President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) has been beating the drum of the so-called “1992 consensus” and reprimanded Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Chairperson Tsai Ing-Wen (蔡英文), demanding that the presidential candidate clarify what she means by the “status quo.”
The tone and intensity of Ma’s rhetoric makes people wonder if he is on China’s side.
Meanwhile, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) has shown allegiance to Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) by affirming that Taiwan and China are both part of “one China.”
Apparently, unification has become the guiding principle of the KMT and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) to win next year’s presidential and legislative elections. The blatant collaboration shows that their joint sense of crisis has pushed them over the edge.
Ma’s approval rating remains low. For fear of losing its hold on power as a result of Ma’s unsatisfactory performance and out of a sense of crisis, the KMT is trying to win back public support before next year’s elections.
The incompetence of Ma’s administration has led to misery for many and should be resolved by formulating policies that will benefit the nation. However, this is not what is happening. Instead, the KMT is collaborating with the CCP and rehashing the game of trick or treat with their favorite weapon — albeit one that could backfire — the “1992 consensus,” a tacit understanding between the KMT and the CCP that both sides acknowledge there is “one China,” with each side having its own interpretation of what “China” means.
One disaster after another has occurred under Ma’s rule. The major disasters are massive national debt, declining wages and shrinking capital markets. Ma has to address these problems with practical solutions if he wants to solve the party’s crisis.
The first crisis is the massive national debt. Last year, total government debt was NT$25.14 trillion (US$820.5 billion), or NT$1.07 million per capita. The government, as well as local administrations, have spent money like it was water, but seldom on productive infrastructure and investments. Most of the spending was for crowd-pleasing fireworks displays, lantern festivals and New Year celebrations, or a variety of development projects that are results of collusion between governments and businesses.
The most shocking among them is the debt of Miaoli County under former county commissioner Liu Cheng-hung (劉政鴻), which rose from NT$20.2 billion to NT$64.8 billion during his time in office. As a consequence, Liu’s successor can hardly afford his civil servants’ paychecks and engineering contractors’ payments; even school-provided lunches have reduced to little more than congee and meat dumplings.
This phenomenon validates the warning issued by the Liberty Times (the Taipei Times’ sister newspaper) that the central government is more akin to that of Greece, while local governments are in the same rut as Detroit, Michigan.
The other problem is the possibility that funds required to pay pensions will skyrocket to NT$18.05 trillion, of which NT$8.66 trillion would be for military personnel, civil servants and public-school teachers, while NT$8.77 trillion would be for labor insurance. Though the amounts are similar, the number of people involved is not, with the number of military personnel, civil servants and public-school teachers scarcely one-10th of the number of workers, showing how highly unreasonable the pension system is.
The second crisis is low salaries. National GDP has risen considerably over the past 15 years, but real wages have fallen to the level they were 15 years ago. The younger generation faces salaries of just NT$22,000, the unfortunate result of industrial relocation abroad; as Taiwanese industry slowed, China opened its labor market.
With cheap land and labor, as well as tax breaks, China lured Taiwanese industry professionals who were reluctant to reform or innovate at home, which became the primary impetus for Taiwan’s GDP growth. However, only shareholders benefited from the moves; jobs and workers’ salaries were actually depressed.
Major reform is therefore needed to encourage industries to return, innovate and transform, and to stop relying so much on China. The nation needs a new, sustainable path leading to increased salaries.
The third crisis is that although the capital market brought about affluence — actually a financial bubble — and its extensive development provided a way for newly established enterprises to amass capital, leading to the growth of Taiwanese industries, the current administration, ostensibly under the flag of justice and fairness, has been treating the capital market as an ATM, demonizing domestic investment while refusing to allow special treatment for foreign investment. This has led to vast foreign capital outflows to China.
Listed companies this year are to pay dividends totaling NT$1.2 trillion, giving the impression that the economy is performing well. However, in reality, since foreign sources account for at least 50 percent of investments in many blue chip firms — 78 percent in the case of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co — it is doubtful how much of those dividends will go to Taiwanese. That is also the main reason the stock market exceeds 10,000 points, while most investors are not reaping any benefit.
Furthermore, if the capital market is depressed, domestic industries will find it harder to generate funds to expand industry scales, conduct research and development, promote brands, and boost global competitiveness.
Leaving those three crises unaddressed, the government will have no funds available to invest in domestic infrastructure, the public will have to struggle to make the ends meet with low incomes, industrial development will have insufficient financial impetus, while the economy will either stagnate or contract. In the long run, there will be more losers in society. Hope is gone. Discontent proliferates. In the end, civil self-help movements are likely to proliferate.
Last year, 500,000 people took to the streets during the Sunflower movement to protest the perceived partnership between the KMT and CCP hijacking the nation’s economy through the cross-strait service trade agreement. Next year, Taiwanese will once again use their votes to dispel the KMT’s contrivance of the “1992 consensus.”
Translated by Ethan Zhan
Taiwan stands at the epicenter of a seismic shift that will determine the Indo-Pacific’s future security architecture. Whether deterrence prevails or collapses will reverberate far beyond the Taiwan Strait, fundamentally reshaping global power dynamics. The stakes could not be higher. Today, Taipei confronts an unprecedented convergence of threats from an increasingly muscular China that has intensified its multidimensional pressure campaign. Beijing’s strategy is comprehensive: military intimidation, diplomatic isolation, economic coercion, and sophisticated influence operations designed to fracture Taiwan’s democratic society from within. This challenge is magnified by Taiwan’s internal political divisions, which extend to fundamental questions about the island’s identity and future
The narrative surrounding Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s attendance at last week’s Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit — where he held hands with Russian President Vladimir Putin and chatted amiably with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) — was widely framed as a signal of Modi distancing himself from the US and edging closer to regional autocrats. It was depicted as Modi reacting to the levying of high US tariffs, burying the hatchet over border disputes with China, and heralding less engagement with the Quadrilateral Security dialogue (Quad) composed of the US, India, Japan and Australia. With Modi in China for the
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has postponed its chairperson candidate registration for two weeks, and so far, nine people have announced their intention to run for chairperson, the most on record, with more expected to announce their campaign in the final days. On the evening of Aug. 23, shortly after seven KMT lawmakers survived recall votes, KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) announced he would step down and urged Taichung Mayor Lu Shiow-yen (盧秀燕) to step in and lead the party back to power. Lu immediately ruled herself out the following day, leaving the subject in question. In the days that followed, several
The Jamestown Foundation last week published an article exposing Beijing’s oil rigs and other potential dual-use platforms in waters near Pratas Island (Dongsha Island, 東沙島). China’s activities there resembled what they did in the East China Sea, inside the exclusive economic zones of Japan and South Korea, as well as with other South China Sea claimants. However, the most surprising element of the report was that the authors’ government contacts and Jamestown’s own evinced little awareness of China’s activities. That Beijing’s testing of Taiwanese (and its allies) situational awareness seemingly went unnoticed strongly suggests the need for more intelligence. Taiwan’s naval
RSS