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
A 50-year-old on Wednesday last week died while under anesthesia at a Taipei cosmetic clinic shortly after undergoing a penis enlargement procedure. The surgeon was arrested for suspected medical malpractice, again bringing to the surface shortcomings in the regulation of cosmetic medicine. Media reports said the clinic owner and surgeon, surnamed Ting (丁), was previously convicted of negligent homicide for a postsurgical death and had been charged with coercion and aggravated assault after allegedly stopping a patient from calling for an ambulance. He had also been fined for failing inspections and had allegedly permitted people without medical licenses to assist
It was most annoying last week to read Chairman Xi Jinping’s (習近平) fulsome encomium to the People’s Liberation Army during the Eightieth Anniversary celebrations of victory over Japan in World War II. Comrade Xi’s soaring rhetoric was stuffed with “martyrs, sacrifice, solemnity and unwavering resolve” in praise of the “Chinese People’s War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression and the World Anti-Fascist War.” His aspirations overflowed with “world peace” and love of the United Nations, of which China is a founding member. The Liberation Army Daily said that every word from General Secretary Xi Jinping “resounded in his powerful voice, illuminating the
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) will stop at nothing to weaken Taiwan’s sovereignty, going as far as to create complete falsehoods. That the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has never ruled Taiwan is an objective fact. To refute this, Beijing has tried to assert “jurisdiction” over Taiwan, pointing to its military exercises around the nation as “proof.” That is an outright lie: If the PRC had jurisdiction over Taiwan, it could simply have issued decrees. Instead, it needs to perform a show of force around the nation to demonstrate its fantasy. Its actions prove the exact opposite of its assertions. A
An American Institute in Taiwan (AIT) spokesperson on Saturday rebuked a Chinese official for mischaracterizing World War II-era agreements as proving that Taiwan was ceded to China. The US Department of State later affirmed that the AIT remarks reflect Washington’s long-standing position: Taiwan’s political status remains undetermined and should only be resolved peacefully. The US would continue supporting Taiwan against military, economic, legal and diplomatic pressure from China, and opposes any unilateral attempt to alter the “status quo,” particularly through coercion or force, the United Daily News cited the department as saying. The remarks followed Chinese Minister of Foreign Affairs
RSS