Taiwan's economy is going down the tubes. This is obvious, because it is what every politician and taxi driver in the country says. And if they say so, it must be true.
Of course, if you have even passing knowledge of economics, you might be tempted to disagree with this well-worn description of the nation's situation.
After all, the nation's five most prominent economic researchers project next year's GDP growth will be between 4.11 percent and 4.21 percent -- a respectable figure for any post-industrial economy. Meanwhile, the unemployment rate dropped to 3.86 percent in November, while the nation's leading stock index, the TAIEX, is hovering around 7,900 points and recently hit a six-year high.
But why let facts and figures intrude on groundless speculation borne from ignorance and politically motivated pessimism? After all, as any taxi driver or tea-house cashier can tell you, Taiwan is doing badly because its GDP growth is less than China's blistering hot -- as the international media loves to describe it -- double-digit percentage point growth.
Perhaps to an economist, it seems illogical to compare the GDP growth of a post-industrial economy to that of an emerging market. But why listen to people who base their opinions on expertise? It's not just easier, but emotionally rewarding to complain and blame everything on whichever political party you don't like.
It's a feature of Taiwanese politics that might mystify some people. Why do both the pan-blue and pan-green camps see fit to portray Taiwan as a nation on the verge of economic collapse? Isn't it in the interests of one or the other to play up Taiwan's solid economic performance? Why wouldn't the Democratic Progressive Party or the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) use the nation's healthy economic indicators to bash the other's economic policies?
As with other facets of local politics, the answer is that economic policy is filtered through a narrow ideological prism that has little to do with reality.
That ideological prism is cross-strait relations.
With this in mind, it is easy to see why everyone is so negative about the economy, despite the paucity of evidence supporting such views. Rational analysis has no place in a battle between opposing ideological extremes. And this is one of the few cases where the views are so extreme that they actually end up sharing ground on the fringe of popular debate.
Both unificationists and independence supporters stand to gain from portraying Taiwan's economic situation as dismal.
From the unificationists' view, Taiwan is lagging behind China, and the only way to catch up is to seek ever closer ties. Meanwhile, the independence camp seeks to demonstrate that Taiwan's economy is already suffering because of its ties with China, and hopes to limit interaction between the two.
But, as is usually the case with narrow ideas, both of these views fall far short of offering any kind of reasonable plan for Taiwan's economic future.
China is not a mountain of gold from which the nation's businesspeople can earn untold riches. The country has enough problems simply trying to lift its vast population out of abject poverty. Still, neither can Taiwan live in economic isolation. Although the popular press makes much of Taiwan's economic "dependence" on Beijing, the reality is that all major economies are, in some degree, dependent on China. And China is economically dependent on them.
Those who say "China will solve all of our economic problems," and those who say "China is the root of all of our economic problems" are wasting our time. What Taiwan needs is an honest debate about economic engagement with China, while considering how best to protect and expand the economic gains of the past 30 years.
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