Print

Mail

wiki links

Integration just means unification

Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) says his party's goal is eventual unification with China. If this is true, will Ma make unification the central platform of his campaign if he is chosen as the KMT's candidate in the 2008 presidential election? Of course not, as he knows that this would most certainly result in defeat.

In a recent interview with Newsweek magazine, Ma sidestepped the question of when unification would take place by saying the conditions are "not ripe yet."

This answer is rather ambiguous to say the least. Is this an admission that China has not yet achieved democracy, or a realization that he would be about as popular as former president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) at a KMT reunion if he were to push for unification? If he is willing to wait, as he has said in the past, until China becomes a democracy, then that is as good as saying that unification while the Chinese Communist Party is in charge will never happen. Ma needs to clearly state his position on this important issue.

When it comes to cross-strait relations it seems that Ma is learning the same cross-strait trick that the US has been performing for such a long time, the "no changes to the status quo" balancing act. That means that Taiwan can neither implement policies or take action without first getting the approval of Washington. Meanwhile, China enacts its "Anti-Secession" Law, forces a downgrading of Taiwan's status at the WTO and continues to build up the number of missiles aimed at Taiwan, without so much as a whisper from Capitol Hill. Yet a mere mention of constitutional change in President Chen Shui-bian's (陳水扁) New Year address apparently has Washington sweating about its effect on the all-important "status quo."

The Taiwan Relations Act (TRA), Washington's bible for its relationship with Taiwan, says that the US will "consider any effort to determine the future of Taiwan by other than peaceful means a threat to the peace and security of the Western Pacific area and of grave concern."

A referendum is about as peaceful as things get. The consensus of a nation's population in decision-making is in line with the principles of human rights and democracy that the US administration is usually so concerned about.The TRA goes on to say "Nothing contained in this Act shall contravene the interest of the US in human rights, especially with respect to the human rights of all the inhabitants of Taiwan. The preservation and enhancement of the human rights of all the people on Taiwan are hereby reaffirmed as objectives of the US." The freedoms of choice, to self-government and to adjust one's constitution are all basic human rights; the Taiwanese people should not be selectively denied any one of them.

In actual fact, the real meaning of the phrase "maintaining the status quo" is maintaining the political status quo, while the military and economic balance of power tilts in China's favor.

After Chen announced his new strategy for economic exchanges with China during his New Year address, Ma was also one of the first to criticize it, saying that "the government just can't figure out its policy priorities, and it pushes for constitutional re-engineering when what people want is a better economy." This is what it all boils down to in the end: economics. The correct path for Taiwan is the path that doesn't hurt international economic interests.

The pan-blue line is that full economic integration with China is the panacea for the nation's economic woes. But they are also aware that further integration with China will eventually take Taiwan to the point of no return, when the nation's sovereignty will have to be forfeited in the name of economic interests. This is something they would happily accept, as it would force the issue of Ma's stated aim: unification. They ignore the fact that a majority of the Taiwanese public do not want unification.

For evidence of the effect of economic integration on Taiwan's sovereignty, we have to look no further than the case of Chi Mei Optoelectronics founder Hsu Wen-long (許文龍), once a staunch supporter of the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) and Taiwan independence, who because of his extensive investment in China now has to toe the communist line. Why else would he say that "Taiwan independence will only lead Taiwan to war and drag people to disaster," as he did in an open letter published in the Economic Daily News before the enactment of the "Anti-Secession" Law last year?

Some experts have talked about the recent poor performance of Taiwan's economy and point to the stock exchange and how badly it did last year compared to both Japan and South Korea's bourses, which rose by 53 percent and 42 percent, respectively. But they neglect to mention that Japanese and South Korean businesses have not invested nearly as much in China as Taiwan's, yet their economies continue to thrive. This may be because industries in these countries have concentrated on becoming successful global players, and have not ploughed every single investment dollar into China. Yet, Taiwanese businesses continue to increase their investment in China.

Any nation and its businesses should be aware of the old adage that says "don't put all your eggs in one basket." The US and many other countries have strategic investment plans and regulations that stop sensitive businesses from investing in "hostile" territory. It makes sense for Taiwan to refrain from relaxing its regulations any further.

China has not shown Taiwan one ounce of goodwill since Chen became president. Taiwanese businesspeople invest in China because it is culturally similar, close to home and easy for them to set up and run their new operations. It also means they can carry on making money for a few more years without any major new investment. Meanwhile many of these businesses lose their competitive edge as they allow the Chinese to gain their industrial secrets and know how.

The very fact that China seeks to promote trade relations with Taiwan while avoiding international conventions (as shown with the fruit exports) should have Taiwanese businesspeople worried, because they have no international agreements or framework to fall back on for arbitration purposes should they suffer some kind of business injustice or fraud. There are already too many tales of Taiwanese businesses that have suffered this fate. This cannot happen with trade disputes that occur with other countries, as investments in places such as India and Vietnam are protected by international law.

To become truly global players, Taiwanese companies need to develop operations globally and not get intoxicated with the "greater China dream." But the overriding issue in all of this is Taiwan and its sovereignty. Ma and the pan-blue camp can afford to do and say as they do because they do not believe Taiwan is a sovereign nation, and have already indicated they support eventual unification. They have nothing to lose. But Taiwan cannot afford to let a handful of economists, profit-hungry industrialists and politicians with ulterior motives decide the fortunes of its sovereignty. South Korea and Japan have already proved that an economy can survive and prosper without full-scale investment in China.

It is quite simple: The president's policy needs to be successfully implemented if Taiwan is to prevent further erosion of its economic strength and sovereignty.

Richard Hazeldine is a writer based in Taipei.
This story has been viewed 1875 times.