Almost one year after Taiwan signed the Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA) with China, the government continues to insist the nation will have many more opportunities to reach free-trade agreements (FTAs) with other countries, completely ignoring the fact that the main obstacle to such agreements is China.
The state-owned Central News Agency (CNA) reported last month that the Ministry of Economic Affairs planned to step up its ongoing FTA negotiations with Singapore and had high hopes of concluding a deal within one year, but no one knows for sure how long such a deal could take. What we do know is that a South Korea-EU FTA set to take effect on July 1 is likely to have a significant impact on Taiwan’s economy.
This is unavoidable because Taiwan and South Korea compete head-to-head in steel, machinery, electrical equipment, petrochemicals, plastics and textiles. Even worse, about 70 percent to 75 percent of Taiwan’s exports to Europe overlap with those from South Korea.
Once the FTA between South Korea and the EU comes into effect next month, it will remove almost 100 percent of import duties between the two sides and lead to the easing of other non-tariff barriers. As a result, government data show that Taiwanese exports to Europe will be 16 percent to 55 percent more expensive than those of South Korea.
As bad as this is, worse lies ahead for Taiwanese exporters. Their competition with South Korean exporters is set to intensify even further, as South Korea looks to implement an FTA with the US by the end of the year. At the same time, Seoul is also aggressively pursuing a trilateral trade pact with Japan and China.
In contrast, Taiwan’s promotion of an FTA with either the US or the EU has been on hold for years, with no signs of a quick breakthrough anytime soon.
In the event that a trilateral trade deal between South Korea, Japan and China comes into being next year, Taiwan will be further marginalized in the global economy and increasingly less able to compete with South Korea, which has already established FTAs with Australia, Chile, Singapore, India and ASEAN.
Little wonder then that as the one-year anniversary of signing the ECFA approaches some people have come to dismiss the government’s euphoria over its impact on Taiwan’s push for more FTAs as nothing short of delusional.
Last month, in a speech to a local trade group, Vice President Vincent Siew (蕭萬長) blamed Taiwan’s lack of progress in signing FTAs on government officials who he said were reticent about opening local markets to competition.
In his assertion, Siew was only partially right. Another important reason why the nation’s FTA push has made so little progress over the past year is cross-strait political tensions.
In view of South Korea’s growing foreign trade power, Taiwanese exporters need to be aware of the possible impact the South Korea-EU FTA could have on their business and devise strategies to respond to this new challenge as soon as possible. In the long term, they will have to differentiate their products and develop niche markets in order to stay competitive.
As for the government, it needs to realize that a deeper and more diversified trade relationship with the world is far more important than a single trade pact with China. In response it should review Taiwan’s current situation in the global trade environment and adjust its FTA strategy accordingly.
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