The global financial storm has had a severe impact on trade and the domestic market in Taiwan, which has suffered the worst unemployment figures and economic contraction of the Four Asian Tigers.
Figures show that excessive reliance on China is the major cause of Taiwan’s recession. Since the global financial crisis broke last year, China has suffered a grave decline in exports. But Taiwanese exports to China have suffered even more.
The signing of an economic cooperation framework agreement (ECFA) with China may be beneficial to some Taiwanese industries, but it will not be beneficial to Taiwan’s economy as a whole.
Moreover, it is not realistic for Taiwan’s lackluster economy to rely on an economic pact with China and Chinese demand.
The logic of President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) administration runs like this: As long as cross-strait policy liberalizes, then the nation’s economy is certain to grow and unemployment will fall to below 3 percent.
SPECIOUS
This is a specious assertion. In Taiwan, which has higher labor costs, it is far-fetched to claim that deregulation of economic trade across the Strait and an economic agreement with China will reduce unemployment.
Any form of economic integration has an impact on a country’s autonomy.
To date, the UK, Denmark and Sweden are still not willing to join the EU monetary union. However, the reality is that despite the enormous size of the eurozone as an economic entity, London has not been marginalized. Indeed, it remains the financial capital of the world.
This tells us that having an enormous economy as a neighbor does not necessarily make dependence the best policy.
If dependence leads to a nation losing its economic autonomy, then economic security and even national security will be under considerable threat. We should carefully consider this from the perspectives of local demand and long-term interest when reflecting on strategies for Taiwan’s economic autonomy.
If the government sincerely wanted to prevent Taiwan from being economically marginalized, it would not be promoting reliance on the Chinese market because China still has a low GDP.
Instead, the government should exclude China from industrial policy.
TECHNOLOGIES
Other countries that have attained the goal of an annual average per capita income of US$30,000 have not done so by being dependent on the Chinese market but by relying on technologies that they control and on industries and products with high added value.
Taiwan should adopt a new industrial mindset and abandon the East Asian manufacturing and export mode that emphasizes cost-cutting.
In addition, the government should gradually transfer the focus of national economic development from OEM industries that have long relied on inexpensive labor to export industries that make products with high added value and to domestic industries that improve living standards.
The government is sorely mistaken if it thinks that relying on the Chinese market will bring about its stated goals of annual GDP growth of 6 percent, annual per capita income of US$30,000 and an unemployment rate of less than 3 percent.
Chiou Jiunn-rong is a professor of economics and vice dean of the Management School at National Central University.
TRANSLATED BY TED YANG
The conflict in the Middle East has been disrupting financial markets, raising concerns about rising inflationary pressures and global economic growth. One market that some investors are particularly worried about has not been heavily covered in the news: the private credit market. Even before the joint US-Israeli attacks on Iran on Feb. 28, global capital markets had faced growing structural pressure — the deteriorating funding conditions in the private credit market. The private credit market is where companies borrow funds directly from nonbank financial institutions such as asset management companies, insurance companies and private lending platforms. Its popularity has risen since
The Donald Trump administration’s approach to China broadly, and to cross-Strait relations in particular, remains a conundrum. The 2025 US National Security Strategy prioritized the defense of Taiwan in a way that surprised some observers of the Trump administration: “Deterring a conflict over Taiwan, ideally by preserving military overmatch, is a priority.” Two months later, Taiwan went entirely unmentioned in the US National Defense Strategy, as did military overmatch vis-a-vis China, giving renewed cause for concern. How to interpret these varying statements remains an open question. In both documents, the Indo-Pacific is listed as a second priority behind homeland defense and
In an op-ed published in Foreign Affairs on Tuesday, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) said that Taiwan should not have to choose between aligning with Beijing or Washington, and advocated for cooperation with Beijing under the so-called “1992 consensus” as a form of “strategic ambiguity.” However, Cheng has either misunderstood the geopolitical reality and chosen appeasement, or is trying to fool an international audience with her doublespeak; nonetheless, it risks sending the wrong message to Taiwan’s democratic allies and partners. Cheng stressed that “Taiwan does not have to choose,” as while Beijing and Washington compete, Taiwan is strongest when
US Secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessent and Chinese Vice Premier He Lifeng (何立峰) are expected to meet this month in Paris to prepare for a meeting between US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平). According to media reports, the two sides would discuss issues such as the potential purchase of Boeing aircraft by China, increasing imports of US soybeans and the latest impacts of Trump’s reciprocal tariffs. However, recent US military action against Iran has added uncertainty to the Trump-Xi summit. Chinese Minister of Foreign Affairs Wang Yi (王毅) called the joint US-Israeli airstrikes and the
RSS