STATISTICS SHOW THAT Shanghai handled more than 26 million standard containers last year, 20.4 percent more than the year before, to replace Hong Kong as the world's second-largest container port. Measured in terms of cargo throughput, Shanghai, which handled 561 million tonnes of cargo last year, maintained its position as the largest port in the world for the third consecutive year.
This is surprising because Hong Kong is rated No. 1 in terms of economic freedom -- well above Shanghai at No. 126. Ships can travel freely between Hong Kong, Shanghai, Tianjin and other ports. Taiwan's pro-unification academics and media tell us that Hong Kong has the potential to be the economic center for all of greater China and the transport hub for all of East Asia. Its container throughput should increase every year, and there is no reason why Shanghai's growth should be greater than Hong Kong's.
Or consider the port of Busan in South Korea. In 2001, Busan surpassed Kaohsiung to become the third-largest container port in the world. At that time, Shanghai was the fifth-largest port. In 2003, Shanghai overtook Busan. This is also surprising because Busan ranks 41st in terms of economic freedom, making it significantly more free than Shanghai. Ships can travel freely from Busan to major ports like Shanghai, Tokyo, Osaka, Dalian and Tianjin. Busan should have been able to develop into a transport hub and a logistics center, yet it has been overtaken by Shanghai. Are officials in Busan and Hong Kong to blame for their lack of competitiveness?
Shanghai's performance should be a warning to the pan-blue camp and the pro-unification media. They should stop using ideological arguments to explain why Kaohsiung keeps sliding down the list of the world's largest ports and stop blaming others for their own mistakes. Kaohsiung's lack of competitiveness is the unavoidable outcome of Taiwan's industries migrating to China and has little to do with policies or direct routes to other ports.
The main reason for Shanghai's rise as a port is that the industry in Shanghai's hinterland is expanding rapidly. Taiwanese businesspeople are playing an important role in this development. Since 2001, when Taiwan's adopted a policy of "active opening," Shanghai's neighboring cities -- such as Suzhou, Kunshan and Wujiang -- have attracted considerable numbers of companies involved in science and technology, many run by Taiwanese. Last year, China exported US$450 billion in information technology products, accounting for 37.6 percent of its exports. Because Taiwan's industries are moving abroad, there is less cargo to be shipped through Kaohsiung. This trend cannot be helped, and it was inevitable that Shanghai's port would grow larger than those of Kaohsiung, Busan and Hong Kong.
During a recent forum in Kaohsiung, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) presidential candidate Ma Ying-jeou (
Pan-blue academics and media are responsible for the decline of Kaohsiung. For years, they have promoted loosening regulations and opening up to China with the result that many of Taiwan's industries have moved to China.
If the government caves in to the demands of the pan-blue camp for looser restrictions and more opening up to China, Taiwanese will suffer the consequences and the Kaohsiung port will inevitably fall off the list of 10 largest ports.
Huang Tien-lin is a former national policy adviser.
TRANSLATED BY ANNA STIGGELBOUT
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion
They did it again. For the whole world to see: an image of a Taiwan flag crushed by an industrial press, and the horrifying warning that “it’s closer than you think.” All with the seal of authenticity that only a reputable international media outlet can give. The Economist turned what looks like a pastiche of a poster for a grim horror movie into a truth everyone can digest, accept, and use to support exactly the opinion China wants you to have: It is over and done, Taiwan is doomed. Four years after inaccurately naming Taiwan the most dangerous place on
Wherever one looks, the United States is ceding ground to China. From foreign aid to foreign trade, and from reorganizations to organizational guidance, the Trump administration has embarked on a stunning effort to hobble itself in grappling with what his own secretary of state calls “the most potent and dangerous near-peer adversary this nation has ever confronted.” The problems start at the Department of State. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has asserted that “it’s not normal for the world to simply have a unipolar power” and that the world has returned to multipolarity, with “multi-great powers in different parts of the
President William Lai (賴清德) recently attended an event in Taipei marking the end of World War II in Europe, emphasizing in his speech: “Using force to invade another country is an unjust act and will ultimately fail.” In just a few words, he captured the core values of the postwar international order and reminded us again: History is not just for reflection, but serves as a warning for the present. From a broad historical perspective, his statement carries weight. For centuries, international relations operated under the law of the jungle — where the strong dominated and the weak were constrained. That