Taiwan faces many problems, primarily caused by the alarming number of Taiwanese businesses relocating to China. It is getting harder to earn a decent living in Taiwan; average income levels are lower than they were 12 years ago, unemployment is high, exports are falling and GDP per capita is now lower than that of South Korea. The government cannot keep using deregulation as an excuse while ordinary people suffer.
I have written about this countless times over the past decade, but have been largely ignored by the pan-blue camp and even many important decisionmakers in the pan-green camp. Now that even a media baron has said as much about Taiwan’s problems, perhaps they might start believing me.
The pro-unification media has been encouraging Taiwanese businesses to enter China for the past 12 years. Now many people think that this is the only way Taiwanese companies can make a profit. Those who think about establishing themselves in Taiwan by following the “no haste, be patient” policy are labeled as proponents of a closed-door policy.
Twelve years of businesses relocating to China have passed. The administration of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) embarked on a policy of proactive liberalization, while President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) has looked to total liberalization and the Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement. However, all have failed to benefit Taiwan economically.
This is especially true of the past four years, during which the Ma administration was following its total liberalization policy. Instead of helping Taiwan’s economy, it caused great damage. South Korea invests much less in China than Taiwan, but is doing much better in many areas, such as its share of the Chinese market, growth in exports and increase in annual wages for workers.
The harm caused by Taiwanese businesses relocating to China goes beyond economics. It has also been damaging politically. The pan-blue parties know that rhetoric about relocation is a surefire way to keep their voter base: It certainly worked wonders in the week leading up to the Jan. 14 presidential election. The economic scaremongering employed by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the CCP practically guaranteed them an extra 800,000 votes, turning the election in their favor.
This alone put Taiwan further down the path to unification with China. Some of the rhetoric used included: “Business is so great now between Taiwan and China and the Democratic Progressive Party [DPP] is still talking about a Taiwanese republic.”
This speaks volumes about the impact the idea of relocation to China has had on Taiwanese politics.
The reason why a former KMT chairman had the gall to talk about “one country, two areas (一國兩區)” on a recent visit to Beijing was because of the huge amount of political capital the KMT has accumulated over 12 years of Taiwanese businesses relocating to China.
“One country, one system” is no hypothetical situation set in the distant future. If both sides of the political spectrum continue their policy of economic integration with China — essentially “unification via economic means” — “one country, two systems” is the only thing that can follow.
I really do not know when the pan-blue and pan-green leaders will wake up from this “China dream” they have been having for the past 12 years. I just hope it is sooner rather than later.
Huang Tien-lin is a former presidential adviser.
Translated by Drew Cameron
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