Taiwan’s manufacturing and services industries are showing signs of slowing down the Taiwan Economic News reported on Tuesday. The Taiwan Institute of Economic Research (TIER) said that manufacturing edged up a mere 0.24 percent in July, while services fell 2.61 percentage points during the same period. Indicators in the construction industry were less than favorable and a construction slowdown is predicted.
TIER has predicted that overall growth will slow down in the second-half of the year. Moreover, the percentage of manufacturers surveyed who foresee a better climate over the next six months fell 4.7 percent from the previous month.
These numbers are in stark contrast to the figures announced in the Taiwan Economic News a few days ago. With high trade growth and low inflation in the first half of this year, one would have thought that the chances of another economic slowdown were minimal.
However, it appears one is right around the corner.
What went wrong? First-half numbers — and especially the second-quarter figures — looked promising and with the Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA) expected to begin next month, one would expect a much more positive forecast.
President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) administration and the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) government has spent so much time over the past year and a half emphasizing the benefits of the ECFA that it has sometimes seemed as though they were attempting to will economic prosperity into being.
This latest economic forecast should have Taiwanese asking not only what information its leaders have been reading but also what was the purpose of imposing the ECFA.
Pushed as a pragmatic and “purely” economic document that promised both immediate (early harvest list) and long-term economic advantages, the ECFA was viewed by many economists and politicians as skewed in Taiwan’s favor, and it was rammed through Taiwan’s legislature as a policy designed to save Taiwan from looming and inevitable economic marginalization.
Instead, the ECFA appears to have fallen stillborn from the Chinese Communist Party (CCP)-KMT party presses from which it was born.
The numbers simply do not add up. Before the ECFA was even signed, Taiwan’s economy was already showing signs of recovery; trade, with year-on-year growth of over 46 percent, was thriving. The ECFA was imposed as a necessary measure to save Taiwan’s “failing” economy, which was being threatened with marginalization (even though the numbers were already indicating a strong recovery).
The ECFA was then signed after economic recovery appeared certain and trade numbers were growing rapidly. Now, after the ECFA has been signed, second-half growth is expected to slow. What gives?
Reality is finally beginning to rear its ugly head. The ECFA, instead of being purely economic, is almost entirely political. Not only has it served CCP-KMT interests by bringing Taiwan and China closer economically (although it would appear with few actual economic benefits) and politically, it has also served as a tool the KMT can use to continue to force its agenda through the legislature and into Taiwanese homes. The continuous advertisements on television and radio promoting the ECFA even after the agreement has been signed only serve to underscore its political, not economic, consequences.
If KMT lawmakers disagree, then we already have the gloomy economic numbers to prove it.
Nathan Novak is a student of China and the Asia-Pacific region with a particular focus on cross-strait relations.
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