Any fool nation can sign a trade agreement with China, if it gives Beijing everything it wants. The question of an economic cooperation framework agreement (ECFA) is not a matter of trade with China; that’s a no-brainer. Rather, the question is how and under what conditions an agreement is signed. In the case of Taiwan, a potential pact is an issue of the competency and credibility of its president.
A well known visiting professor of international trade negotiations put it this way: “If any of my graduate students proposed entering a trade agreement of such serious proportions as ECFA and ... set a deadline for negotiations ... I would fail him.”
Yet here was President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) saying the country must sign an ECFA with the People’s Republic of China (PRC) by the end of this month. This raises serious questions about Ma’s competency.
No one is against trade with China, nor does anyone think Taiwan can pretend to ignore China, especially as it is already one of China’s biggest trade and investment partners. So why is Ma saying that Taiwan will be marginalized if it doesn’t get on board with a non-transparent ECFA by the end of the month?
Taiwanese and international academics, think tanks and the public have been consistently calling for a cautious and transparent approach, public input, as well as a full analysis and examination of the risks and dangers, but Ma has ignored such calls.
To make it worse, Ma keeps changing his position. He said that an ECFA with China must come first; it will lead to free-trade agremeents (FTAs) with other countries; then he changed that to “an ECFA should lead to” and then “it might lead to.”
Mixed messages abound. China countered by saying that an ECFA leading to other FTAs is not even on the table. The US, however, disagrees and says that there is no need for an ECFA to precede an FTA with it. Premier Wu Den-yih (吳敦義) suggested that Taiwanese businesses should pull back from China, but Ma says push on; ECFA is the key; it must be signed by the end of this month, but why?
Ma’s insistence resembles the rushed agreement on US beef imports last fall. The resulting scandal was just one in a long list of miscalculations: the Maokong Gondola, the botched Wanhu MRT line, the failed Nanjing West Road Circle revival, Typhoon Morakot, the slighting of Aborigines, etc. Aside from some inconsequential matters and photo opportunities, it is difficult to find any evidence of competence at all.
Ma’s tank has been running on empty for some time. Only the gas fumes created by making new promises to cover unfulfilled undertakings seem to keep him going. This brings up another list: Unfulfilled promises. What of the promise to divest the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) of its ill-gotten assets? That was made and vanished in 2005, along with the promise to deliver arms sales. What of the 2008 presidential campaign “6-3-3” pledge? It was replaced by a promise of big-spending Chinese tourists who would turn the economy around. That was followed by an ECFA and a “golden decade.” What promise will follow an ECFA?
Ma has been out of his depth since he became Taipei mayor. The signs were there early on when a devoted KMT supporter committed suicide at City Hall, but his decomposing body was not discovered for six months.
Who was in charge? This was management by promise and neglect. It was the illusion of management created by public relations and hype. Little wonder that more and more Taiwanese are uneasy with Ma’s demand that an ECFA be signed by the end of thus month.
Is Taiwan’s economy, sovereignty and nationhood the next corpse to be found sometime after an ECFA is signed?
Jerome Keating is a writer based in Taipei.
“History does not repeat itself, but it rhymes” (attributed to Mark Twain). The USSR was the international bully during the Cold War as it sought to make the world safe for Soviet-style Communism. China is now the global bully as it applies economic power and invests in Mao’s (毛澤東) magic weapons (the People’s Liberation Army [PLA], the United Front Work Department, and the Chinese Communist Party [CCP]) to achieve world domination. Freedom-loving countries must respond to the People’s Republic of China (PRC), especially in the Indo-Pacific (IP), as resolutely as they did against the USSR. In 1954, the US and its allies
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
On Monday last week, American Institute in Taiwan (AIT) Director Raymond Greene met with Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers to discuss Taiwan-US defense cooperation, on the heels of a separate meeting the previous week with Minister of National Defense Minister Wellington Koo (顧立雄). Departing from the usual convention of not advertising interactions with senior national security officials, the AIT posted photos of both meetings on Facebook, seemingly putting the ruling and opposition parties on public notice to obtain bipartisan support for Taiwan’s defense budget and other initiatives. Over the past year, increasing Taiwan’s defense budget has been a sore spot
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