Since the change in Taiwan’s government in May, there have been statements in the media about what the government plans to do, especially on cross-strait relations. There has been a reopening of meetings between the two sides, which is important. There has been an opening of charter airline flights and visits by Chinese to Taiwan, neither of which has gained much economically.
Taiwan has continued to lay out a long list of issues it hopes to address with China, however, understanding that Beijing will be completely preoccupied with the Olympics until after Aug. 24. In the meantime, Taiwan has to deal with a sluggish economy and a poor stock market performance. It has already allowed many companies to invest up to 60 percent of their net worth in China. There are still concerns even in the media that the government will soon lift a ban on some investments by Taiwan’s semiconductor industry in China.
In addition, foreign firms with Chinese equity investment will be allowed to be listed on the Taiwan Stock Exchange, lifting a long-standing rule that bars companies with 20 percent or more Chinese equity from investing in Taiwan. The government will also lift a rule that bars companies from using funds they borrow or raise in Taiwan to invest in China.
A plan to allow Taiwanese liquid-crystal makers to set up panel factories in China is also under consideration. At the same time, the Straits Exchange Foundation openly discussed closer economic cooperation in the meeting with the Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Strait in June. There were even discussions on different economic agreements, including the Closer Economic Partnership Arrangement that exists between Hong Kong and Beijing.
The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) complains that such serious matters should not be launched so hastily on matters that could have impact on the country and the people.
Taiwanese companies worry about Chinese investors’ methods of using the capital generated in Taiwan back in China; that rules and regulations do not have real comprehensive policies that cover Chinese investments in Taiwan (considering that many if not most of the Chinese investors have connections to the Chinese government).
While making changes in Taiwan that will please China, President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) often states the wish that the two sides can find a way of interacting in international society.
Ma has frequently warned that if Taiwan continues to be isolated on the international scene, there could be no significant progress in cross-strait relations, but he continues to propose “viable diplomacy” and a “diplomatic truce” in cross-strait relations.
At any rate, the Olympic Games have begun, and political issues regarding China, including cross-strait relations, will have to wait until after Aug. 24 — at least. Even then there could be problems within the Chinese government.
There have been many articles about what China will be like after the Olympics. Two recent ones in the Wall Street Journal show the differences.
In James Mann’s “Reform Fantasy,” he said: “China has reached the point where it no longer seeks to mollify or accommodate the international community’s expressions of concern about human rights.”
The question, Mann said, was not whether China will be nationalistic, but what sort of nationalism it will have. The Olympics should prompt the rest of the world to start thinking about the implications of a China that is not opening up in the way that was hoped.
In Bruce Gilley’s “China’s Democratic Acceleration,” he said: “No one expects the Games to lead to regime collapse in China, especially not immediately. But change? Yes ... By denying the Communist Party its moment of glory, the dissonance created by the Olympic year will accelerate the values transformation in China needed to erode the regime’s popular support.”
What these two sides suggest is about China and the differences in how the rest of the world sees it. But Taiwan could have a different concern — how China will see Taiwan.
It will be seen, however, after the Games are completed and talks between the two sides start again.
Nat Bellocchi is a former chairman of the American Institute in Taiwan and a special adviser to the Liberty Times Group. The views expressed in this article are his own.
A failure by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) to respond to Israel’s brilliant 12-day (June 12-23) bombing and special operations war against Iran, topped by US President Donald Trump’s ordering the June 21 bombing of Iranian deep underground nuclear weapons fuel processing sites, has been noted by some as demonstrating a profound lack of resolve, even “impotence,” by China. However, this would be a dangerous underestimation of CCP ambitions and its broader and more profound military response to the Trump Administration — a challenge that includes an acceleration of its strategies to assist nuclear proxy states, and developing a wide array
Jaw Shaw-kong (趙少康), former chairman of Broadcasting Corp of China and leader of the “blue fighters,” recently announced that he had canned his trip to east Africa, and he would stay in Taiwan for the recall vote on Saturday. He added that he hoped “his friends in the blue camp would follow his lead.” His statement is quite interesting for a few reasons. Jaw had been criticized following media reports that he would be traveling in east Africa during the recall vote. While he decided to stay in Taiwan after drawing a lot of flak, his hesitation says it all: If
Twenty-four Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers are facing recall votes on Saturday, prompting nearly all KMT officials and lawmakers to rally their supporters over the past weekend, urging them to vote “no” in a bid to retain their seats and preserve the KMT’s majority in the Legislative Yuan. The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), which had largely kept its distance from the civic recall campaigns, earlier this month instructed its officials and staff to support the recall groups in a final push to protect the nation. The justification for the recalls has increasingly been framed as a “resistance” movement against China and
When Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) caucus whip Ker Chien-ming (柯建銘) first suggested a mass recall of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators, the Taipei Times called the idea “not only absurd, but also deeply undemocratic” (“Lai’s speech and legislative chaos,” Jan. 6, page 8). In a subsequent editorial (“Recall chaos plays into KMT hands,” Jan. 9, page 8), the paper wrote that his suggestion was not a solution, and that if it failed, it would exacerbate the enmity between the parties and lead to a cascade of revenge recalls. The danger came from having the DPP orchestrate a mass recall. As it transpired,
RSS