The cross-strait service trade agreement is gradually devolving into a confrontation between those who support it and those who oppose it.
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), which supports the passage of the pact through the legislature, has made three claims backing its implementation:
First, the KMT said that the government was unable to discuss the deal with domestic industrial and commercial groups before Taiwan and China signed it on June 21 because there was a “confidentiality agreement” between the two parties. It was not the government’s intention to sign the pact through in such a non-transparent way, the KMT has said.
However, many of those who oppose the service trade pact feel that since the agreement is so significant, a consensus should first have been reached domestically, beginning at the grassroots level and moving upward, instead of the policy being formulated by a few powerful national leaders in a top-down manner to satisfy their own motives.
Second, the KMT said the local economy has stagnated and has wondered why many Taiwanese are finding it impossible to accept the pact as a means to remove trade barriers between the two sides of the Taiwan Strait and strengthen bilateral cooperation.
However, those who oppose the trade pact feel that Taiwan’s economic stagnation is a result of President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) inept leadership, saying that his ineptitude has resulted in an inability to stimulate private consumption and boost economic growth. They further say that these economic failings have nothing to do with the service trade agreement, which they claim will humiliate the nation and forfeit its sovereignty.
Third, the KMT also claims that Taiwan stands to gain more than it will lose by ratifying the cross-strait agreement and that the overall effect of the pact will be positive.
Despite that, those opposed to the agreement feel that if it will be so good for the nation, then the government should commission a comprehensive report on the domestic impact it will have so that the public can thoroughly understand all the benefits. By doing this, the government would clarify the public’s doubts over whether implementing the pact would adversely affect their jobs and salaries, and whether some are criticizing the pact just for the sake of opposing it.
However, instead of taking this route, the authorities have not offered the public any explanation on questions such as: After signing the pact, what are the possible problems that Taiwanese industry might face? How will the nation benefit from exporting services from certain sectors and how will it suffer from the import of services from other sectors? How should Taiwan’s service sectors react to these possible impacts and how should the nation use the agreement to strengthen its industrial competitiveness and increase economic growth? To this day, the public have yet to see or hear about any assessment being carried out on these key issues.
By failing to handle the signing of the service trade pact properly, the government has turned the agreement into a monster. The Ma administration should not blame its poor handling of the matter on public opposition to the pact.
Kuo Chen-hero is an adjunct professor in the School of Business at Soochow University.
Translated by Eddy Chang
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers
Gogoro Inc was once a rising star and a would-be unicorn in the years prior to its debut on the NASDAQ in 2022, as its environmentally friendly technology and stylish design attracted local young people. The electric scooter and battery swapping services provider is bracing for a major personnel shakeup following the abrupt resignation on Friday of founding chairman Horace Luke (陸學森) as chief executive officer. Luke’s departure indicates that Gogoro is sinking into the trough of unicorn disillusionment, with the company grappling with poor financial performance amid a slowdown in demand at home and setbacks in overseas expansions. About 95