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.
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
RSS