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
President William Lai (賴清德) attended a dinner held by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) when representatives from the group visited Taiwan in October. In a speech at the event, Lai highlighted similarities in the geopolitical challenges faced by Israel and Taiwan, saying that the two countries “stand on the front line against authoritarianism.” Lai noted how Taiwan had “immediately condemned” the Oct. 7, 2023, attack on Israel by Hamas and had provided humanitarian aid. Lai was heavily criticized from some quarters for standing with AIPAC and Israel. On Nov. 4, the Taipei Times published an opinion article (“Speak out on the
Eighty-seven percent of Taiwan’s energy supply this year came from burning fossil fuels, with more than 47 percent of that from gas-fired power generation. The figures attracted international attention since they were in October published in a Reuters report, which highlighted the fragility and structural challenges of Taiwan’s energy sector, accumulated through long-standing policy choices. The nation’s overreliance on natural gas is proving unstable and inadequate. The rising use of natural gas does not project an image of a Taiwan committed to a green energy transition; rather, it seems that Taiwan is attempting to patch up structural gaps in lieu of
News about expanding security cooperation between Israel and Taiwan, including the visits of Deputy Minister of National Defense Po Horng-huei (柏鴻輝) in September and Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs Francois Wu (吳志中) this month, as well as growing ties in areas such as missile defense and cybersecurity, should not be viewed as isolated events. The emphasis on missile defense, including Taiwan’s newly introduced T-Dome project, is simply the most visible sign of a deeper trend that has been taking shape quietly over the past two to three years. Taipei is seeking to expand security and defense cooperation with Israel, something officials
“Can you tell me where the time and motivation will come from to get students to improve their English proficiency in four years of university?” The teacher’s question — not accusatory, just slightly exasperated — was directed at the panelists at the end of a recent conference on English language learning at Taiwanese universities. Perhaps thankfully for the professors on stage, her question was too big for the five minutes remaining. However, it hung over the venue like an ominous cloud on an otherwise sunny-skies day of research into English as a medium of instruction and the government’s Bilingual Nation 2030