The extraordinary legislative session is about to begin and President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) has demanded that the legislative caucuses pass the cross-strait service trade agreement and the free economic pilot zones special draft bill. Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Chairperson Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) held a DPP policy meeting at which she stressed that the extraordinary session will be an intense battle. The ruling and the opposition parties are thus dead set on passing or blocking these bills from the outset.
When it comes to the service trade agreement and the regulations for the oversight of cross-strait agreements, which are both on the agenda, there is almost no room for compromise between the two sides, who are both likely to take a hardline approach.
The nominees for the Control Yuan and the Examination Yuan, which are also on the agenda, will simply be reviewed according to the rules, and those who do not meet the requirements will be rejected. The only review that may lead to discussion is the review of the draft law on the free economic pilot zones. National Development Council Minister Kuan Chung-ming (管中閔) has said that while economic policy can be debated, there should be no reason to fight over this law, while Tsai has said that for the present, the government should focus on industrial development strategies, and that if the Cabinet’s proposal is adjusted in a positive way based on this approach, that would be acceptable.
Following the lessons it has learned from the Sunflower movement, the government has improved its public policy information and communication. It is now even offering an online introduction to the free economic pilot zones to bring policymaking closer to the public, especially the younger generation. It has also produced a short information film for young people, although that has been criticized for not making much sense. Unfortunately, these efforts are too little, too late and too weak.
Tsai’s recent criticism of the free economic pilot zones and Kuan’s rejection of the crititicism means that — although the exchange is belligerent and takes place via the media — there is still dialogue, and compromise has not been completely ruled out. It can only be hoped that the government and the opposition will be able to use the debate over the law on free economic pilot zones to discuss and find a direction for Taiwan’s economic development.
With its version of the zones, the government hopes to promote further economic liberalization and internationalization. However, the thinking behind it follows that of the export processing zones that the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) had previously introduced.
The system relies on special permits, as the government would offer greater freedom and more tax incentives in special zones and to special industries picked by the government. The DPP thinks the KMT version remains stuck in the manufacturing era and has failed to enter the era of the innovation and technology industries. It also thinks the zones are insufficiently liberalized, and that if the government really wants to have a comprehensive industrial strategy, it should strengthen the guidance of key industries, while the focus for other industries should be on deregulation — only applying controls and restrictions in exceptional situations — instead of offering selective deregulation through permit and special privilege.
If this debate on policy could take place before the draft bill takes on its final shape, it would help improve the legislation, but unfortunately it has been late arriving.
Still, better late than never, and changes to the draft law could still take place in the legislature. Any law that meets current requirements, facilitates internationalization and is beneficial to Taiwan’s economy should be welcomed.
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 Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
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