Two developments are making it clear that the Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) administration and the technocrats who fill its ranks must not only shift gear on the economy, but shift into high gear before it’s too late.
First is the adoption earlier this week of maximum residue levels for the leanness-enhancement drug ractopamine by the Codex Alimentarius Commission, which is likely to result in a decision by the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) to end its ongoing legislative boycott of a vote on the import of US beef products containing the agent.
The US side, which has made resolving the dispute over ractopamine a sine qua non for the resumption of long-stalled Trade and Investment Framework Agreement (TIFA) negotiations, is now hoping that the Ma administration will be able to pass the bill allowing the imports. Once this is out of the way, there would be no reason why TIFA talks could not resume, US officials have told this newspaper in private.
The other development is the continued deterioration of the nation’s economic indicators, epitomized by a revised GDP growth forecast for this year by Citibank, which trimmed its prediction to 2.8 percent, from 3.3 percent in May, saying the figure could be revised downwards again should the situation fail to improve. This is a pretty bad drop from the prediction of 4.51 percent GDP growth made a year ago and the gloomy economic prospects make the state of the economy during the Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) era --— often the point of comparison for the Ma government — look healthy in contrast.
It is clear, therefore, that more drastic and imaginative economic policies will be needed to revive the economy.
However, accelerating the pace of economic liberalization with China, Ma’s turnkey approach to improving the economy, just won’t do. What is needed is for Taiwan to quickly realize that some of its economic policies are in dire need of modernization and that failure to address the problem will leave Taiwan well behind its regional competitors.
One important first step would be to quickly deal with the TIFA, which anyway is a relatively unambitious plan, and immediately aim for the real goal, which is the signing of a free-trade agreement (FTA) between the two economies.
If, as Ma argued, signing the Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA) with China opened the door to future FTAs with other regional economies, one can only imagine how signing an FTA with the US would embolden other countries, including major economies, to follow suit.
Beyond those first steps, Taiwan must really start making the adjustments that will make it possible for it to become a member of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), which many analysts regard as the future model for regional, if not global, economic cooperation (for the time being, China has not been invited to join the yet-to-be-formed framework, mostly because it constantly violates the rules it had agreed to play by upon joining the WTO).
Ma’s recent comments on the possibility of Taiwan joining the TPP are disheartening and a sign that his administration has yet to fully appreciate the importance of the changes that need to be made. A little while ago, Ma said Taiwan would not be ready to do so for another decade; he has since revised that prediction to eight years. This is way too long and highlights a lack of willingness that Taiwan simply cannot afford. US officials, many of whom would be supportive of Taiwan’s entry into the TPP, are confident that Taipei could make the needed adjustments well before then. Some members of the US Congress have even gone on record calling for Washington’s support on the issue.
There could not be a better time for Ma, a president who made a revived economy a cornerstone of his administration, to take bold steps in that direction. The support is there — and the clock is ticking.
“History does not repeat itself, but it rhymes” (attributed to Mark Twain). The USSR was the international bully during the Cold War as it sought to make the world safe for Soviet-style Communism. China is now the global bully as it applies economic power and invests in Mao’s (毛澤東) magic weapons (the People’s Liberation Army [PLA], the United Front Work Department, and the Chinese Communist Party [CCP]) to achieve world domination. Freedom-loving countries must respond to the People’s Republic of China (PRC), especially in the Indo-Pacific (IP), as resolutely as they did against the USSR. In 1954, the US and its allies
A response to my article (“Invite ‘will-bes,’ not has-beens,” Aug. 12, page 8) mischaracterizes my arguments, as well as a speech by former British prime minister Boris Johnson at the Ketagalan Forum in Taipei early last month. Tseng Yueh-ying (曾月英) in the response (“A misreading of Johnson’s speech,” Aug. 24, page 8) does not dispute that Johnson referred repeatedly to Taiwan as “a segment of the Chinese population,” but asserts that the phrase challenged Beijing by questioning whether parts of “the Chinese population” could be “differently Chinese.” This is essentially a confirmation of Beijing’s “one country, two systems” formulation, which says that
Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi arrived in China yesterday, where he is to attend a summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) and Russian President Vladimir Putin today. As this coincides with the 50 percent US tariff levied on Indian products, some Western news media have suggested that Modi is moving away from the US, and into the arms of China and Russia. Taiwan-Asia Exchange Foundation fellow Sana Hashmi in a Taipei Times article published yesterday titled “Myths around Modi’s China visit” said that those analyses have misrepresented India’s strategic calculations, and attempted to view
When Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) stood in front of the Potala Palace in Lhasa on Thursday last week, flanked by Chinese flags, synchronized schoolchildren and armed Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) troops, he was not just celebrating the 60th anniversary of the establishment of the “Tibet Autonomous Region,” he was making a calculated declaration: Tibet is China. It always has been. Case closed. Except it has not. The case remains wide open — not just in the hearts of Tibetans, but in history records. For decades, Beijing has insisted that Tibet has “always been part of China.” It is a phrase