Beijing has been sending signals that it might significantly reduce the number of Chinese allowed to visit Taiwan up until Jan. 15. This has caused widespread worry among travel agencies.
Data validates this message: the number of Chinese applicants on Dec. 3 was a mere 2,161, only 20 percent of the daily quota. However, when calmly considering the big picture, despite a temporary, albeit considerable, impact as a result of the drop in the number of Chinese visitors, the Beijing policy could prompt Taiwan’s tourism industry to develop normally.
Taiwanese travel agencies can capitalize on any adversity a decrease in Chinese tourists might bring by establishing client bases in Europe and Japan and training English-speaking and Japanese-speaking tour guides, which would maximize tourism resources. Similarly, Beijing has more than once warned Taiwan that the “one China” policy is the political foundation on which cross-strait interactions can take place. If the foundation is absent, Taiwan-China relations are bound to be shaky. However, there is no way to tell what Beijing means by “shaky.”
Is it suggesting that the service trade agreement and the trade in goods agreement would be halted?
Incidentally, that is precisely what the student movements have been trying relentlessly to achieve. Both agreements are to subject Taiwanese industry to the whims of the Chinese economy, something neither the public in general nor young people in particular want. Is Beijing suggesting the termination of the 21 cross-strait agreements, including the Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA)?
As far as Taiwanese are concerned, that is not really a threat, because after the ECFA was signed, what Taiwanese have gotten in return are not benefits, but a year-by-year decrease in domestic investment and GDP growth. The younger generation has had enough of the depressed economy and an average minimum monthly paycheck of NT$22,000. If Beijing’s warning comes to fruition, the nation could use the opportunity to free itself of the bondage that cross-strait agreements imposed on it, thereby opening itself up to the wider world.
Perhaps Beijing would take more aggressive measures. For example, ordering Chinese companies to stop purchasing Taiwanese products, including products made by China-based Taiwanese companies. However, this involves China’s obligations to fulfill international treaties, such as the WTO’s Information Technology Agreement. Even if China were to ram this through with its considerable might as a major nation, its ability to keep its commitments to international agreements would be questioned. Everything comes at a price.
Losing the Chinese market would be difficult and possibly even be fatal for some Taiwanese industries, but a crisis can often turn out to be an opportunity, which could enable the economy and industries to rise from the ashes, encourage investment in Taiwan and facilitate market diversification. In four years, a new and well-off economy could surely emerge.
Perhaps Beijing is suggesting that it would isolate Taiwan? This is one of the frequently talked about options to cause major disruptions in the nation, albeit most unlikely to happen. Isolation is, after all, an international matter, and it would only push Taiwan closer toward the alliance between the US, Japan and the Philippines. History shows that economic isolation is rarely successful. Most attempts end in failure.
The real purpose of staging a meeting between President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) was so Ma could make a joint announcement with Xi to the whole world that the “Taiwanese president” acknowledges the “one China” policy, which says that Taiwan is part of China, thus implicitly binding future presidents to abide by the so-called “1992 consensus.” The problem is, the cross-strait relationship according to the “1992 consensus” over the past eight years has proved to be an economic colonial relationship, causing the Taiwanese economy to collapse and become dependent on the Chinese economy. Eight years of misery under Ma’s rule is more than enough. Just say no to the “one China” ideology that the meeting was campaigning for.
Worried the sky might fall? Chinese philosopher Mencius (孟子) said: “Before Heaven bestows a great responsibility upon someone, it always lets his mind be tormented, his muscles be burdened and his stomach be starved.”
Trials and tribulations are how the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) can remain in power after its expected win next month. If, on the contrary, the DPP is willing to make compromises and surrender Taiwan to China to get Beijing to agree not to “shake up” the nation, then even if the DPP achieve a landslide victory in the Jan. 16 presidential and legislative elections, it would not stay in power more than one term.
Huang Tien-lin is a former president and chairman of First Commercial Bank and a former Presidential Office adviser.
Translated by Ethan Zhan
From the Iran war and nuclear weapons to tariffs and artificial intelligence, the agenda for this week’s Beijing summit between US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) is packed. Xi would almost certainly bring up Taiwan, if only to demonstrate his inflexibility on the matter. However, no one needs to meet with Xi face-to-face to understand his stance. A visit to the National Museum of China in Beijing — in particular, the “Road to Rejuvenation” exhibition, which chronicles the rise and rule of the Chinese Communist Party — might be even more revealing. Xi took the members
After Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) met Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) in Beijing, most headlines referred to her as the leader of the opposition in Taiwan. Is she really, though? Being the chairwoman of the KMT does not automatically translate into being the leader of the opposition in the sense that most foreign readers would understand it. “Leader of the opposition” is a very British term. It applies to the Westminster system of parliamentary democracy, and to some extent, to other democracies. If you look at the UK right now, Conservative Party head Kemi Badenoch is
A Pale View of Hills, a movie released last year, follows the story of a Japanese woman from Nagasaki who moved to Britain in the 1950s with her British husband and daughter from a previous marriage. The daughter was born at a time when memories of the US atomic bombing of Nagasaki during World War II and anxiety over the effects of nuclear radiation still haunted the community. It is a reflection on the legacy of the local and national trauma of the bombing that ended the period of Japanese militarism. A central theme of the movie is the need, at
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) on Friday used their legislative majority to push their version of a special defense budget bill to fund the purchase of US military equipment, with the combined spending capped at NT$780 billion (US$24.78 billion). The bill, which fell short of the Executive Yuan’s NT$1.25 trillion request, was passed by a 59-0 margin with 48 abstentions in the 113-seat legislature. KMT Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文), who reportedly met with TPP Chairman Huang Kuo-chang (黃國昌) for a private meeting before holding a joint post-vote news conference, was said to have mobilized her
RSS