On Lunar New Year’s Day, President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) paid a courtesy call to former president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) and took advantage of the occasion to consult with Lee on national policy.
Over the years, Lee has made significant contributions to Taiwan’s democracy, its relations with China and its international standing, and he has often spearheaded original approaches to key problems. Any advice he might offer should, therefore, be useful for Taiwan in this difficult period. The problem is that Taiwan may have fewer options now that Ma has taken the country down the blind alley of the “one China” principle.
Lee expressed his concerns over Taiwan’s economic development, and urged Ma to boost the economy by promoting exports. Lee said the key to Taiwan’s continued economic progress is for the country to keep its competitive edge. If this can be done, the standard of living will gradually improve.
Lee’s advice hit the nail on the head. The Ma government recently issued consumer vouchers to encourage spending and stimulate the economy, and this measure has produced a certain effect over the Lunar New Year holiday. However, Taiwan’s economy is export-oriented. Even taking the multiplier effect into account, the NT$88 billion (US$2.6 billion) short-term surge in domestic consumption can be no more than a temporary shot in the arm for the economy as a whole. This measure alone cannot overcome the difficulties and revive the economy because Taiwan relies on international trade for its economic well-being.
Even with regard to overseas trade, Ma’s line is fundamentally different from that of Lee. Lee reportedly told Ma that, for the sake of Taiwan’s integration and position in the global economy, he does not oppose fostering relations with China. At the same time, however, he said that Taiwan’s prospects cannot be based entirely on the development of the Chinese market. Rather, Taiwan must develop its own economy of its own accord.
Since Ma took power, he has pinned Taiwan’s economic hopes on the Chinese market. However, his policy to open the nation to Chinese tourism has failed and the opening of direct cross-strait transportation links has not produced the desired effect. This leads to concern over the prospects for opening Taiwan to Chinese financial capital. With China busy with its own economic troubles, Ma’s China card has lost its efficacy.
Despite the Ma administration’s focus on the Chinese market, Beijing remains strongly hostile to Taiwan and still intends to annex it. The focus of the government’s economic policies on China will certainly sabotage Taiwanese independence and sovereignty, and it is this that causes Lee’s concern about the Ma administration’s cross-strait policies.
Ma accepts the fictional “1992 consensus,” does not deny Beijing’s “one China” policy, is unwilling to advocate Taiwanese sovereignty and independence and fears disobeying Chinese requests. This weak approach means that over time, even if Taiwan were granted observer status at the World Health Assembly, Taiwan would stop seeing itself as a sovereign state. In turn the international community would view Taiwan as a subordinate region of China. Taiwan would wither and become a part of China. This is the Ma administration’s most serious policy mistake.
Lee has pointed out a blind spot in the Ma government’s economic and cross-strait policies. However, no matter how effective the medicine, it will be useless if ignored. If Ma were to earnestly take Lee’s advice and change his policies, it would be a blessing to the nation.
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of