Discussing the opposition parties’ recent protest over government policies, President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) said the national economy had no future unless the government eased the ban on US beef imports containing ractopamine residues.
The government criticized the opposition for its objection to easing the ban by saying Taiwan’s economic future was at stake. This was a case of choosing the lesser of two evils and the nation had no choice but to compromise for the greater good.
Ma would have Taiwanese believe that because South Korea has signed a free-trade agreement (FTA) with the US, Taiwan is doomed unless it signs one too.
Two years ago, he made a similar claim about the Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA) during a debate with then-Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) chairperson Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文).
It is now possible to see the extent to which the failings of the ECFA expose Ma’s flawed strategy and lack of determination.
First, the ECFA has been of limited use in boosting exports. Last year saw an increase of 8 percent in exports to China and only 9 percent growth in export volume for products on the “early harvest” list. Also, Taiwanese exports to China have fallen to 7.2 percent of the goods China imports, the lowest since 1993.
Despite Taiwan having no similar agreements with ASEAN countries, growth in exports to those nations last year was three times higher than the growth in exports to China. In the first five months of this year, exports to China shrank by 10 percent, compared with a 6.2 percent increase to ASEAN countries.
The ECFA has also not had any discernible effect on attracting foreign investment to Taiwan, while Taiwanese money continues to flow out of the country. When the ECFA was signed in 2010, the amount of foreign investment coming into Taiwan contracted by 29 percent, even lower than that going into Thailand, Indonesia and Vietnam. Last year, foreign investment in Taiwan was US$3.4 billion.
In addition, from 2008 to last year Taiwan experienced considerable cash outflows, the average annual amount being US$27.7 billion, with last year the most serious at over US$50 billion.
It was originally said that signing the ECFA might benefit FTA negotiations with Singapore. However, 18 months after talks with Singapore started, there are no tangible results. Moreover, even if we do sign an FTA with Singapore, trade between the two countries represents just 3.6 percent of Taiwan’s total trade, so the effect of such an agreement would be negligible.
Up to now, Taiwan has still not entered into FTA negotiations with its major trading partners: the US, Europe and Japan.
Council for Economic Planning and Development Minister Yiin Chii-ming (尹啟銘) has said that the ECFA was a framework agreement and never intended to have a significant economic impact. That is certainly not how Ma characterized it during a post-signing press conference. He claimed it was a big step in addressing Taiwan’s economic isolation; that it would make the nation a focus for foreign investment and invigorate domestic investment. In reality, the investment rate for this year is forecast to be 16.2 percent, a historical low.
Two years after the ECFA was signed, Taiwan’s situation has deteriorated. Ma and his government are now saying that the nation’s economic isolation will intensify if it fails to relax import restrictions on US beef.
It is true that Taiwan faces an economic crisis, but the government’s policies are flawed, its strategy is ill-founded and it lacks the resolve to grapple with the nation’s problems.
Will the US really be more willing to sign an FTA with Taiwan if the ractopamine ban is relaxed? Washington has never said as much, it has just reiterated that it would be prepared to resume talks on a Trade and Investment Framework Agreement (TIFA). A TIFA would of course be a prerequisite for a US-Taiwan FTA, but the problem is whether Taiwan will ever be in a position to secure a FTA with the US. Given that the public has serious concerns about the health implications of ractopamine, it is important to know whether, if this compromise is made now, there is a reasonable chance of getting an FTA further down the road.
If the US is willing to hold talks with Taiwan over a possible FTA, would the Ma administration be prepared to completely open up the economy? Even if the legislature relaxed the ban, a US-Taiwan FTA will still be a long way off when Ma finishes his second term. It is even possible that negotiations will not yet have started.
Tung Chen-yuan is a professor in the Graduate Institute of Development Studies at National Chengchi University.
Translated by Paul Cooper
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has long been expansionist and contemptuous of international law. Under Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), the CCP regime has become more despotic, coercive and punitive. As part of its strategy to annex Taiwan, Beijing has sought to erase the island democracy’s international identity by bribing countries to sever diplomatic ties with Taipei. One by one, China has peeled away Taiwan’s remaining diplomatic partners, leaving just 12 countries (mostly small developing states) and the Vatican recognizing Taiwan as a sovereign nation. Taiwan’s formal international space has shrunk dramatically. Yet even as Beijing has scored diplomatic successes, its overreach
In her article in Foreign Affairs, “A Perfect Storm for Taiwan in 2026?,” Yun Sun (孫韻), director of the China program at the Stimson Center in Washington, said that the US has grown indifferent to Taiwan, contending that, since it has long been the fear of US intervention — and the Chinese People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) inability to prevail against US forces — that has deterred China from using force against Taiwan, this perceived indifference from the US could lead China to conclude that a window of opportunity for a Taiwan invasion has opened this year. Most notably, she observes that
For Taiwan, the ongoing US and Israeli strikes on Iranian targets are a warning signal: When a major power stretches the boundaries of self-defense, smaller states feel the tremors first. Taiwan’s security rests on two pillars: US deterrence and the credibility of international law. The first deters coercion from China. The second legitimizes Taiwan’s place in the international community. One is material. The other is moral. Both are indispensable. Under the UN Charter, force is lawful only in response to an armed attack or with UN Security Council authorization. Even pre-emptive self-defense — long debated — requires a demonstrably imminent
Since being re-elected, US President Donald Trump has consistently taken concrete action to counter China and to safeguard the interests of the US and other democratic nations. The attacks on Iran, the earlier capture of deposed of Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro and efforts to remove Chinese influence from the Panama Canal all demonstrate that, as tensions with Beijing intensify, Washington has adopted a hardline stance aimed at weakening its power. Iran and Venezuela are important allies and major oil suppliers of China, and the US has effectively decapitated both. The US has continuously strengthened its military presence in the Philippines. Japanese Prime
RSS