On Sept. 28, EVA Airways Corp said that as of Nov. 23 it would no longer offer flights from Taipei to Paris, a service it had provided for 14 years.
The company gave many reasons for this decision, from the cost of entering Russian airspace becoming too high to increases in the price of fuel to it not having the Fifth Freedom of the Air, which would give it the right to fly passengers from a second to a third country.
Industry watchers said flights to Europe for both national airlines -- EVA Airways and China Airlines -- were generating revenue losses.
It is sad that EVA Airways had to cancel its flights to Paris because of business difficulties. But times have changed.
When EVA started its service to Paris in 1993, Taiwan was in the middle of its economic miracle. Its foreign reserve was second only to Japan's.
Three European countries also at the height of their economic power -- the UK, France and Germany -- were all eager to establish direct flights to and from Taiwan.
But all good things come to an end. The ensuing enthusiasm for China among Taiwanese businesses prompted the quick growth of the Chinese economy. This in turn led many Taiwanese businesses to invest in China, to such an extent that China's gains became Taiwan's losses.
From that point onwards, Taiwan's development of the European market began to stagnate. The percentage of exports to Europe as a part of total Taiwanese exports went down 17.1 percent from 1992. The government's active opening policy in 2001 accelerated this trend, and the percentage of Taiwanese exports to Europe went down from 16.3 percent in 2001 to 12.3 percent last year.
Stagnating trade with Europe naturally led to a decline of business travelers to and from Europe. Under such circumstances, any increase in cost, such as the cost of using another country's airspace, or the price of fuel, can be the straw that breaks the camel's back.
The demise of EVA Airways' flights to Paris once again proves the cruel truth that too much investment in China is not good for the international position of Taiwanese companies.
Taiwan's shrinking market share in Europe inevitably influenced its visibility there. While the market share of Taiwanese exports to the European market declined every year, from 3.08 percent in 1999 to 2.69 percent last year, China's share increased, from 4.67 percent in 1999 to 19.7 percent last year.
More European companies abandoned Taiwan and started trading with China. It was a natural development, therefore, for them to make Shanghai their new hub for East Asian business and there was very little Taiwan could do about it. After all, business is about making profit.
This also influenced European governments and over time the number of European countries friendly to Taiwan decreased, as did the voices speaking in the defense of Taiwan. This is the reason Taiwan has become increasingly marginalized globally.
When the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) came to power in 2000, Taiwan swept away all the evils left over from the colonial era and began developing a comprehensive policy for the globalization of the economy.
Who would have thought that the DPP government could have been brainwashed by the education system and the media and sought to be close to China?
The old "no haste, be patient" policy that looked pan-blue but was pan-green at heart, was thrown straight into the trash can by the new government, which instead implemented a pan-blue economic policy, in which globalization was virtually the same as entering the Chinese market. This caused an abrupt end to Taiwan's strong global position.
The market share of Taiwanese products in the world except China shrank fast. The most worrying aspect of this is the declining percentage of Taiwanese products on the US market, which went from 3.33 percent in 2000 to 2.06 percent last year, a decline of 38 percent. During the same period, Chinese products went from 8.22 percent to 15.5 percent.
As a result of this growth, China's influence on the domestic US market is growing every day. This is also one of the main reasons why Taiwan's diplomatic relations with the US have suffered in the past few years. If this situation continues, it will endanger the nation's survival.
The pan-blue camp always said that if it were not for the positive trade balance of US$27 billion with China last year, Taiwan would already have a trade deficit. Government officials never came up with a good answer to this claim, because the DPP government's economic policy is identical to that of the pan-blue camp. The only difference lies in the speed by which the policy is implemented.
Taiwanese do not know that current woes are the result of the government's pro-China trade policy, which has caused Taiwanese companies to flock to China and let Chinese companies take over international markets. The end of EVA Airlines' flights to Paris is a direct result of this policy.
Huang Tien-lin is a former national policy adviser to the president.
Translated by Anna Stiggelbout
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
It is being said every second day: The ongoing recall campaign in Taiwan — where citizens are trying to collect enough signatures to trigger re-elections for a number of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators — is orchestrated by the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), or even President William Lai (賴清德) himself. The KMT makes the claim, and foreign media and analysts repeat it. However, they never show any proof — because there is not any. It is alarming how easily academics, journalists and experts toss around claims that amount to accusing a democratic government of conspiracy — without a shred of evidence. These
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
RSS