Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference member Hu Angang (胡鞍鋼) once said there is no need for China to take up arms against Taiwan, and that doing so would be the worst option. Hu said Taiwan’s economic dependence on China runs so deep that economic sanctions would bring Taiwan to its knees in seven days. In Hu’s words, Taiwan is like a diabetes patient in need of China’s insulin.
This 2006 statement is indirect evidence that China may launch economic sanctions against Taiwan at any time. At the time, cross-strait trade had reached a total of US$100 billion, and Taiwan’s trade surplus with China had reached US$66.13 billion. Today, these figures have repeatedly been exceeded. With the opening up of direct transportation links, dependence has reached a new level.
President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) said that direct transportation links spell the end of the “no haste, be patient” and “effective management” policies. It seems Taiwan really has become reliant on Chinese insulin.
Saying direct links are turning Taiwan into a diabetic may turn out to be more than mere satire because of government incompetence. Speeches by Ma and Premier Liu Chao-shiuan (劉兆玄) at the three links inaugural ceremony clearly show that the government is basing deregulation on the ideological viewpoint that anything that involves opening up to China is a good thing.
The lack of complementary measures to open Taiwan to the international community means that the practical effects can be easily determined. Due to factor-price equalization, Taiwan’s increasingly closer connection to low-wage, low-cost China is resulting in falling, rather than increased, incomes. Forging closer ties with an economy whose exports are suffering heavily from the global economic slowdown will lead to Taiwan being sucked dry rather than benefiting from these ties.
The government likes to talk about the “one day community” concept, as it will only take 80 minutes to fly from Taipei to Shanghai, less time than it takes the high speed rail to run from Taipei to Kaohsiung.
As tourist spots in China are cutting prices to gain competitiveness, and given the lower cost of living in China together with accompanying government policies, one wonders whether the Ma administration has made any preparations to help the domestic tourism industry strengthen its competitiveness or whether it will let companies fend for themselves and let the Chinese-controlled market decide the outcome.
Government data shows that cross-straight charter flights have increased Taiwanese tourism to China, while Chinese tourism to Taiwan remains unchanged. If this continues, domestic hotels, bus companies and tourist shops will suffer, aggravating domestic unemployment. It would be no exaggeration to say that the deregulation seems aimed at boosting the Chinese, not the Taiwanese, economy.
Liu’s statement that the benefits to Taiwanese agricultural product and fresh foods industries from direct cross-strait links will arrive “faster than if they were delivered by express delivery” distorts the facts and could be construed as deceiving farm and fishery workers.
The first sea transport carried textile and paper raw materials, and it will bring back malt, vegetables and corn starch. This is not a one-way street for selling Taiwanese oranges and grouper fish to China, and future price dumping of Chinese agricultural produce is all but certain. Taiwan’s agricultural sector will bear the brunt of these developments and within six months, Taiwanese farmers will feel the pinch.
The key to selling Taiwanese products in China is not speed but price. What preparations has the government made to help protect Taiwanese farmers?
On Monday Ma said the economic effect of direct cross-strait transportation links would be worth NT$3 billion (US$92.4 million). Where does this figure come from? No one believes his promises any more, and there were even rumors that the goods containers in the first shipments were only half full, although official reports said they were fully loaded.
The cross-strait agreements stipulate that the daily charter flights can only carry mail, not other goods, and there aren’t even any fifth freedom rights — the right of an airline of one country to land in a different country, pick up passengers, and carry them on to a third country.
The limited benefits can be counted on the fingers of one hand, and while they will not trickle down to the general public, the public will have to share the burden of any losses. Is the government really trying to benefit a few rich corporations at the cost of the poor?
Is the goal of the direct three links to create economic benefits for Taiwan or to bleed Taiwan dry? The government’s motives are questionable. It seems the patient’s situation is deteriorating and that it in the end will require the Chinese insulin. Ma must respond to the claim that Taiwan will fall in a mere seven days of economic warfare, without China even lifting a gun.
TRANSLATED BY PERRY SVENSSON
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers