President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) tends to say whatever is on his mind. Commenting on the issue of China's elimination of tariffs on Taiwanese fruit, he said it was a 100 percent political move -- and a part of China's "united front" strategy to achieve unification with Taiwan. Far from considering the real interests of farmers in central and southern Taiwan, he says, China hopes to win their hearts and minds in order to help the pan-blue camp win the next presidential election.
In this, Chen is correct. China has not sought a corresponding reduction in agricultural tariffs for its exports to Taiwan. It has unilaterally waived import duties on some Taiwanese fruit. Fruit is not part of the staple diet in China, and there is no need to rely on imported Taiwanese produce to achieve price equilibrium.
Taiwan does have a trade surplus with China, but it is nothing like the serious one it had with the US 20 or 30 years ago, when Taiwan was required to import oranges and oats from the US to balance the numbers. It is clear, then, that China's willingness to remove tariffs on Taiwanese fruit is based on political and not commercial considerations.
These political considerations are targeted at Taiwan's opposition parties, and even more so at the farmers, according to Chen. Both China and Taiwan are well aware that these are the reasons behind Chinese President Hu Jintao (
But now that Chen has articulated the true nature of China's policy, will fruit farmers really desist from selling their produce to China, out of a sense of patriotism and loyalty to their president?
Chen himself has pointed out that fruit farmers have sold their wares to China in the past. Now, in a situation when tariffs are being waived and customs procedures simplified, why should farmers stop exporting their goods?
Should they really be expected to base their decisions on the same political calculations that inform Beijing's decisions, and thus show their opposition to the "united front?"
If they end up doing that, it will not likely be due to altruism, or loyalty to their country or president. Instead, it would be because the government here is willing to purchase their produce at equivalent prices.
This is bad news for Chen. The Chinese communists and pan-blue camp in Taiwan are eating away at the pan-green camp's traditional support base. If the fruit exports go ahead, the pan-blues come out on top; if they don't, the blame will fall on the shoulders of the pan-greens. Whatever happens, the latter are going to be the losers.
With nowhere to turn, government officials have put forth a gamut of rather unconvincing objections. Even the strongest argument against fruit exports -- that China is unwilling to negotiate with Taiwanese government officials -- seems a little weak.
China is unilaterally offering special treatment to Taiwan and is expecting nothing in return. If there are any problems resulting from the relaxing of China's quarantine regulations, it is China that will suffer, not Taiwan. What is there for Taiwanese government officials to negotiate? The most they could achieve is a kind of "formal equality."
China recently relaxed its position and agreed to let officials from the Taiwan External Trade Development Association (TAITRA) -- the group approved by Taipei to conduct talks on the matter -- join a broader Taiwanese negotiating team.
But the Taiwanese government decided not to send TAITRA to attend the talks anyway, because China was insisting that the Provincial Farmers' Association play the major role in the negotiating process. But when all is said and done, if TAITRA did participate in talks, it would only be to officially endorse the outcome.
The export of fruit to China is quite alarming for the government. First it was Taiwanese industries that migrated to China, and the service industry soon followed. This westward migration has been going on for 15 years now, and has hit central and southern Taiwan the hardest.
For some time now Taiwanese farmers have not been able to sustain themselves on their earnings from agriculture, and have had to look for part-time employment in factories to earn a living.
These same factories, however, had to close because of industrial migration to China. And there are dwindling opportunities to supplement family income through cottage industries such as making Christmas lights.
Farmers need no reminding of the difficulties caused by the flight of industry to China. So when the political elite started objecting to the process of Sinification, farmers were receptive to their words.
However, if central and southern Taiwanese farmers stand to gain from moving into the China market and from the process of Sinification, a big block of the Democratic Progressive Party's (DPP) support could be chipped away.
The DPP is keenly aware of this situation, but has not come up with a strategy to counter it. They have been forced into a situation where they can only put their hopes in Chen's appeal to farmers to resist China's "united front" tactics.
The DPP will have to admit defeat in this war on fruit exports. The longer they stand in the way, the more unlikely the farmers will be to forgive them. This will only give the pan-blue camp further leverage to eat away at their support base. But having admitted defeat, what should the pan-green camp do now?
In the past, when Taiwanese industry was migrating to China, the government routinely emphasized the importance of improving Taiwan's talent pool and education and investing in research, in order to raise industrial standards. This mantra has been repeated for many years with limited effect, but that hasn't stopped the government from continuing to harp on.
If Taiwan is to pursue both precision agriculture and recreational agriculture, there are certain conditions that have to be met. If heavy storms wreak havoc on forests and farmland, the price of vegetables goes haywire.
Then there is the issue of the pollution lurking in fields, fishponds and duck pens. If one is not willing to deal seriously with these problems, how can one expect to have thriving farms?
It's all well and good to say that selling Taiwanese fruit to the Chinese market is risky. But in the absence of paradise at home, one can hardly blame farmers for wanting to chase a dream abroad.
Ku Er-teh is a freelance writer.
TRANSLATED BY PAUL COOPER
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
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
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing