Many experts are currently discussing the pros and cons of signing an economic cooperation framework agreement (ECFA) with China.
However, remarks made by both the Taiwanese and Chinese governments and their representatives have deviated so far from common sense that the ECFA has already morphed into something never before heard of in the history of diplomacy.
The first oddity: Regardless of whether one is buying an apple or a piece of real estate, at its most basic such an act constitutes a transaction and such exchanges only ever take place when they meet the interests of both parties.
Failure to meet this condition invariably means that a deal will not take place.
Intergovernmental negotiations follow the same principle. Before negotiations, such things as what one considers acceptable and one’s bottom line are kept secret.
Whether or not to haggle or sign an agreement is then determined by the conditions set forth by the two sides.
In such a situation, how can it make sense for one party to declare that the agreement “must” be signed at all costs and even setting a time limit for its inking?
This is essentially the same as handing over one’s weapons to the enemy before the battle has even started and cannot but be considered an unfortunate joke.
However, this is exactly what the Taiwanese government has done.
In normal democracies, officials making such remarks would be forced to step down and governments displaying such ineptitude would have to face a vote of confidence in parliament and thrown out of office.
The second oddity: Whether private transactions or negotiations between governments, both sides are presumed to be working towards maximizing their respective interests.
However, during the talks on an ECFA between Taiwan and China, representatives of one of the parties announced that they would make “concessions” to the interests of the other party.
In short, they agreed to forgo elements of a deal that would be in the best interests of their country.
This is what the Chinese government has said. In a normal country, representatives that make such comments would be removed from their positions immediately and subjected to investigation.
Such a government would also face a legislative vote of no confidence and be replaced.
Of course, China is not a normal country, nor is it even a democracy.
China has done everything it can to attack Taiwan verbally, through military threats as well as diplomatically by limiting Taiwan’s international space.
It is only when China talks about signing an ECFA with Taiwan that it suddenly appears generous and thoughtful.
Instead of feeling honored and favored by such “forbearance,” the Taiwanese need to be made aware of the ill intent that hides behind China’s sweet talk.
These strange events are reported in the media on a daily basis.
If the Taiwanese public continues to ignore such oddities, I see no end in sight to the many abnormal situations that plague our society.
Peng Ming-min is a former presidential adviser.
TRANSLATED BY DREW CAMERON
A response to my article (“Invite ‘will-bes,’ not has-beens,” Aug. 12, page 8) mischaracterizes my arguments, as well as a speech by former British prime minister Boris Johnson at the Ketagalan Forum in Taipei early last month. Tseng Yueh-ying (曾月英) in the response (“A misreading of Johnson’s speech,” Aug. 24, page 8) does not dispute that Johnson referred repeatedly to Taiwan as “a segment of the Chinese population,” but asserts that the phrase challenged Beijing by questioning whether parts of “the Chinese population” could be “differently Chinese.” This is essentially a confirmation of Beijing’s “one country, two systems” formulation, which says that
Taiwan stands at the epicenter of a seismic shift that will determine the Indo-Pacific’s future security architecture. Whether deterrence prevails or collapses will reverberate far beyond the Taiwan Strait, fundamentally reshaping global power dynamics. The stakes could not be higher. Today, Taipei confronts an unprecedented convergence of threats from an increasingly muscular China that has intensified its multidimensional pressure campaign. Beijing’s strategy is comprehensive: military intimidation, diplomatic isolation, economic coercion, and sophisticated influence operations designed to fracture Taiwan’s democratic society from within. This challenge is magnified by Taiwan’s internal political divisions, which extend to fundamental questions about the island’s identity and future
Media said that several pan-blue figures — among them former Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) chairwoman Hung Hsiu-chu (洪秀柱), former KMT legislator Lee De-wei (李德維), former KMT Central Committee member Vincent Hsu (徐正文), New Party Chairman Wu Cheng-tien (吳成典), former New Party legislator Chou chuan (周荃) and New Party Deputy Secretary-General You Chih-pin (游智彬) — yesterday attended the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) military parade commemorating the 80th anniversary of the end of World War II. China’s Xinhua news agency reported that foreign leaders were present alongside Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), such as Russian President Vladimir Putin, North Korean leader Kim
Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) Chairman Huang Kuo-chang (黃國昌) is expected to be summoned by the Taipei City Police Department after a rally in Taipei on Saturday last week resulted in injuries to eight police officers. The Ministry of the Interior on Sunday said that police had collected evidence of obstruction of public officials and coercion by an estimated 1,000 “disorderly” demonstrators. The rally — led by Huang to mark one year since a raid by Taipei prosecutors on then-TPP chairman and former Taipei mayor Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) — might have contravened the Assembly and Parade Act (集會遊行法), as the organizers had
RSS