On Monday, Chinese-language newspapers quoted Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) vice presidential candidate Vincent Siew (
It seems Siew doesn't fully grasp the inner workings of the EU.
First, this year the EU gained two new members, Bulgaria and Romania, which puts the total number of EU member states at 27.
Second, economic integration in the EU is built on the basic premise that the 27 sovereign member states all recognize each other and the need to build mutual relationships based on equality and cooperation. They are not permitted to be hostile to each other, which is why they can cooperate on the establishment of a joint European army.
In contrast, China at present has deployed more than 800 ballistic missiles targeting Taiwan on its southern coast and refuses to recognize the Taiwanese government. China's hostile cross-strait policies will make it very difficult to build a cross-strait common market.
Third, the Maastricht Treaty signed by all EU member states gives EU citizens the fundamental rights to move freely, work and live anywhere in the EU.
The title of Article II-75 in the draft EU constitution mandates the "freedom to choose an occupation and right to engage in work."
Item 2 of the text reads: "Every citizen of the Union has the freedom to seek employment, to work, to exercise the right of establishment and to provide services in any Member State."
With the entry of 10 Eastern European nations into the EU in 2004, the lower wage levels in these countries resulted in workers using the right to freedom of movement to move to Germany, France, Italy and other countries with higher standards of living.
At the time, France began seriously debating what was said to be the phenomenon of "Paris being flooded by Polish plumbers."
Many of the workers from the Eastern European member states not only competed with French workers by accepting lower wages, but they also evaded taxes and this caused much disgruntlement among French workers.
The differences in salary structure between Taiwan and China is much greater than the differences between the countries in Eastern and Western Europe. According to the French newspaper Le Monde, in 2005 more than 1,000 workers in the EU textile industry lost their jobs every day because the EU removed the import restrictions on Chinese textile products.
Since Taiwanese and Chinese share the same language and because the two governments have no negotiation mechanism to manage the situation, the creation of a cross-strait common market would lead to a great influx of people from China using the right to free movement to come to Taiwan to work.
Given the lower salary requirements of Chinese workers, salaries in Taiwan would probably plummet, or, in the best-case scenario, would be highly unlikely to rise.
With jobs going to those who were willing to accept lower salaries, one can only wonder what impact Taiwanese unemployment would have on social stability.
For these reasons, it seems quite clear that we should give careful thought to Siew's suggestion for a cross-strait common market.
Wu Chih-chung is secretary-general of the European Union Study Association in Taiwan.
Translated by Lin Ya-ti
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