One month into the signing of the Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA), Taiwan’s public is still hearing two sides of the story, with President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) administration continuing its efforts to sugarcoat the benefits of the agreement, while the opposition continues to push for a referendum for Taiwanese to decide whether they want the agreement to come into effect.
Before being elected, Ma came up with a rosy blueprint for Taiwan’s future, promising a “6-3-3” goal, which stands for 6 percent economic growth each year, annual per capita income of US$30,000 and an unemployment rate lower than 3 percent by 2012. Two years on from his election, last year’s economic growth turned downward to minus 1.87 percent, the unemployment rate reached its peak at 6.13 percent in August last year (it is currently 5.16 percent) and per capita income also dropped to US$17,927.
Now with the ECFA, the Ma administration once again is boasting about the various benefits Taiwan would gain after the inking of the pact, saying that the nation’s GDP will rise from 1.65 percent to 1.72 percent, and that export growth of approximately 5 percent and some 263,100 jobs will be created as a result. In addition, it will also help attract foreign direct investment in Taiwan.
Looking back, the fact that Ma failed to deliver on his election promises makes one wonder whether the ECFA dream may well become another set of empty promises.
One example is the claim that the ECFA will make it easier for Taiwan to sign free-trade agreements (FTAs) with other countries. While Chinese officials, as recently as Tuesday, have stated that they will not object to Taiwan having “trade relations with other economies,” Chinese Vice Minister of Commerce Gao Hucheng (高虎城) stated that his government continued to oppose any FTAs between Taiwan and other countries. The Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs has made similar comments earlier as well.
Another interesting sign that things are not as rosy as portrayed by the Ma administration is the recent joint report by the legislature’s Oragnic Law and Statute Bureau, pointing out that the ECFA could lead to an “economic siege” and threaten Taiwan’s sovereignty. The Ma administration has clung to the assertion that the ECFA is merely economic and no political issues are involved. If China’s ultimate goal is to absorb the island and is using the ECFA as a stepping stone, how nonpolitical is the agreement?
When asked about the different interpretations and perceptions — China’s political agenda and the Ma administration’s economic goals — Charles Freeman of the Center for Strategies and International Studies speaking at a seminar at George Washington University on Tuesday, responded that “you can sleep in the same bed and have different dreams, as long as they both have a good night of sleep.”
The problem is that China is the elephant in the room, and when it shares the same bed with a mouse, one can be certain that the mouse will have a hard time closing its eyes — it has to work hard not to be squashed.
If the Ma administration continues to daydream about the positive impact of the ECFA in Taiwan, then the matter may turn out to be a nightmare because China’s economic leverage and undemocratic proximity will squeeze out Taiwan’s democracy and hard-earned freedoms. The Taiwanese people will need to wake up to this reality and let their voice be heard before it is too late.
Jean Wu is a graduate in diplomacy and international relations from Seton Hall University in New Jersey. She works at the Formosan Association for Public Affairs in Washington.
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with