Most international observers believe that the second "strategic economic dialogue" between the US and China failed to break new ground.
Aside from Chinese promises to increase flights to the US before 2012 and give US financial organizations a bit more leeway to operate in China, little was accomplished. The question of the yuan's exchange rate was not resolved, and little progress was made on providing US companies with greater access to Chinese markets. Sources in Washington said that discussions ended somewhat acrimoniously on both sides. This atmosphere has led many to believe that the chances of another meeting at the end of the year aren't good.
Nonetheless, there are several aspects of the conference worth considering.
First, the main point of the dialogue was to find ways to resolve US-China trade issues caused by a lack of transparency in China's economic structure. This is why the issues discussed included the yuan's exchange rate and market access. It also provided the US with a platform to raise "structural" issues with China.
Contrast this with the economic forum between the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and Chinese Communist Party (CCP), which focused only on one thing -- securing more Taiwanese investment and technology in China. It failed to address structural problems in cross-strait economic and trade interaction, including intellectual property rights, international trademark registration and market transparency.
Despite the widely touted agreement on protection for Taiwanese investors, in the end, China's Taiwan Affairs Office used it to manipulate Taiwanese business associations, which were supposed to be independent. Taiwanese investors will not be protected by a full array of laws, but by cozying up to the government. More important, with a fine supporting performance by the KMT, the forum has become a platform for the CCP's unification campaign. In short, it's done nothing to resolve economic issues, but only added to Taiwan's political woes.
Second, US manufacturers have undoubtedly been hurt by China's mercantilist manipulation. Yet despite its size, the US has been unable to pressure China to open up its markets and promote economic transparency. Despite its own failure, the US is pressuring Taiwan to open up to China, saying this would go a long way toward helping Taiwan and US economic relations. The result of the most recent US-China dialogue shows that this argument is not very convincing.
Finally, China's actions at the US conference was hardly surprising. It reflected Beijing's fundamental unwillingness to address these structural problems. Nor are China's international trade disputes limited to the US. Witness its numerous trade conflicts with the EU, or reports that Australia is set to discontinue negotiations on a free-trade agreement with China after two years of frustrating talks.
Looking at China's economic and Taiwan policy from a global strategic perspective, the question is not how Taiwan should open up to China. The real issue is how to strengthen Taiwan's economy, as well as cooperation with the international community to urge China to open up its markets and make its economy more transparent. This would promote fair competition that would be beneficial to Taiwan and create a liberal economic environment free of China's political interference.
Resolving the structural issues in cross-strait trade is a more important objective than hoping China will buy more Taiwanese products, or that Taiwan will raise its China-bound investment limit.
Lai I-chung is the head of the Democratic Progressive Party's Department of Chinese Affairs.
Translated by Marc Langer
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
Former president Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) trip to China provides a pertinent reminder of why Taiwanese protested so vociferously against attempts to force through the cross-strait service trade agreement in 2014 and why, since Ma’s presidential election win in 2012, they have not voted in another Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) candidate. While the nation narrowly avoided tragedy — the treaty would have put Taiwan on the path toward the demobilization of its democracy, which Courtney Donovan Smith wrote about in the Taipei Times in “With the Sunflower movement Taiwan dodged a bullet” — Ma’s political swansong in China, which included fawning dithyrambs