Although it was no surprise that the US House of Representatives passed the bill to grant China permanent normal trading relations (PNTR), the margin was rather more comfortable than expected. The Clinton administration need not have been so nervous; in the end, Congress was unlikely to reject a bill that brings such obvious economic benefits to the US.
The outcome is also a relief to most Taiwanese, since we expect that the agreement -- and particularly the Chinese WTO entry that it almost assures -- will bring many benefits to Taiwan as well.
The arguments are well-rehearsed. First, Tai-wanese investors in China will no longer have to worry that the door to their main market will be shut (some 80 percent of the production of Taiwanese-owned factories in China is exported). Second, China's WTO entry should be accompanied by our own, as the House reiterated in an amendment to the PNTR bill. For Taiwan, WTO entry will provide a much-needed forum to manage trade disputes, free from the political specter of China or the lack of diplomatic relations.
However, there is a strong and persistent strain of thought that the benefits of PNTR will extend far beyond this. The claim has been made by proponents of the bill -- from President Bill Clinton to the Dalai Lama -- that allowing Beijing to join the WTO will transform Chinese society, turning China from an isolated, repressive regime into a democratic, peace-loving country with whom genuine partnership -- not the fiasco that currently masquerades under that name -- will be easy to achieve. A "side benefit" is that this democratic China would be less of a bully to Taiwan and the rest of the region.
This thesis rests on a simple chain of logic: free trade promotes economic growth, which leads to the development of a strong middle class, which will inevitably demand democracy. Empirical experience shows this to be relatively sound, since there are essentially no rich countries which are not democracies (Singapore can be discounted as a special case). Nevertheless, we should be beware of applying the analogy unthinkingly to China.
The first and most important qualifier is that China is still a very poor country. The democratic transitions in South Korea and here in Taiwan are most often cited as evidence for the theory. But in both these cases, the breakthrough only occurred after per capita incomes reached a level that will not be seen in China, even at current rates of growth, for decades. We should note that people have been predicting the "inevitable" political reform ever since Deng Xiaoping
Therefore, even taking the most optimistic assumptions, the promised change in its political culture is not likely to be achieved for a generation. In the meantime, China will be getting steadily stronger. This is not very heartening for those in the region, especially Taiwan, who are already feeling pressure from Beijing.
And there are less rosy scenarios. Social unrest in China shows no sign of cooling down and WTO entry, at least in the near term, is likely to widen the gap between the haves and the have-nots, raising the risk of internal disturbances that could derail economic development. And the rigidity of China's current political system means that a political crisis cannot be ruled out. The more extreme possibilities include civil war.
In short, PNTR and WTO entry will certainly bring economic benefits to China and its trading partners, including Taiwan, and they are to be welcomed. But we should not believe that they are a panacea for the many political and security issues that remain to be addressed.
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
The past few months have seen tremendous strides in India’s journey to develop a vibrant semiconductor and electronics ecosystem. The nation’s established prowess in information technology (IT) has earned it much-needed revenue and prestige across the globe. Now, through the convergence of engineering talent, supportive government policies, an expanding market and technologically adaptive entrepreneurship, India is striving to become part of global electronics and semiconductor supply chains. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Vision of “Make in India” and “Design in India” has been the guiding force behind the government’s incentive schemes that span skilling, design, fabrication, assembly, testing and packaging, and
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
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