The Chancellery has intervened. Once again, the ministries in Berlin led by the various traffic light parties have so far been unable to agree on a common position on an important European law. While the SPD and Greens support the compromise on the AI Act reached in the trilogue, there is resistance from the FDP – particularly from Volker Wissing’s Digital Ministry.
It is also unclear how France will position itself. If both countries do not back the compromise, others could follow. There are growing calls from German business and society not to jeopardize the deal.
Like Italy, Germany and France were among the most prominent critics of the AI Act, as they expressed in a joint letter to the Spanish Council Presidency in November. The most important point: the concern that the regulation of general-purpose AI (GPAI) could put emerging AI companies in Europe at a competitive disadvantage. Others see civil rights at risk due to the regulations on biometric recognition in public spaces.
The Federal Cabinet intends to determine its position on Wednesday. The ministries involved and the Chancellery are currently trying to reach an agreement – and thus avoid another abstention by the German government in Brussels. The decision in the Committee of Permanent Representatives (Coreper) in Brussels is scheduled for February 2.
An alliance of academia, think tanks, business and civil society has sent a letter to the German government urging it to vote “yes.” The signatories include Stiftung Neue Verantwortung, Stiftung Mercator and the Federation of German Consumer Organizations. “In order to create legal certainty for companies, binding, proportionate standards for trustworthy AI”, an agreement should be reached before the end of this legislative period. A lack of a legal framework would be “risky for the protection of fundamental rights and innovation in Europe given the ongoing development of AI.”
They also warn against a patchwork of national regulatory initiatives. This will make it more difficult for smaller companies in particular to launch their products on the market across Europe. “China and the USA are also working on laws on AI technologies. These rules will significantly determine the use of and markets for AI products,” warns Carla Hustedt, Head of Digital Affairs at Stiftung Mercator. “The EU would be at the mercy of this development if it does not agree on its own rules in time.”
Hustedt admits that she is disappointed with the way biometric surveillance has been handled. “Civil society had hoped for clear prohibitions in this area.” Here, the nation-states would have to make adjustments to the implementation. However, she also says: “If the current proposal for the AI Act fails, it is unlikely that a better result will be achieved later.”
The Federation of German Industries (BDI) also shows little understanding of jeopardizing the AI Act. “We need legal certainty,” said Polina Khubbeeva, Head of Digitalization and Innovation at the BDI, in an interview with Table.Media. Some very valuable progress had been made in the negotiations. For example, simple activities are no longer subject to regulation, even if they take place in a high-security area. “We welcome that. Also, that there are more opportunities for self-assessment and less confirmation from third parties is required, which would have led to greater delays.”
The AI Act is not a law that is generating great enthusiasm in the industry. “There are many concerns.” However, the industry is grateful to the federal government “for being very supportive of our concerns, especially in the second half, particularly concerning the regulation of GPAI. Our worst fears have not been realized.”
The AI Association is also critical of some aspects of the AI Act, such as the definition of AI in the regulation. However, a possible failure could lead to major collateral damage. “A delay due to the European elections and the formation of the new EU Commission could lead to months of uncertainty in the implementation of AI products in the conventional economy,” writes the AI Association. “It must be considered whether a political signal justifies this price.”
In France, criticism of the AI Act comes from the highest level: Emmanuel Macron has made no secret of the fact that he does not like the proposed legislation. However, if France votes “no” or abstains, it would be a defeat for French Internal Market Commissioner Thierry Breton, who pushed for the law. France wanted to achieve a postponement of the vote in Coreper but was unable to get its way. Therefore, a ministerial meeting in France will decide how the country will vote this week. The government reshuffle has led to some confusion as to who is responsible.
Italy is keen to contribute to artificial intelligence, as AI is high on the list of topics that Italy wants to promote during its G7 presidency this year. Alessio Butti, Undersecretary of State responsible for digital transformation and innovation, represented Italy in the negotiations on the AI Act. However, there are different views on the topic of AI within the right-wing governing coalition. Economics Minister Adolfo Urso (like Butti from the Fratelli d’Italia) called for less stringent codes of conduct, as did his counterparts from France and Germany. In mid-December, however, the two politicians jointly declared that the trilogue agreement “represents a significant step for the development of artificial intelligence in the EU and in Italy.”
If France, Germany and Italy do not agree, this would not be enough to stop the AI Act. But if just one more member state does not give its consent, negotiations on the law would have to continue. Many considered this to be a disaster. Not only because of the legal uncertainty that would remain. Above all, observers are concerned about the expected shift to the right in the European Parliament – and that Hungary, of all countries, will take over the Council Presidency in the second half of the year.
Countries such as Spain, Belgium and the Netherlands are therefore looking critically at the discussions in neighboring countries. “We have a deal and broad agreement,” say diplomatic circles. “Let’s finish it now.”
Poland, on the other hand, does not yet have an official position. The prevailing opinion in the specialist media is that the AI Act imposes too many restrictions on the industry. On Monday, a team of experts will be presented at the Ministry of Digitization to deal with the issue of AI in Poland. Warsaw looks closely at Germany and France, where the most important AI companies are based. The unofficial word is that Poland is unlikely to vote in favor if Berlin and Paris vote against it. with asf/ryb
The first party conference of the Sahra Wagenknecht Alliance (BSW) party begins with a standing ovation for the founder, who enters the hall in a red costume at 10 a.m. on the dot. This staging of Sahra Wagenknecht and the new party as a “saving force” for a “badly governed” Germany remains the most important motif of the day. Oskar Lafontaine also enters the hall with Wagenknecht. He had only recently confirmed his BSW membership. At the party conference, he sits in the front row between General Secretary Christian Leye and Wagenknecht.
Criticism of the traffic light coalition dominates most of the day’s speeches. It is the reason why more and more people are turning away from politics, says Deputy Party Chairman Shervin Haghsheno. He is a political career changer and until recently worked as an engineer. Co-chair Amira Mohamed Ali asks why Germany is lagging in Europe in many areas. Instead of setting her own rhetorical tone, she quotes Wagenknecht, who once said in the Bundestag: “Because we have the most stupid government in Europe.” It is clear: it will not work without Wagenknecht.
In her speech, the party chairwoman takes a swipe at the government. The politicians do not care if there are no more buses in the countryside and the last doctor’s office closes. At the same time, the Greens in particular staged themselves as “do-gooders” who care about every toad. This “discrepancy between the pompous moralism of this supposedly progressive coalition and their deeply amoral policies in reality” is driving people crazy.
Wagenknecht’s blows are always met with applause from her supporters. Concrete political demands, on the other hand, are rare. Wagenknecht calls for a higher minimum wage and a pension system “like in Austria.” A reform of the healthcare system – she does not say what this should look like. Energy must be affordable and economic sanctions, which are not damaging to Russia but to Germany, must be abolished and “all burdens on farmers” must be lifted.
Wagenknecht also blames the government for the rise of the AfD. Any criticism of politics is immediately defamed as right-wing, as was recently the case with the farmers’ demonstrations. We already know this from the protests during the Covid pandemic. “If people have been told for years that any reasonable criticism is right-wing, then it’s no wonder that a right-wing party is successful.” The fact that the traffic light politicians are now taking to the streets at anti-AfD protests is absurd. “If they really want to weaken the AfD, they don’t need to demonstrate, they need to finally change their miserable policies.”
The BSW also uses the date, International Holocaust Remembrance Day, to rhetorically distance itself from the AfD. Publicist Daniela Dahn gave the opening speech. Dahn is not a member of the BSW, but she was one of the first signatories of the “Manifesto for Peace,” which Wagenknecht published with Alice Schwarzer last year. The Holocaust is far more than a fly in the ointment, she says – that is how AfD leader Alexander Gauland described the Nazi era. The BSW, on the other hand, stands for anti-racism and anti-fascism. It is also the only consistent peace party in Parliament. A minute’s silence follows for the victims of the Holocaust.
General Secretary Christian Leye attacks the AfD most specifically: While it had supported the farmers in their protests, its program calls for the removal of their subsidies. “Dear farmers, please read this!” he shouts. The AfD does not really care about workers and their problems either, he said. “This is not an anti-system party. It is the system, but undemocratic and mean.”
The BSW is to be the true anti-system party – this is the message the party conference intends to represent. “We are the serious address for those who feel badly governed,” says Co-Party Leader Mohamed Ali. At its first party conference, it presented itself as a populist force with left-wing accents, which it emphasized more clearly at the party conference than before. In keeping with this, the party is distancing itself from the former party: “We are not the Left 2.0,” says Wagenknecht. This must also apply to how we treat each other. “Let’s become a party of togetherness.”
There were no amendments to the program for the European elections, in which the BSW intends to run in June, there was no debate or substantive discussion. The BSW’s lead candidate for the European elections, Fabio De Masi, underlined the BSW’s mistrust of the European institutions. The leitmotif of the program is: “Less is more.” The BSW strives for an “independent Europe of sovereign democracies.” The integration of Europe “in the direction of a supranational unitary state has proven to be a mistake.”
The BSW wants to prevent wage dumping in the internal market and is calling for the introduction of a European minimum wage. A postulate that the Left Party also has in its program. The demand for an excess profits tax in the industrial sector and a reform of the debt brake is also common to both parties. The power of large corporations such as Google or Amazon must be restricted, said De Masi. The BSW is calling for an end to energy sanctions against Russia. They were not harming Putin, but Germany.
De Masi left out the topic of migration in his speech. The program remains relatively vague on the subject: illegal migration must be stopped and prospects in the home countries improved, it says. The right to asylum is not called into question. However, immigration should not overburden local capacities. When the European election program was presented at the beginning of January, it had already become clear that the two leading candidates, Fabio De Masi and former Düsseldorf mayor Thomas Geisel, were not in complete agreement on the topic.
The BSW is polling at seven percent. This means that the party could be represented in the European Parliament with seven MEPs. The list for the European elections:
When Roy Chun Lee was appointed to a government position by Taiwan’s Minister of Foreign Affairs Joseph Wu in early 2023, he was visibly surprised. In his role as deputy minister of foreign affairs, he sought to explore unconventional paths in foreign policy, considering Taiwan’s limited political room for maneuver. “I alone cannot change the world, but I can try to encourage the foreign ministry to think outside the box.”
In November of last year, Lee spoke at the second Berlin Taiwan Conference initiated by Green MEP Reinhard Buetikofer. “European countries need their own Taiwan policy,” Lee demanded, connected live via video from his office in the foreign ministry. Taiwan is a valuable partner for the EU, especially due to its long-standing experience in analyzing and reducing economic dependencies on China. Lee specifically highlighted the opportunities for sectoral cooperation between Taiwan and European governments and companies, such as in the semiconductor industry, renewable energy or the research of secure supply chains.
Regarding the possibility of a classic bilateral trade agreement between Taiwan and the EU, Lee appeared rather reserved. “A trade agreement is not a priority for us. We should move towards a broader concept of comprehensive economic cooperation.” He could not precisely articulate how such a concept could be legally formulated and structured at that time.
Now, Roy Chun Lee has the opportunity to officially continue these considerations. Since Jan. 8, Lee has been the new envoy at Taiwan’s representative office for Belgium and the European Union in Brussels.
Lee is a trained lawyer. After studying in Taiwan, he pursued a doctoral program in Public Policy Analysis at the Australian National University in 2002. Since then, Lee has developed into a proficient trade specialist. As Deputy Director of the state-funded Chung-Hua Institute for Economic Research, Lee was actively involved in Taiwan’s actions in the World Trade Organization (WTO) and the initiation of regional trade agreements.
However, after Taiwan’s accession to the WTO in 2002, it became increasingly difficult for the country, under Chinese pressure, to conclude bilateral or multilateral agreements, including with the EU. In 2015, European Commission guidelines suggested exploring separate “investment agreements” with Taiwan based on the then-hoped-for Comprehensive Agreement on Investment (CAI) between the EU and China. However, the ratification of the investment agreement with China in the European Parliament has been on hold since 2021 due to political tensions.
Roy Chun Lee himself doubts that the EU, under China’s pressure, will dare to first conclude a formal trade or investment agreement with Taiwan under these conditions. With the recent victory of the China-critical Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) in Taiwan’s presidential elections and William Lai becoming the next president, Taiwan’s international political room for maneuver may not expand.
Therefore, Lee aims to focus more on intergovernmental agreements and softer forms of economic and political cooperation. Examples for this can be the Trade Framework Agreement concluded with the USA last June and the “Enhanced Trade Partnership” agreement signed with the UK in November. Recently, there was only one ministerial-level agreement between Taiwan and Germany: During the visit of Minister of Education and Research Bettina Stark-Watzinger in March 2023, a cooperation agreement focusing on collaboration in artificial intelligence, hydrogen energy, battery, and semiconductor technology was signed. Leonardo Pape
The Chancellery has intervened. Once again, the ministries in Berlin led by the various traffic light parties have so far been unable to agree on a common position on an important European law. While the SPD and Greens support the compromise on the AI Act reached in the trilogue, there is resistance from the FDP – particularly from Volker Wissing’s Digital Ministry.
It is also unclear how France will position itself. If both countries do not back the compromise, others could follow. There are growing calls from German business and society not to jeopardize the deal.
Like Italy, Germany and France were among the most prominent critics of the AI Act, as they expressed in a joint letter to the Spanish Council Presidency in November. The most important point: the concern that the regulation of general-purpose AI (GPAI) could put emerging AI companies in Europe at a competitive disadvantage. Others see civil rights at risk due to the regulations on biometric recognition in public spaces.
The Federal Cabinet intends to determine its position on Wednesday. The ministries involved and the Chancellery are currently trying to reach an agreement – and thus avoid another abstention by the German government in Brussels. The decision in the Committee of Permanent Representatives (Coreper) in Brussels is scheduled for February 2.
An alliance of academia, think tanks, business and civil society has sent a letter to the German government urging it to vote “yes.” The signatories include Stiftung Neue Verantwortung, Stiftung Mercator and the Federation of German Consumer Organizations. “In order to create legal certainty for companies, binding, proportionate standards for trustworthy AI”, an agreement should be reached before the end of this legislative period. A lack of a legal framework would be “risky for the protection of fundamental rights and innovation in Europe given the ongoing development of AI.”
They also warn against a patchwork of national regulatory initiatives. This will make it more difficult for smaller companies in particular to launch their products on the market across Europe. “China and the USA are also working on laws on AI technologies. These rules will significantly determine the use of and markets for AI products,” warns Carla Hustedt, Head of Digital Affairs at Stiftung Mercator. “The EU would be at the mercy of this development if it does not agree on its own rules in time.”
Hustedt admits that she is disappointed with the way biometric surveillance has been handled. “Civil society had hoped for clear prohibitions in this area.” Here, the nation-states would have to make adjustments to the implementation. However, she also says: “If the current proposal for the AI Act fails, it is unlikely that a better result will be achieved later.”
The Federation of German Industries (BDI) also shows little understanding of jeopardizing the AI Act. “We need legal certainty,” said Polina Khubbeeva, Head of Digitalization and Innovation at the BDI, in an interview with Table.Media. Some very valuable progress had been made in the negotiations. For example, simple activities are no longer subject to regulation, even if they take place in a high-security area. “We welcome that. Also, that there are more opportunities for self-assessment and less confirmation from third parties is required, which would have led to greater delays.”
The AI Act is not a law that is generating great enthusiasm in the industry. “There are many concerns.” However, the industry is grateful to the federal government “for being very supportive of our concerns, especially in the second half, particularly concerning the regulation of GPAI. Our worst fears have not been realized.”
The AI Association is also critical of some aspects of the AI Act, such as the definition of AI in the regulation. However, a possible failure could lead to major collateral damage. “A delay due to the European elections and the formation of the new EU Commission could lead to months of uncertainty in the implementation of AI products in the conventional economy,” writes the AI Association. “It must be considered whether a political signal justifies this price.”
In France, criticism of the AI Act comes from the highest level: Emmanuel Macron has made no secret of the fact that he does not like the proposed legislation. However, if France votes “no” or abstains, it would be a defeat for French Internal Market Commissioner Thierry Breton, who pushed for the law. France wanted to achieve a postponement of the vote in Coreper but was unable to get its way. Therefore, a ministerial meeting in France will decide how the country will vote this week. The government reshuffle has led to some confusion as to who is responsible.
Italy is keen to contribute to artificial intelligence, as AI is high on the list of topics that Italy wants to promote during its G7 presidency this year. Alessio Butti, Undersecretary of State responsible for digital transformation and innovation, represented Italy in the negotiations on the AI Act. However, there are different views on the topic of AI within the right-wing governing coalition. Economics Minister Adolfo Urso (like Butti from the Fratelli d’Italia) called for less stringent codes of conduct, as did his counterparts from France and Germany. In mid-December, however, the two politicians jointly declared that the trilogue agreement “represents a significant step for the development of artificial intelligence in the EU and in Italy.”
If France, Germany and Italy do not agree, this would not be enough to stop the AI Act. But if just one more member state does not give its consent, negotiations on the law would have to continue. Many considered this to be a disaster. Not only because of the legal uncertainty that would remain. Above all, observers are concerned about the expected shift to the right in the European Parliament – and that Hungary, of all countries, will take over the Council Presidency in the second half of the year.
Countries such as Spain, Belgium and the Netherlands are therefore looking critically at the discussions in neighboring countries. “We have a deal and broad agreement,” say diplomatic circles. “Let’s finish it now.”
Poland, on the other hand, does not yet have an official position. The prevailing opinion in the specialist media is that the AI Act imposes too many restrictions on the industry. On Monday, a team of experts will be presented at the Ministry of Digitization to deal with the issue of AI in Poland. Warsaw looks closely at Germany and France, where the most important AI companies are based. The unofficial word is that Poland is unlikely to vote in favor if Berlin and Paris vote against it. with asf/ryb
The first party conference of the Sahra Wagenknecht Alliance (BSW) party begins with a standing ovation for the founder, who enters the hall in a red costume at 10 a.m. on the dot. This staging of Sahra Wagenknecht and the new party as a “saving force” for a “badly governed” Germany remains the most important motif of the day. Oskar Lafontaine also enters the hall with Wagenknecht. He had only recently confirmed his BSW membership. At the party conference, he sits in the front row between General Secretary Christian Leye and Wagenknecht.
Criticism of the traffic light coalition dominates most of the day’s speeches. It is the reason why more and more people are turning away from politics, says Deputy Party Chairman Shervin Haghsheno. He is a political career changer and until recently worked as an engineer. Co-chair Amira Mohamed Ali asks why Germany is lagging in Europe in many areas. Instead of setting her own rhetorical tone, she quotes Wagenknecht, who once said in the Bundestag: “Because we have the most stupid government in Europe.” It is clear: it will not work without Wagenknecht.
In her speech, the party chairwoman takes a swipe at the government. The politicians do not care if there are no more buses in the countryside and the last doctor’s office closes. At the same time, the Greens in particular staged themselves as “do-gooders” who care about every toad. This “discrepancy between the pompous moralism of this supposedly progressive coalition and their deeply amoral policies in reality” is driving people crazy.
Wagenknecht’s blows are always met with applause from her supporters. Concrete political demands, on the other hand, are rare. Wagenknecht calls for a higher minimum wage and a pension system “like in Austria.” A reform of the healthcare system – she does not say what this should look like. Energy must be affordable and economic sanctions, which are not damaging to Russia but to Germany, must be abolished and “all burdens on farmers” must be lifted.
Wagenknecht also blames the government for the rise of the AfD. Any criticism of politics is immediately defamed as right-wing, as was recently the case with the farmers’ demonstrations. We already know this from the protests during the Covid pandemic. “If people have been told for years that any reasonable criticism is right-wing, then it’s no wonder that a right-wing party is successful.” The fact that the traffic light politicians are now taking to the streets at anti-AfD protests is absurd. “If they really want to weaken the AfD, they don’t need to demonstrate, they need to finally change their miserable policies.”
The BSW also uses the date, International Holocaust Remembrance Day, to rhetorically distance itself from the AfD. Publicist Daniela Dahn gave the opening speech. Dahn is not a member of the BSW, but she was one of the first signatories of the “Manifesto for Peace,” which Wagenknecht published with Alice Schwarzer last year. The Holocaust is far more than a fly in the ointment, she says – that is how AfD leader Alexander Gauland described the Nazi era. The BSW, on the other hand, stands for anti-racism and anti-fascism. It is also the only consistent peace party in Parliament. A minute’s silence follows for the victims of the Holocaust.
General Secretary Christian Leye attacks the AfD most specifically: While it had supported the farmers in their protests, its program calls for the removal of their subsidies. “Dear farmers, please read this!” he shouts. The AfD does not really care about workers and their problems either, he said. “This is not an anti-system party. It is the system, but undemocratic and mean.”
The BSW is to be the true anti-system party – this is the message the party conference intends to represent. “We are the serious address for those who feel badly governed,” says Co-Party Leader Mohamed Ali. At its first party conference, it presented itself as a populist force with left-wing accents, which it emphasized more clearly at the party conference than before. In keeping with this, the party is distancing itself from the former party: “We are not the Left 2.0,” says Wagenknecht. This must also apply to how we treat each other. “Let’s become a party of togetherness.”
There were no amendments to the program for the European elections, in which the BSW intends to run in June, there was no debate or substantive discussion. The BSW’s lead candidate for the European elections, Fabio De Masi, underlined the BSW’s mistrust of the European institutions. The leitmotif of the program is: “Less is more.” The BSW strives for an “independent Europe of sovereign democracies.” The integration of Europe “in the direction of a supranational unitary state has proven to be a mistake.”
The BSW wants to prevent wage dumping in the internal market and is calling for the introduction of a European minimum wage. A postulate that the Left Party also has in its program. The demand for an excess profits tax in the industrial sector and a reform of the debt brake is also common to both parties. The power of large corporations such as Google or Amazon must be restricted, said De Masi. The BSW is calling for an end to energy sanctions against Russia. They were not harming Putin, but Germany.
De Masi left out the topic of migration in his speech. The program remains relatively vague on the subject: illegal migration must be stopped and prospects in the home countries improved, it says. The right to asylum is not called into question. However, immigration should not overburden local capacities. When the European election program was presented at the beginning of January, it had already become clear that the two leading candidates, Fabio De Masi and former Düsseldorf mayor Thomas Geisel, were not in complete agreement on the topic.
The BSW is polling at seven percent. This means that the party could be represented in the European Parliament with seven MEPs. The list for the European elections:
When Roy Chun Lee was appointed to a government position by Taiwan’s Minister of Foreign Affairs Joseph Wu in early 2023, he was visibly surprised. In his role as deputy minister of foreign affairs, he sought to explore unconventional paths in foreign policy, considering Taiwan’s limited political room for maneuver. “I alone cannot change the world, but I can try to encourage the foreign ministry to think outside the box.”
In November of last year, Lee spoke at the second Berlin Taiwan Conference initiated by Green MEP Reinhard Buetikofer. “European countries need their own Taiwan policy,” Lee demanded, connected live via video from his office in the foreign ministry. Taiwan is a valuable partner for the EU, especially due to its long-standing experience in analyzing and reducing economic dependencies on China. Lee specifically highlighted the opportunities for sectoral cooperation between Taiwan and European governments and companies, such as in the semiconductor industry, renewable energy or the research of secure supply chains.
Regarding the possibility of a classic bilateral trade agreement between Taiwan and the EU, Lee appeared rather reserved. “A trade agreement is not a priority for us. We should move towards a broader concept of comprehensive economic cooperation.” He could not precisely articulate how such a concept could be legally formulated and structured at that time.
Now, Roy Chun Lee has the opportunity to officially continue these considerations. Since Jan. 8, Lee has been the new envoy at Taiwan’s representative office for Belgium and the European Union in Brussels.
Lee is a trained lawyer. After studying in Taiwan, he pursued a doctoral program in Public Policy Analysis at the Australian National University in 2002. Since then, Lee has developed into a proficient trade specialist. As Deputy Director of the state-funded Chung-Hua Institute for Economic Research, Lee was actively involved in Taiwan’s actions in the World Trade Organization (WTO) and the initiation of regional trade agreements.
However, after Taiwan’s accession to the WTO in 2002, it became increasingly difficult for the country, under Chinese pressure, to conclude bilateral or multilateral agreements, including with the EU. In 2015, European Commission guidelines suggested exploring separate “investment agreements” with Taiwan based on the then-hoped-for Comprehensive Agreement on Investment (CAI) between the EU and China. However, the ratification of the investment agreement with China in the European Parliament has been on hold since 2021 due to political tensions.
Roy Chun Lee himself doubts that the EU, under China’s pressure, will dare to first conclude a formal trade or investment agreement with Taiwan under these conditions. With the recent victory of the China-critical Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) in Taiwan’s presidential elections and William Lai becoming the next president, Taiwan’s international political room for maneuver may not expand.
Therefore, Lee aims to focus more on intergovernmental agreements and softer forms of economic and political cooperation. Examples for this can be the Trade Framework Agreement concluded with the USA last June and the “Enhanced Trade Partnership” agreement signed with the UK in November. Recently, there was only one ministerial-level agreement between Taiwan and Germany: During the visit of Minister of Education and Research Bettina Stark-Watzinger in March 2023, a cooperation agreement focusing on collaboration in artificial intelligence, hydrogen energy, battery, and semiconductor technology was signed. Leonardo Pape
