After China and Taiwan signed the Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA) in June last year, cross-strait relations have entered a more regulated and orderly period. While interaction across the Taiwan Strait is expected to continue to increase, the exchanges that have already occurred have led to a worrying situation.
If these exchanges involved the general public, no one would have given it much thought. However, when they involve senior officials, they become disconcerting and even unacceptable. It then becomes even more difficult to reach a domestic consensus on the direction of cross-strait policy, which could be harmful to future exchanges across the Strait.
Take the recent Boao Forum for Asia as an example: The ideas expressed at the forum by Taiwan’s de facto representative, former minister of foreign affairs Frederick Chien (錢復), the top adviser to the Cross-Straits Common Market Foundation, are unacceptable.
According to media reports, Chien said at the forum’s Across-Straits Business Roundtable: “Taiwanese exports to China, including Hong Kong, are worth US$114.7 billion, while Taiwanese imports from China are worth US$37.5 billion. That gives [Taiwan] a trade surplus of US$77.2 billion. Without the Chinese market, Taiwan would have a trade deficit of more than US$50 billion, or an average of US$2,300 per person.”
One doesn’t have to be an economist to understand the falsehood of such a statement. It’s just as preposterous as another extreme statement: “Taiwan would not be marginalized even without the Chinese market.” Even so, such statements can be heard time and again at both domestic and international events.
This is especially true when small groups of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) members visit China. After a couple of glasses of “motherland” liquor and a few plates of zhongyuan (Central Plains, referring to China) delicacies, they forget who they are and make derogatory remarks about Taiwan that are not commensurate with their status. If the Taiwanese public knew what these people were saying and doing in China, they would start beating the war drums and go on the attack.
Anyone working at a roadside food stall knows that what they do not sell during the breakfast rush they will have to wait to sell during the lunch hour, and that if they do not sell it at lunch they will have to wait for dinner time to sell it. Without the Chinese market, Taiwan would of course find other markets, although maybe with a slightly lower profit margin. If these markets weren’t big enough to take Taiwanese exports, Taiwan would have to reduce production, leading to a reduction in imports of raw materials and components.
If there were no Chinese market, Taiwan’s imports and exports might drop, its economic growth might shrink and unemployment might rise. If that is defined as becoming “marginalized,” then so be it.
Taiwan might indeed be marginalized if there were no Chinese market, but to exaggerate things to the point of saying that if there were no Chinese market, Taiwan would end up with a trade deficit or that every Taiwanese would incur a debt burden of US$2,300 is either being ignorant or a deliberate attempt to flatter China. It might earn someone another round of “motherland” drinks, but it will not stand up to any other kind of test, and anyone who says so does not deserve to be called a “top adviser.”
The two sides of the Strait have been separated for 116 years. The differences in the social system and the characteristics that are unique to each nation are quite significant, and the size of this gap is quite unsettling. Little wonder that some Taiwanese worry that cross-strait exchanges will not benefit Taiwan and therefore want to maintain the “status quo.”
However, the Chinese view is that if Taiwan wants independence today or to maintain the “status quo” for the long term, both would come at a significant cost to China, because integration or any manner of unification would then become a formidable undertaking. Anyone, regardless of their political stance, must be very cautious as they feel their way forward — there is no “model” to follow.
That is why any statement dealing with cross-strait relations must aim for objectivity and should be both pragmatic and cautious so as not to cause concern and misunderstandings among the Taiwanese public. That could lead to polarization and infighting, which would only hamper Taiwan’s social development. Senior KMT officials must be particularly careful and it is the duty of President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九), the party’s chairman, to admonish his comrades to show restraint lest the long-term positive relationship between Taiwan and China be harmed.
Tu Jenn-hwa is convener of the Taiwan Competitiveness Forum.
TRANSLATED BY PERRY SVENSSON
A series of strong earthquakes in Hualien County not only caused severe damage in Taiwan, but also revealed that China’s power has permeated everywhere. A Taiwanese woman posted on the Internet that she found clips of the earthquake — which were recorded by the security camera in her home — on the Chinese social media platform Xiaohongshu. It is spine-chilling that the problem might be because the security camera was manufactured in China. China has widely collected information, infringed upon public privacy and raised information security threats through various social media platforms, as well as telecommunication and security equipment. Several former TikTok employees revealed
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
At the same time as more than 30 military aircraft were detected near Taiwan — one of the highest daily incursions this year — with some flying as close as 37 nautical miles (69kms) from the northern city of Keelung, China announced a limited and selected relaxation of restrictions on Taiwanese agricultural exports and tourism, upon receiving a Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) delegation led by KMT legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (傅崑萁). This demonstrates the two-faced gimmick of China’s “united front” strategy. Despite the strongest earthquake to hit the nation in 25 years striking Hualien on April 3, which caused
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion