There have always been many different opinions regarding how cross-strait trade relations should be defined and constructed. Whether one promotes opening up or continued restrictions on cross-strait trade, this has always been a major issue in Taiwan.
In this presidential election, with Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) candidates Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) and Vincent Siew (蕭萬長) proposing a "cross-strait common market," the issue has again become the mainstay of debate between the pan-blue and pan-green camps.
Yet because election discourse often oversimplifies issues, the two sides have not been able to clarify their stances so the public can form an opinion on the differences between their views on the cross-strait trade relationship.
What is a "common market?" A common market is arrived at through a process of negotiations and adjustments, whereupon the two sides establish a customs union and implement a unified foreign trade policy on the basis of equality and mutual benefit.
In principle, human resources, capital, labor and products flow freely within a common market. Of course, all these changes cannot be achieved in one fell swoop. Preferential trade agreements, free-trade agreements (FTA) and customs unions that offer a lower degree of economic integration are required for a gradual evolution to the more advanced common market, a process that requires longwinded negotiations and adjustments.
Socially and economically, more competitive and mobile individuals or businesses stand to gain most from this process; conversely, less competitive and disadvantaged groups tend to suffer the greatest harm.
The most important aspect of the establishment of a common market is the process of gradual negotiation and adjustment to allow full economic integration between the parties. For instance, the creation of the EU, starting from the European Steel and Coal Community, required more than 50 years of hard work, whereas ASEAN is just stepping into the FTA phase, and only expects to reach the initial targets of a common market by 2015 at the earliest.
Looking at the cross-strait situation, however, even normal mutually beneficial and equal economic relations are still lacking. Any suggestion of an immediate establishment of a common market is quite unrealistic.
Besides, another characteristic of common markets is the principle of equality and mutual benefit, including the free exchange of human resources, capital, labor and products.
Following attacks from the pan-green camp over the damage a common market could do to disadvantaged groups in Taiwan, including laborers and agricultural workers, Ma and Siew have not only altered their stance on recognition of Chinese education qualifications but have even gone to the trouble of elaborately explaining how a "cross-strait common market" would not allow for the import of Chinese labor and agricultural products. These claims are contradictory to the idea of a common market, and do not even comply with WTO regulations.
Realistically speaking, appropriate allowance for Taiwanese holders of Chinese degrees to take examinations for Taiwanese qualifications, and opening Taiwan to skilled Chinese manpower and non-competitive agricultural products, are likely to be unavoidable trends.
Liberalization and globalization are unstoppable and Taiwan is a beneficiary. Opening is the reasonable course. How the impact on non-competitive industries, laborers and farmers can be reduced should be the focus of public concern. I would very much like to hear what Siew has to say.
Lee Wen-chung is a former DPP legislator.
Translated by Angela Hong
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with