Late last month, Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao (溫家寶) said the Chinese government would look after the interests of Taiwan’s small and medium enterprises as well as Taiwanese nationals, especially farmers. Wen said China could make interest concessions because “Taiwanese compatriots are our brothers.” He sounded as if he were trying to run for the Taiwanese presidency.
Not long afterward, Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Strait Chairman Chen Yunlin (陳雲林) said Taiwan and China would likely sign an economic cooperation and framework agreement (ECFA) in May or June. Over the course of just a few days, Chinese officials, both high and low, talked about making interest concessions and set up dates for the signing of an ECFA. This is very suspicious.
China’s reasoning is simple. According to WTO regulations, once Taiwan and China sign an ECFA, they must sign a free-trade agreement (FTA) within 10 years. Therefore, an ECFA is like a legally binding engagement ceremony that requires marriage within a certain period of time, a marriage one cannot withdraw from. China is therefore prepared to make all sorts of promises before the engagement, because once an ECFA is signed, Taiwan will have no way of getting out of a cross-strait FTA.
In addition to mutual tariff exemptions, an FTA requires that the signatories deregulate their service industries. This implies that large numbers of people in the Chinese service industry will move to Taiwan, thereby bringing about a “one China market.” Research by Chung-Hua Institution for Economic Research estimates that 60 percent of Taiwan’s increased exports following the signing of an ECFA would go to China, while imports of Chinese products to Taiwan would crowd out products from other countries. Taiwan’s trade would become concentrated on China, which will give Beijing more power to manipulate Taiwan’s economy.
Because of the difference in size between China and Taiwan in a “one China market,” Beijing’s power to call the shots on Taiwan’s economic policy will increase, and Chinese authorities will be able to control the distribution of economic benefits among the Taiwanese public. Taiwanese businesspeople and political hacks who only care about their own interests will have to kowtow to China and avoid saying and doing things that could offend the Chinese government and powerful people there. Politicians will have to pay heed to their master when handling cross-strait relations and Taiwan’s domestic affairs, which would give China control over Taiwan’s political and economic situation and annex Taiwan without sacrificing a single soldier.
It was not very strange, then, that Wen juxtaposed an ECFA and peaceful unification on Friday last week, because one is a natural and necessary prerequisite for the other. While officials have said an ECFA will not include mention of unification, unification is precisely what it is aimed at, and that is a very smart form of trickery. This is why it is a total hoax when Premier Wu Den-yih (吳敦義) said he would resign if an ECFA mentions the word “unification.”
Once an ECFA is signed, it will only be a matter of time before the Chinese Communist Party gains control over Taiwan’s economic and political interests and annexes the country. When that happens, China will retract all the benefits it has used as bait to get Taiwan on the hook.
In the whole ECFA hoax, President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) has the shadiest role. Is he really a fool fishing for short-term gain or a swindler pretending to be a fool?
Lin Kien-tsu is a member of the Taiwan Association of University Professors.
TRANSLATED BY DREW CAMERON
As former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) concludes his fourth visit to China since leaving office, Taiwan finds itself once again trapped in a familiar cycle of political theater. The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) has criticized Ma’s participation in the Straits Forum as “dancing with Beijing,” while the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) defends it as an act of constitutional diplomacy. Both sides miss a crucial point: The real question is not whether Ma’s visit helps or hurts Taiwan — it is why Taiwan lacks a sophisticated, multi-track approach to one of the most complex geopolitical relationships in the world. The disagreement reduces Taiwan’s
Former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) is visiting China, where he is addressed in a few ways, but never as a former president. On Sunday, he attended the Straits Forum in Xiamen, not as a former president of Taiwan, but as a former Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) chairman. There, he met with Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference Chairman Wang Huning (王滬寧). Presumably, Wang at least would have been aware that Ma had once been president, and yet he did not mention that fact, referring to him only as “Mr Ma Ying-jeou.” Perhaps the apparent oversight was not intended to convey a lack of
A foreign colleague of mine asked me recently, “What is a safe distance from potential People’s Liberation Army (PLA) Rocket Force’s (PLARF) Taiwan targets?” This article will answer this question and help people living in Taiwan have a deeper understanding of the threat. Why is it important to understand PLA/PLARF targeting strategy? According to RAND analysis, the PLA’s “systems destruction warfare” focuses on crippling an adversary’s operational system by targeting its networks, especially leadership, command and control (C2) nodes, sensors, and information hubs. Admiral Samuel Paparo, commander of US Indo-Pacific Command, noted in his 15 May 2025 Sedona Forum keynote speech that, as
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) last week announced that the KMT was launching “Operation Patriot” in response to an unprecedented massive campaign to recall 31 KMT legislators. However, his action has also raised questions and doubts: Are these so-called “patriots” pledging allegiance to the country or to the party? While all KMT-proposed campaigns to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) lawmakers have failed, and a growing number of local KMT chapter personnel have been indicted for allegedly forging petition signatures, media reports said that at least 26 recall motions against KMT legislators have passed the second signature threshold