The recent US-China Joint Statement suffers from intellectual laziness when it applauds the Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA) between Taiwan and China. Why applaud an unsustainable policy that undermines the current international trade status and sovereignty of Taiwan and supports a government that appears to consider democratic Taiwan a part of China and thus goes against the wishes of the vast majority of Taiwanese?
No matter if the backing of ECFA is a result of intellectual laziness or not, it supports China’s political engineering with the ultimate goal of annexing Taiwan. This runs against Taiwanese wishes and is not sustainable.
On the surface, the ECFA seems like a great breakthrough in a troubled relationship, providing hope for a peaceful development in the near future. The assumption appears to be that trade and dialogue will lead to peace and prosperity. The intellectually lazy politicians will be satisfied with such fantasies and thus refrain from asking critical questions about the optimistic buzzwords that are easy to sell to the international community.
Why not jump on this bandwagon with positive thinking and openly support the ECFA? Because the ECFA undermines Taiwan’s hard-won international trade status in the WTO as well as its sovereignty. The ECFA was signed between two NGOs from Taiwan and China, the Straits Exchange Foundation and the Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Strait (ARATS) respectively, and not between two legal members of the WTO. The trade status appears to be further undermined by the fact that the ECFA has not yet been submitted to the WTO as expected, despite the pact going into force on Jan. 1.
The political symbolism is hard to misunderstand. China appears in the international press as the responsible nation entering dialogue with Taiwan, even though Beijing has not altered its position one inch. It continues to consider Taiwan a part of China. Recently, ARATS Chairman Chen Yunlin (陳雲林) stated that the negotiations were based on the so-called “1992 consensus,” even though its existence is widely disputed, and opposition to Taiwanese independence.
The whole package of agreements between Taiwan and China is increasingly leaving the international community with the impression that Taiwan is a part of China, which Taiwan’s government applauds. President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) even considers himself the president of China.
The vast majority of Taiwanese want Taiwan to be independent and surveys from the Mainland Affairs Council reveal that more than 80 percent of the public rejects any formulation of a “one China” system. Moreover, identification with Taiwan has been increasing over the past 20 years in spite of Taiwan having a China-leaning government since 2008. By applauding the ECFA, the US-China Joint Statement is increasing the gap between the wishes of Taiwanese and the imagined goal of both Ma’s administration and international policymakers. This will only lead to trouble and increasing tensions in Taiwan. It is time to respect the wishes of Taiwanese rather than follow the fantasies of intellectually lazy politicians.
Michael Danielsen is the chairman of Taiwan Corner.
In the US’ National Security Strategy (NSS) report released last month, US President Donald Trump offered his interpretation of the Monroe Doctrine. The “Trump Corollary,” presented on page 15, is a distinctly aggressive rebranding of the more than 200-year-old foreign policy position. Beyond reasserting the sovereignty of the western hemisphere against foreign intervention, the document centers on energy and strategic assets, and attempts to redraw the map of the geopolitical landscape more broadly. It is clear that Trump no longer sees the western hemisphere as a peaceful backyard, but rather as the frontier of a new Cold War. In particular,
As the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) races toward its 2027 modernization goals, most analysts fixate on ship counts, missile ranges and artificial intelligence. Those metrics matter — but they obscure a deeper vulnerability. The true future of the PLA, and by extension Taiwan’s security, might hinge less on hardware than on whether the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) can preserve ideological loyalty inside its own armed forces. Iran’s 1979 revolution demonstrated how even a technologically advanced military can collapse when the social environment surrounding it shifts. That lesson has renewed relevance as fresh unrest shakes Iran today — and it should
The last foreign delegation Nicolas Maduro met before he went to bed Friday night (January 2) was led by China’s top Latin America diplomat. “I had a pleasant meeting with Qiu Xiaoqi (邱小琪), Special Envoy of President Xi Jinping (習近平),” Venezuela’s soon-to-be ex-president tweeted on Telegram, “and we reaffirmed our commitment to the strategic relationship that is progressing and strengthening in various areas for building a multipolar world of development and peace.” Judging by how minutely the Central Intelligence Agency was monitoring Maduro’s every move on Friday, President Trump himself was certainly aware of Maduro’s felicitations to his Chinese guest. Just
On today’s page, Masahiro Matsumura, a professor of international politics and national security at St Andrew’s University in Osaka, questions the viability and advisability of the government’s proposed “T-Dome” missile defense system. Matsumura writes that Taiwan’s military budget would be better allocated elsewhere, and cautions against the temptation to allow politics to trump strategic sense. What he does not do is question whether Taiwan needs to increase its defense capabilities. “Given the accelerating pace of Beijing’s military buildup and political coercion ... [Taiwan] cannot afford inaction,” he writes. A rational, robust debate over the specifics, not the scale or the necessity,
RSS