesday, Trump appeared to dampen hopes for a quick deal. 'I like President XI of China, always have, and always will, but he is VERY TOUGH, AND EXTREMELY HARD TO MAKE A DEAL WITH!!!' he posted on his Truth Social platform. Asked about the remarks during a regular press briefing, Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Lin Jian said: 'The Chinese side's principles and stance on developing Sino-US relations are consistent.' China was the main target of Trump's April tariff blitz, hit with levies of 145 percent on its goods and triggering tit-for-tat tariffs of 125 percent on US goods. Both sides agreed to temporarily de-escalate in May, after Trump delayed most sweeping measures on other countries until July 9. His latest remarks came hours after he increased his tariffs on aluminum and steel from 25 percent to 50 percent, raising temperatures with various partners while exempting Britain from the higher levy. EU trade commissioner Maros Sefcovic said after talks with US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer on the sidelines of the OECD meeting in Paris that raising the metal tariffs 'doesn't help the negotiations'. The two sides were nonetheless 'making progress' in their negotiations, Sefcovic said at a news conference. Goods from the 27-nation bloc will be hit with 50-percent tariffs on July 9 unless it reaches a deal with Washington. The EU has vowed to retaliate. 'We did very much focus on these negotiations, and I still believe in them,' Sefcovic said, adding that he was optimistic that a 'positive result' could be reached. Steel tariffs The OECD cut its forecast for global economic growth on Tuesday, blaming Trump's tariff blitz for the downgrade. 'We need to come up with negotiated solutions as quickly as possible, because time is running out,' German economy minister Katherina Reiche warned. French trade minister Laurent Saint-Martin said: 'We have to keep our cool and always show that the introduction of these tariffs is in no one's interest.' Canada, the largest supplier of the metals to the United States, has called Trump's tariffs 'illegal and unjustified'. After talks between UK Trade Secretary Jonathan Reynolds and Greer on Tuesday, London said imports from the UK would remain at 25 percent for now. Both sides needed to work out duties and quotas in line with the terms of a recently signed trade pact. 'We're pleased that as a result of our agreement with the US, UK steel will not be subject to these additional tariffs,' a British government spokesperson said. White House wants offers The Group of Seven advanced economies — Britain, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan and the United States — was due to hold separate talks on trade Wednesday. Mexico will request an exemption from the higher tariff, Economy Minister Marcelo Ebrard said, arguing that it was unfair because the United States exports more steel to its southern neighbour than it imports. 'It makes no sense to put a tariff on a product in which you have a surplus,' Ebrard said. Mexico is highly vulnerable to Trump's trade wars because 80 percent of its exports go to the United States, its main partner. While some of Trump's most sweeping levies face legal challenges, they have been allowed to remain in place for now as an appeals process takes place. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt confirmed Tuesday that the Trump administration sent letters to governments pushing for offers by Wednesday as the July 9 deadline approached.
Asia Times
19 hours ago
- Asia Times
Anwar's immunity bid fails in rule-of-law test for Malaysia
In a landmark June 4 ruling, Malaysia's High Court denied Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim's controversial attempt to shield himself from civil proceedings by invoking a constitutional mechanism — a move critics say was a veiled attempt at political immunity. The court's rejection of Anwar's bid marks the beginning of a legal confrontation unprecedented in Malaysian history: a sitting prime minister now stands to defend himself in court while governing the nation. The decision arrives on the heels of a motion by Anwar's legal team seeking to refer eight constitutional questions to the Federal Court. These questions, according to the defense, pertained to the burdens placed on the Prime Minister's Office by an ongoing civil suit and were framed not as an immunity plea but as a request for a 'constitutional filter.' Yet the distinction was semantic at best. 'We are not claiming immunity,' Anwar's counsel asserted on June 3. 'We are simply seeking clarity to protect the executive's function.' But the subtext was clear: Anwar wanted out of the dock. The case in question — a civil suit filed by Muhammed Yusoff Rawther alleging sexual misconduct by Anwar — predates Anwar's premiership. The incident allegedly occurred in 2018, and Rawther filed the suit in 2020. Notably, Anwar did not attempt to strike out the suit at any point over the past three years. Only on May 23, 2025 — a staggering 912 days after he assumed office — did he pivot to constitutional arguments. Rawther's lawyer, Muhammad Rafique Rashid Ali, minced no words in court. 'Why did the Prime Minister take 912 days to raise this issue?' he asked. 'If the matter truly affected his ability to discharge executive functions, he should have addressed it long ago.' Rafique also pointed out that Anwar's affidavit failed to provide any reason for the delay — a procedural omission that, in the eyes of many, exposed the real motivation behind the application. More damningly, Rafique invoked Article 8 of the Federal Constitution, which guarantees equal protection under the law. 'No man — not even the Prime Minister — can stand above that,' he said. 'Immunity, whether cloaked as a filter or wrapped in legalese, is still immunity.' Presiding Judge Roz Mawar Rozain dismissed all eight questions as 'untenable, abstract and speculative.' She ruled that the Federal Court need not be burdened with academic hypotheticals. The trial, she affirmed, will proceed as scheduled on June 16, and 20,000 ringgit (US$4,700) in legal costs were awarded to Rawther. Anwar's team immediately sought an urgent stay of the ruling, but it also was dismissed. They now have 30 days to file an appeal to the Court of Appeal, though the countdown to the trial has already begun. In her oral judgment, Roz Mawar made it clear: Articles 39, 40, and 43 of the Constitution — which Anwar's team cited to support their plea — contain no implicit or explicit provision for immunity. The Constitution, she emphasized, enshrines accountability, not executive insulation. Anwar's maneuver has drawn comparisons to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's 2020 attempt to sidestep legal scrutiny. Facing multiple indictments, Netanyahu petitioned the Knesset for parliamentary immunity, claiming the charges were politically motivated. While Israel's system at least provides a legal pathway for such immunity via legislative vote, Malaysia's does not. Anwar's attempt to manufacture a similar buffer through the courts was both bold and, ultimately, unsuccessful. In both cases, the public response was the same: dismay at the spectacle of a sitting prime minister attempting to rewrite the rules mid-game. Anwar's critics say his move reeks of the same hubris — a desperate attempt to evade moral reckoning while cloaked in constitutional garb. For a man who once stood as the face of Reformasi, the optics are devastating. Here is Anwar — long celebrated as a martyr of political injustice, imprisoned under Mahathir Mohamad's authoritarian regime — now attempting to insulate himself from due process using the very levers of power he once opposed. This isn't Anwar's first brush with accusations of overreach. His 1999 conviction for abuse of power — widely seen as politically charged — is now being unearthed in conversations across social media and political circles alike. History, as they say, echoes. The parallel doesn't stop there. Like Thailand's Thaksin Shinawatra — another leader accused of self-enrichment and later pardoned — Anwar has blurred the lines between public service and political dynasty. His appointment of Thaksin as ASEAN adviser and his own daughter Nurul Izzah as Deputy President of the PKR have raised questions about nepotism and political insulation, further damaging his image as a reformer. Conversely, Rawther's credibility has only been strengthened by this legal victory. He has, for years, insisted that his pursuit of justice is not politically motivated. The June 4 ruling — which affirms the legitimacy of his claim and the court's commitment to due process — lends weight to that assertion. In a political landscape often defined by backroom deals and unaccountable elites, Rawther has emerged as a symbol of perseverance — a private citizen holding the nation's most powerful man to legal scrutiny. This verdict could well reshape how Malaysia is seen on the regional stage. As the country currently chairing ASEAN, the world is watching. The failure of Anwar's immunity gambit is a litmus test of Malaysia's democratic maturity. What signal would it have sent if a sitting Prime Minister could so easily erect a legal wall around himself? The judiciary, by rejecting this narrative, has reaffirmed Malaysia's commitment to constitutional supremacy and rule of law. In Rafique's words outside the court, 'This ruling ensures that in Malaysia, no executive, no prime Minister, no monarch can place himself above the people.' This episode will linger in the nation's political memory — not just for what it reveals about Anwar's instincts, but for what it says about the resilience of Malaysia's institutions. The prime minister now finds himself in uncharted territory: governing while on trial, a dual burden with no modern precedent in Malaysia. Anwar once said, 'Justice is the soul of governance.' It remains to be seen whether he will honor that creed — or be judged by it.
Asia Times
a day ago
- Asia Times
Now the hard part: Lee Jae-myung and S Korea's quest for balance
This article was originally published by Pacific Forum. It is republished with permission. When Lee Jae-myung last ran for the South Korean presidency in 2022 he campaigned for balance in Seoul's foreign relations. At a time when the Biden administration pushed for not just closer bilateral but trilateral cooperation with Japan on the security issues of the day and Lee found himself in a tight contest with a conservative candidate happy to accede to Biden's wishes, this meant stressing an open hand to China and a willingness to say no to the United States. Three years later, Korea has just finished a snap election following an aborted martial law declaration and impeachment process. Lee, in his now-successful campaign to win the presidency again, stressed balance. However, the circumstances around him and around the Korean Peninsula have shifted starkly – as has the meaning of 'balance.' Instead of a Biden administration eager to deepen cooperation with Seoul at all levels, Lee will have a counterpart in Washington who demands to see results in keeping with the US administration's goals. And while the US administration clearly does have its eyes on the Indo-Pacific and seeks to contain China's ambitions there, US-Korea ties have not flourished during Seoul's leadership vacuum over the past several months. Supporters of the alliance have been holding their breath to see how Korea's next president will gel with President Donald Trump on a personal level. Most recently, rumors of a US troop drawdown have set off fears of a decreased US commitment to South Korea, especially regarding the deterrence of North Korea. It is in light of these developments that some of Lee's recent remarks, including his praise of Trump's dealmaking skill and of the role of US Forces Korea in ensuring regional stability should be read. While such remarks may have surprised those who remember the foreign policy planks of Lee's last campaign for the presidency, they make sense under current conditions: North Korea remains a looming and unpredictable security threat. China – with its ambitions of regional hegemony – hovers over all, and not everyone in Washington is convinced of Seoul's indispensability. Whatever else is true of Lee, he seemingly recognizes that balance will not be achieved if the US role diminishes and China's grows unabated. Furthermore, Lee's previous stances on China, the US, Japan and other foreign policy matters, when coupled with his domestic policy proposals – such as supporting a universal basic income during the 2022 campaign – suggested that he would govern firmly from the left. Once Yoon Suk Yeol was removed over his ill-fated martial law declaration and Lee became the clear favorite, Lee has scaled back previous promises and even tried to rebrand himself as 'centrist-conservative.' All of which is to say that, ultimately, Lee Jae-myung is a less a progressive ideologue than a politician – for both good and ill. Yes, his policy proposals have in the past earned comparisons to Bernie Sanders; they've also earned him the sobriquet of 'Korea's Trump.' And now he has the presidency, a massive majority in the National Assembly and a fragmented opposition. Assuming he establishes a rapport with President Trump, he would enjoy broad room to maneuver over the next five years, including in the security sphere. There are some things to ponder in the meantime. First, will Lee's elevation and the Democratic Party's return to power mean more inter-Korean talks? The odds for such talks are certainly better than they were under Yoon, but not necessarily good. With Kim Jong Un officially swearing off unification with the South and enjoying ties with Russia, North Korea may be in no hurry to cozy up to Washington for sanctions relief. Even if he does, one lesson he appears to have learned from the Moon Jae-in years is that South Korea is irrelevant to his goals: Kim wants sanctions reduction and only the US is necessary for that. If North Korea bypasses South Korea entirely to achieve its diplomatic objectives over the next five years, Seoul may actually have a weaker hand in dealing with Pyongyang and its regional partnerships may become even more important. Second, 'balance' between China and the US may not be up to Lee. Enjoying the security benefits that come with being a US ally and the economic boon of partnering with China would be a difficult posture under any circumstances. It will prove especially challenging if the rumors of US troop withdrawal prove true, leaving Lee to convince the US to increase its engagement in other ways, whether economically, in terms of intelligence-sharing, or in bolstering defense through weapons acquisition. But Beijing presents other problems: China remains deeply unpopular in Korea, and not all governments that have shifted in the direction of the US since the Covid-19 pandemic did so voluntarily. Should Seoul's decisions in the security, trade, or tech spheres displease Beijing, the measures China takes in response may force South Korea down the path of Australia, India and the Philippines, whose domestic discontent with Chinese actions pushed them into Washington's arms. If that happens popular sentiment could force Lee into a more hawkish position than he is comfortable with, and into a confrontation with his own party. No one expects Lee to be as friendly to Japan as his predecessor, who made unprecedented (and unpopular) gestures toward Tokyo in the name of trilateral security cooperation. But just because Lee is not another Yoon Suk Yeol does not mean he has to be another Moon Jae-in, who regularly inveighed against the 'collaborators,' abrogated the 2015 comfort women agreement with Japan to the delight of activists but not defense specialists, and threatened more serious steps like ending South Korea's involvement in the GSOMIA. Even if Lee declines to meet the Japanese prime minister for a summit, stable ties – marked by continued dialogues in the bilateral and trilateral formats – are in Korea's best interests. It's one thing for Lee to request sincere contrition from Japan regarding its imperial past; it's another thing entirely to throw away those ties to the benefit of China's hegemonic present. For a non-movement conservative to bolster bilateral Japan ties, even incrementally, will do wonders for the relationship over the long term. Lee has come under fire for saying that his reaction to a China-Taiwan contingency would be to say ' xie xie ' to both sides and otherwise steer clear. One can certainly decry such indifference. While Lee has sought to frame this as seeking good relations with both Taipei and Beijing, for an autocratic power to attempt the forcible absorption of a liberal democracy would have serious repercussions for all free societies and for US security guarantees, across the Indo-Pacific. Neutrality is not good enough. However, the ambiguity of Korea's response to a Taiwan contingency did not begin with Lee and it is not up to him to solve alone. The United States must play a role in determining the parameters of Seoul's engagement, including by organizing discussions with Seoul at the track 2 level and above to help decide what Seoul's response to a Taiwan Strait emergency would be. A good first step would be for a US-ROK summit to include a statement opposing any effort to change the status quo by force. Given recent Chinese diplomatic initiatives, even that might count as a bold step from Seoul. Again, the key word is 'balance' – and not just in foreign affairs. In addition to the personal differences compared with his predecessor that Lee brings to the presidency, his party's base will have different demands. How he manages those expectations in the face of a rapidly changing security climate will determine his legacy, and maybe South Korea's future. Rob York ( rob@ ) is director for regional affairs at Pacific Forum International. He is the editor of Pacific Forum publications and spearheads Pacific Forum outreach to the Korean Peninsula and South Asia. He earned his PhD in Korean history in December 2023.
