Print

Mail

wiki links

Editorial: Taiwan can't afford to speculate

Between a lawyer and a business management guru, who is more veracious? This is a real toss up for most people. Such a question might even give some people the inspiration for more lawyer and manager jokes. In any event, it is a clear depiction of the debate over the future of China between Gordon Chang, a former China-based American lawyer who wrote the book The Coming Collapse of China, and Kenichi Ohmae, a Japanese management scholar who wrote The Emergence of the United States of Chunghwa. The titles of the books are essentially self-explanatory proclamations about the diametrically opposite predictions each author makes about the future of China.

The divergent conclusions reached by the two academics reflect their differing professional backgrounds. As a lawyer, Gordon based his prediction that China will collapse within the time span of five to 10 years mostly on the social, political, legal and structural problems currently facing China. Conversely, Ohmae, who is essentially a businessman, based his prediction (that by 2005 Taiwan will be politically integrated into China in a federal form) mostly on financial and economic statistics and figures.

In reality, these social and economic factors are mixed with each other to produce unpredictable and complex results. It is fair to say that Ohmae underestimates the potential impact of political and social problems in China, while Gordon commits a similar error by undervaluing economic development.

The two make accurate and in-depth observations about contemporary China. If one pieces their disparate observations together, a relatively complete picture of China might emerge -- a nation with a thriving economy, that is rife with political, social and other structural undercurrents. But it would be naive to fully embrace either author's conclusion as an accurate prognostication of things to come.

Ohmae assumes that China's economy will continue to grow and thrive, forever improving and progressing undisturbed by political and social factors that might slow down or even interrupt positive economic development. Gordon, however, assumes that the political and social problems he has highlighted will have a chance to reach the boiling point. He misjudges the Chinese regime's ability and determination to suppress such problems with an iron fist as well as the degree to which China's people might be willing to put up with oppression -- the lack of human rights, endemic corruption and so forth -- for unfulfilled promises and the remote chance of prosperity under a thriving economy.

While Ohmae has criticized the statistics cited by Gordon as "outdated," he himself makes the mistake of overly relying on statistics released by the Chinese government. Evidently, the Chinese government's recent handling and concealment of the extent of its SARS epidemic is an indication of how far it will go in lying to the general public to protect the interests of its rulers. It is customary for China to deliberately paint rosy pictures by "touching up" statistics so as to attract foreign investors. At least both Gordon and Ohmae concede that Taiwan is already an independent sovereign country. Ironically, that is just about the only issue on which the two authors agree.

Taiwan Think Tank president Chen Po-chi's (陳博志) remarks about the two men's views -- that both are too optimistic -- was right on the mark. In any event, this nation can not place all of its eggs in the one basket of China. Taiwan must learn to hedge its bets.
This story has been viewed 2221 times.