This past May Chinese Vice Premier Qian Qichen (
Qian also emphasized that direct links are an economic issue, and should not be influenced by political factors. Qian's painstaking emphasis on the point that direct links are an economic issue was of course especially made for the ears of visitors from Taipei who desperately pine for direct links.
He understood that these visitors have consistently called for the opening up of direct links in Taiwan on the grounds that "economic [issues] should be treated as such," believing that the current ban on direct links is political in nature and the cause of the current economic downturn in Taiwan.
Qian, of course, seized the opportunity to echo that stance, so that these Taiwanese businessmen would have be able to talk about it with a stronger voice, and pressure Taiwan's government after they get home.
For now, let us not talk about the threat to our country's sovereignty and international status that treating directs links as a domestic issue would bring. Instead, let us analyze the pros and cons of direct links from a purely economic perspective.
In the economic domain, people, unfortunately, will often accept certain opinions as the supreme truth without thinking critically about it. Millions and millions of innocent people have suffered as a result.
Communism is a most glaring example. Marxism stormed the world in 19th and 20th century. Sixty years ago in China, anyone who opposed Marxism was deemed an enemy of the people.
However, the experience of Russia, Eastern Europe and China, shows that Marxism is a mistake because it overlooks the selfish and greedy nature of human beings. It eventually brought pain and suffering and massive loss of life.
In the past decade or so, some seemingly correct yet off-the-point economic ideas have surfaced in Taiwan. Among them are "economic [issues] should be treated as such," and "save Taiwan with cross-strait direct links."
The relationships between the economy, politics and human nature are an everlasting truth across times and cultures.
Yet, there are still those who insist that politics and economy should be treated as independent subjects.
They elaborate extensively on the theory and extend its application indefinitely.
If this theory is right, then the US' embargo against Cuba, and the termination of air links between Israel and Arab states would all be short-sighted government policies.
In recent years, these people have also called for the opening up of cross-strait direct links. They use theories on the mutual benefits of trade and different economic models to make the point that direct links would be beneficial to Taiwan.
They seem to have either forgotten the fact that the other side is much bigger than us in terms of political and economic resources.
They ignore the other side's obvious attempt to engulf Taiwan, and the lack of national identity in Taiwan. The various models of economic predictions they use do not take into consideration these factors.
Therefore, if conclusions are made purely on the basis of economic models, then the fatal mistake made by Karl Marx will be repeated. Irreparable damage to Taiwan's economy will result, causing harm to everyone in Taiwan. Will direct links be good for Taiwan's tourism? Our countrymen must understand that China is not yet a free country.
The number of tourists from China that can come to Taiwan will be determined strictly by Beijing.
In the year and a half since the opening of "small direct links," several thousand people have travelled from Kinmen to China. However, the number of tourists traveling from China to Kinmen is zero. This proves that whether tourists will come and how many of them will come are uniformly determined by Beijing's policies. Once direct links open, tourists from China may come, because it is compatible with Beijing's policy of engulfing Taiwan.
But, even if the number of tourists from China to Taiwan reached 500,000, the number of Taiwanese traveling to China will probably be between 1.5 million to 2 million.
Obviously, while direct links will bring some business for a few tourism agencies, in the grand scheme of things, Taiwan will still be on the losing end. This is true especially in view of the fatal blow to the tourism industry caused by a decline in domestic travel by Taiwanese.
Will direct links benefit the real-estate industry in Taiwan? The government is also considering the possibility of opening up the real-estate market to Chinese capital.
Once direct links begin, perhaps some Chinese will become media darlings by buying property in Taiwan. But, the people of Taiwan must realize that China imposes strict foreign exchange controls.
The number of Chinese coming to Taiwan to buy real estate will be limited.
However, if the number of Taiwanese traveling to Shanghai increases as a result of direct links, the number of Taiwanese businessmen buying property near West Lake in China will sharply increase.
Then the price of real estate in Taiwan will decline. The wealth of Taiwanese will depreciate in general.
It would certainly be a disaster for both the banking and real estate sectors. Under the same logic, the stock market would also lose its vitality.
The decline in real estate prices and the stock market would without question cause domestic consumption to fall, affecting nearly all industries in Taiwan.
More businesses would be forced to relocate to China. Production would fall and unemployment rise, further accelerating decline in consumption.
By then, "keep [one's] roots in Taiwan (
The former will shut down one by one. This is how Hong Kong's economic downturn has unfolded over the past five years. Ever since Taiwan's government allowed investments in China by Taiwanese business in 1990, Taiwan has suffered the pain of economic marginalization in the form of low economic growth, stagnant cash flows and excessive bank loans.
The pain has increased along with the Sinization of Taiwanese businesses. In view of Hong Kong's experience, opening up direct links will surely increase the severity and the speed of Taiwan's marginalization. To the people of Taiwan, this would of course be very damaging.
Obviously, the ban on direct links in the past have inconvenienced Taiwanese business with ambitions in China.
However, the ban has also served as an economic safety valve and an insulator against threats from China.
At a time when China is using its economy and military to intensify its unification rhetoric, Taiwan's government should give top priority to the interests of everyone in Taiwan.
Do not forget that the biggest responsibility of a government is to defend the country and protect the welfare of the people. The interests of the businesses come second.
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
In the 2022 book Danger Zone: The Coming Conflict with China, academics Hal Brands and Michael Beckley warned, against conventional wisdom, that it was not a rising China that the US and its allies had to fear, but a declining China. This is because “peaking powers” — nations at the peak of their relative power and staring over the precipice of decline — are particularly dangerous, as they might believe they only have a narrow window of opportunity to grab what they can before decline sets in, they said. The tailwinds that propelled China’s spectacular economic rise over the past