As expected, the central bank kept its policy interest rates unchanged again on Thursday, highlighting its confidence that the inflation outlook would remain benign and that the domestic economy could grow at a moderate pace in coming quarters.
Though the central bank said it would only raise its interest rates if the inflation rate increases, the chance of this is slim for the rest of the year because international raw material prices have been stable and domestic private consumption remains weak.
The headline inflation rate is forecast to increase just 1.14 percent year-on-year in the second half of the year and to 1.23 percent for the whole of this year.
It is the eighth straight quarter that the central bank decided to stay put. The dovish policy is necessary should the bank need to take hawkish action if something goes really wrong in the global economy.
Just last week, official data for last month showed that the nation’s unemployment rate fell for the third straight month to 4.06 percent, its lowest level in nearly five years, but the industrial production index continued contracting for a fourth consecutive month by 0.07 percent year-on-year. The index of economic monitoring also indicated “yellow-blue” for a record ninth consecutive time, which means a lackluster economy.
Nevertheless, two key messages from the bank’s quarterly board meeting deserve attention.
First, members of the bank’s policymaking board believe the uncertainties surrounding the global economy will continue and recovery will not keep pace with major economies. The US and Japan have seen their economies expand modestly so far this year, while European economies remain weak and the growth of China and Asian emerging economies is slower than expected.
Second, and more importantly, board members have taken note of recent turbulence in global financial markets. The US Federal Reserve’s plan to start reducing its bond purchases later this year, the liquidity problem among Chinese banks and the massive short-term capital flows around the world are all factors. The board believes this uneasy situation in international financial markets, if it persists, could cloud the prospects for the global economy.
Though speculation about the Fed’s withdrawal of its extraordinary stimulus had surfaced in recent months, the actual wind-down came earlier than expected. The aggressive monetary easing and similar actions from other central banks have caused substantial capital flows in the global financial system, especially into emerging markets such as Taiwan’s. As such, some people fear that as the US central bank withdraws its quantitative easing, other central banks will follow suit and global liquidity will dry up, negatively affecting emerging economies. Indeed, such fears did trigger sharp declines in US Treasury bond and world stock market prices days after Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke’s announcement on June 19.
While bank Governor Perng Fai-nan (彭淮南) on Thursday played down any potential impact on Taiwan’s banking system or the New Taiwan dollar exchange rate, one should not pay too much attention to his remark, but rather expect the US monetary authorities will find a solution to smooth things over. Yet Taiwan should be concerned about whether the Fed’s withdrawal will slow down the global economy and affect Taiwan’s export-reliant economy because of the recent reports that the pace of domestic growth remained weaker than expected. While the government has recently presented both short-term and long-term stimulus measures to boost domestic consumption and investment, the local economy is vulnerable to external uncertainties.
If people’s salaries are stuck at the same level that they were 16 years ago, things will not improve significantly. Expect stronger growth in the economy? Better wait till next year.
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing