Less than two months ago, Premier Wu Den-yih (吳敦義) told reporters that he himself had a hard time explaining the so-called framework behind the proposed economic cooperation framework agreement (ECFA) with China. Wu’s humility implied a personal lack of understanding of the trade pact, which in a way should be excusable, since the Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) administration, in pursuing a top-down policymaking approach, has tried to sandwich all of its lengthy, sector-by-sector trade negotiations with China into one comprehensive mega-pact.
That has certainly led to a lack of understanding among the general public.
Wu’s confession also demonstrated a sincere desire to bridge the cracked channels of communication between the government and the public before the pact is deliberated on.
After all, a lot of myths remain about the deal, which must be clarified to pinpoint potential benefits and dangers to the local economy before Taiwan enters into such an agreement.
But on Friday, Wu went to the other extreme, saying that “Taiwan will be drowned or face serious economic danger” if the ECFA isn’t inked immediately.
He also urged the public not to think or talk negatively about the deal before it is struck, likening such thinking to “a couple who are about to tie the knot and are talking about nothing but divorce.”
If the ECFA is to be a marriage, it should be a well thought out one. A prenuptial agreement is often necessary, but that does not suggest that the marriage will fall apart; instead, it provides some guarantee that it will not end unpleasantly.
One must be careful entering into a marriage, let alone a comprehensive trade agreement that may take jobs from local workers or squeeze out investment.
That said, we should not ignore this window of opportunity to normalize trade with China. Instead, we should consider any potential downside and find ways to prepare for it — such as putting in place an “exit” mechanism in case the ECFA doesn’t work or China fails to honor its promises regarding dumping, trade disputes and market access.
Doing so will ensure a safety net to minimize any negative consequences from the inking of the ECFA, without sacrificing any of the deal’s potential benefits to Taiwan, as several Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT)-associated experts have suggested.
It is understandable that the KMT government wishes to “give face” and create an amicable atmosphere before it enters into official ECFA negotiations with China in the next few months.
For a responsible government to represent Taiwan and sit behind the negotiation table with another nation, however, the priority must be the national interest, not face or atmosphere.
If the ECFA were simply a party-to-party matter, no one would give a second thought about the KMT making a blind date with the Communist Party of China.
Now that the ECFA is a matter of national interest, however, the least we should expect from the government is to demonstrate some leadership and inform the public of its “plan B.”
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
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
RSS