Begin with this basic premise: All countries operate out of self-interest.
There is nothing wrong with that; it is to be expected. Of course, it is possible for a nation to have more than one motive, but if self-interest is not a part of a country’s modus operandi, then its leadership should be questioned.
When President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) begins touting the advantages of the Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA), it would be natural for him to claim that it is in the nation’s interest.
However, is this really true? With a little scrutiny, it soon becomes evident that Ma is asking Taiwanese to buy into the pact without knowing what is in it and the self-interest is his own and perhaps China’s.
The nation has had about six years of Ma’s bumbling incompetence.
He produced what has become a standing joke: the infamous “6-3-3” campaign promise.
His popularity has sagged; his approval ratings hit a low of 9.2 percent — an embarrassing figure especially after Ma suggested that then-president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) should step down at a time when his “poor” rating was higher than Ma’s.
Then comes the smoke and mirrors.
Throughout his presidency, Ma has touted the image of peace in the Taiwan Strait because of his benign “kowtowing” to China, but does peace really reign?
As the world constantly hears this peace mantra from Ma, skepticism fills the air.
China’s 1,600-plus missiles aimed at Taiwan are still in place. China’s rulers still block Taiwan and have upped the ante; they now say that the issue must be settled in this generation. Of course “settled” for them means unification under Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) definition of “one China.”
At the same time, prices continue to rise, salaries diminish and housing prices skyrocket.
Taiwanese are ironically told that they should be happy that their mid-sized country with a superior economy has gotten a crumb from China: assuming “guest status” at a recent international forum.
If things are so great, why do the people need to be told repeatedly that Ma has brought this new “peace in our time” and prosperity? Whose reputation is Ma trying to salvage?
Without any real examination by the Legislative Yuan or the public, Ma and the leaders of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) are saying that the ECFA should be passed quickly.
However, the crucial factor in this push is that while Ma touts its alleged advantages, he avoids the real question: What does China get out of it?
All countries put themselves first and a hegemonic China is certainly one that pursues its self-interest with a vengeance.
Does China need the agreement to help it solve its slowing economy?
Is this economy crucial to the salvation of a country of 1.3 billion people?
Do China’s farmers and its service industries really need outside help?
The only reason for Chinese farmers and service providers to bring their wares here, is to swamp, undercut and destroy the local markets for China’s benefit.
Another factor that must be faced is China’s repeated blocking of Taiwan from international forums and how Beijing makes no bones about considering the nation a rebellious province.
China’s handling of “rebels” in Tibet, Xinjiang and Hong Kong is of no comfort.
Yet these warning signs seem to go in one of Ma’s ears and out the other as he pushes for closer ties.
In his self-interest, the president talks out of both sides of his mouth.
In one breath, he says that the time is not right for political talks, but in the next he says that they may happen at upcoming events despite the absence of calls for political talks from Taiwan.
Ma says that he will seek a political consensus before any negotiations, but then he proceeds to negotiate without that consensus.
From the fabricated “1992 consensus” on, all talks have been restricted to a party-to-party basis between the KMT and the CCP.
Taiwan is already a major investor in China; major industries have moved there.
Instead of putting more eggs in the China basket, the nation needs to develop a balanced international trade network.
If the KMT really has the nation’s self-interest at heart, it should spend its efforts on that.
The crucial question remains: If the ECFA brings no real economic advantage to China, what does China get from it?
This is what has been at the heart of Ma’s contrived attack on Legislative Speaker Wang Jin-pyng (王金平) who has pushed for further examination of the ECFA.
Taiwan is getting a raw deal and Ma is trying to salvage his reputation at the nation’s expense.
And China? One does not have to worry about China; it is taking care of its own self-interest well enough.
Jerome Keating is a commentator in Taipei.
“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
RSS