Since President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) came to power in 2008, he has pushed for many reforms and policies to deregulate cross-strait relations.
However, he has been unable to do so freely due to some concerns, and some of his policies have met with strong opposition. In the face of public criticism, Ma often feels misunderstood and attributes the problem to the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) boycotting his policies and misleading the public.
He clearly does not know what the problem is, nor does he know how to lead the nation forward.
Reform and deregulation are necessary for the survival and development of a nation. Still, they frequently fail, and sometimes fail miserably. This inevitably affects vested interests and disadvantaged groups, and these groups may be locked in opposition. Given the uncertain effects of reform and deregulation, and the fear among individuals as to whether they will end up among the winners or the losers, most people simply oppose such measures. This is the problem the nation is facing today.
Sometimes, a crisis can be a turning point, because people suffer from a past mistake and have no choice but to change. However, Taiwan is like a frog in a pot of slowly boiling water.
While faced with a drastically changing and challenging international environment, Taiwanese have little crisis awareness and determination to change. Many people are afraid of change, but since they have to go on making a living, they seek greater protection from the government to counter the external competition.
Not only will this behavior not solve the problem, it will make it worse.
China’s experience in reform and deregulation could serve as a good example for Taiwan, with its pilot points, gradual expansion, increased development and dual systems.
The successful reforms in Chinese farming villages and booming individually owned businesses during the 1980s were not planned and implemented by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). They were experiments of the Chinese people risking their lives in order to survive, conducted in the spirit of “emancipating the mind and seeking truth from facts” as proposed by then-Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping (鄧小平).
Taiwan’s problem is not the emancipation of the mind, but it needs to seek truth from facts. To push for reform and deregulation, it is necessary to protect both vested interests and the disadvantaged, while at the same time changing their old habits.
This is no easy task; in fact, it is Taiwan’s greatest challenge today. If the government starts reform from pilot points in underdeveloped areas, it is less likely to confront opposition from vested interests. People living in underdeveloped areas tend to be more accepting of new things and innovations, because their future can only get better.
When China started to push for reform, it selected Xiamen, Shenzhen and two other cities as pilot areas. Since these cities were relatively poor at the time, residents supported the deregulation policies. Even so, Beijing was cautious and started by only opening a special zone of 2.5km2 in Xiamen.
The four cities were opened only to overseas Chinese — including Taiwanese — to avoid criticism of being capitalists. There were no state-owned enterprises inside the special zones, so the opening would not hurt the legitimacy of socialism or vested interests.
Gradual expansion can reduce the risk and uncertainty of reform and deregulation, and give a concrete boost to the economy, so that other areas would be encouraged to adopt the same policy.
Next, through increased development, the Chinese government promoted reform in domains that were not part of the planned economy so as not to hurt those with vested interests in the planned economy. When the strength of this unplanned economy exceeded that of the planned economy, changes to the planned economy did not meet with much opposition. When state-owned enterprises saw the benefits of reform, they took the initiative to reform.
Nevertheless, reforms of the planned economy will still meet with opposition from vested interests and disadvantaged groups. Although the economic benefits of implementing pilot points and gradual expansion may reduce the opposition, it will still be hard to completely eliminate opposition.
That is why a double-track approach becomes key to reform.
For example, on the premise of not hurting those with vested interests in the planned economy, the government can adopt a different employment policy for new employees. They will not have job security, but their salaries will be high. Once the number of employees on the “new track” exceeds those on the “old track,” overall reform can be implemented.
Compared to China, promoting reform may face greater opposition in Taiwan because Taiwanese have yet to feel the same sense of urgency.
However, Ma cannot push policies like an arrogant prophet. Rather, he should try to clear public doubts and resolve their opposition with appropriate policy mechanisms, so as to truly promote reform and deregulation.
Tung Chen-yuan is a professor at National Chengchi University’s Graduate Institute of Development Studies.
Translated by Eddy Chang
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.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with