President Chen Shui-bian's (
Although many predicted that Chen would relax his China policy following the Democratic Progressive Party's (DPP) defeat in last year's local government elections, his cross-strait economic policy has only changed from "active opening, effective management" to "active management, effective opening."
This has led many to feel that the government was going to tighten its cross-strait policy and, as a result, the TAIEX fell 86.28 points on Monday. However, the nation's stock market rebounded yesterday with foreign investors helping the TAIEX to rise by 129 points on a staggering turnover of NT$153.4 billion (US$4.7 billion) -- more than counterbalancing the fall of the previous day, and refuting the pessimism of Chen's critics. In fact, changes in cross-strait policy are minor adjustments that will have little impact on Taiwan's longer-term economic prospects.
Rather than dissect the significance of the new wording, it is more useful to see how the new policy will be achieved. What Chen proposed in his speech is aimed at remedying the failings of current policy, for in the past, the government has not effectively regulated investments in China.
This has led to events such as chipmaker United Microelectronics Corp investing illegally in China and many firms investing through offshore companies or failing to honor loans made to finance their China investments. It is this situation that the government should rectify.
The key point of future policy lies in whether the government can establish a mechanism to control the process and discipline of cross-strait economic and commercial liberalization. If it is able to do so, then it can control the direction of this liberalization and even impose limits if necessary. It will also be able to use this mechanism to overcome disadvantageous circumstances that it may encounter.
The government is considering commissioning both local and foreign accounting firms to investigate the finances of Taiwanese firms operating in China so as to achieve greater control over their investments through a more detailed understanding of their financial situation, technological capability and human resources. This will enable the government to guide Taiwanese businesses in their investments in China and protect the interests of Taiwan's investors. This is a good way of correcting the current undirected flood of investment into China.
No policy is permanent. It has already been seen that "active opening, effective management" has led to capital outflows and has failed to gain any gratitude from China, which continues to ignore Taiwan's existence and rejects official dialogue on direct links and protection of Taiwan's interests in China. To continue with this policy will only lead to the further decline and marginalization of Taiwan. With the change in policy, the government will be able to look at cross-strait interaction from the perspective of Taiwan's interests.
Chen's determination to put Taiwan first is the correct policy to pursue and he should be supported. If he has failed in anything, then surely it is that he realized too late the failings of the previous policy, and for this Taiwan has paid a heavy price. Now, Taiwan must wait and see what can be achieved under the new policy of "active management, effective opening."
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
RSS