Speaking in a recent interview about the proposed economic cooperation framework agreement (ECFA) with China, President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) said that if it were discovered in tariff discussions that reductions to certain types of products would not be beneficial to Taiwan, these tariffs would not be lowered. Such a move would be a serious breach of the WTO’s principle of universality.
In any type of negotiation, one always has to make sacrifices to make gains. It is naive and presumptuous to be unwilling to give in to the other party while expecting the same party to hand out benefits.
If the other party were to accept such an outcome, it would go against common sense on international trade negotiations and imply that there were other objectives beyond the scope of economic issues.
Cross-strait relations are supposedly “special” and “different” and the result of a unique international political environment. Proponents of closer ties say that economic interests exist between industries on both sides of the Taiwan Strait, while China and Taiwan share a common history and culture.
However, the Ma administration has ignored the fact that most Taiwanese want to maintain the “status quo.” This is why an ECFA looks rosy but naive on paper, while in reality poses a danger to Taiwan.
The ECFA Ma wants contradicts the principle of comparative advantage that is supposed to result from free trade and it will nullify its assumed benefits. When put into a political context, Ma’s extra-economic motivations become instantly obvious.
Some industries that lost their competitiveness long ago or are in desperate need of public resources to survive may do so once this distorted economic framework is promulgated. However, these industries will be no different than those Taiwanese industries that are currently being kept alive by Chinese money.
This is a bit like the belief that a frog placed in a pot of water that is gradually heated would not realize the danger and can be boiled alive.
Most wage earners and the middle class will not know what to do, and they will be destined to drift along with whatever happens.
The prediction by former Council for Economic Planning and Development chairman Chen Po-chih (陳博志) — that factor price equalization will occur as a result of cross-strait trade — will come true.
Another problem with an ECFA is that the interests of corporations will take precedence over democratic principles and drown out the voices of the middle class.
Only a limited number of corporations would gain anything. Industries with special interests will go to every length to influence policy, while the general public and small and medium enterprises will be ignored.
The lightning speed with which the government passed the memorandum of understanding with Beijing gives us a glimpse of what will happen in future.
These companies will form interest groups to put pressure on the government and demand subsidies or pay allegiance to Beijing to win their support. By doing so, they will direct the development of cross-strait trade.
Once this happens, Taiwan will slowly sink into China’s trap of taking Taiwan by economic means. The middle class and wage earners that do not belong to any interest group will lose out. They will be mere bargaining chips and will become the “new poor” in the process.
Hong Chi-chang is former chairman of the Straits Exchange Foundation and a former Democratic Progressive Party legislator.
TRANSLATED BY DREW CAMERON
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath