One day after Premier Simon Chang (張善政) took office, the caretaker Cabinet decided to resume talks with Beijing over a cross-strait trade in goods agreement.
However, the government — both the caretaker Cabinet and the incoming administration — should consider postponing negotiations until Taiwan joins the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). The reasons are as follows:
First, there is a consensus in Taiwan that the economy has become too dependent on China. This over-dependence has discouraged businesses from making innovations or undertaking necessary reforms. Excessive investment in China has also slowed domestic investment. The Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA), signed in 2010, further increased the attraction of China to Taiwan’s smaller economy, which is the main reason the nation’s economic growth rate dropped sharply, registering a mere 0.85 percent growth last year.
A cross-strait trade in goods agreement would consolidate the cross-strait integration set in motion by the ECFA and it would only make the economy even more reliant on China, causing it to deteriorate further.
Second, president-elect Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) has expressed her vision for Taiwan, saying: “Taiwan should first move toward the world, and then toward China through the world.”
The ECFA, a cross-strait service trade agreement and a trade in goods agreement are all part of an elaborate economic strategy planned by President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) administration and Beijing to bring about unification between Taiwan and China. Any talk about a trade in goods agreement at this time would go against Tsai’s vision and set the nation on the wrong course.
Third, Taiwan is in danger of being isolated from the international community by Beijing, but the TPP could be a solution to this threat. It is important to be clear about one’s priorities. The incoming government should first and foremost seek TPP membership; this is not the time to think about a cross-strait trade in goods agreement.
If such an agreement is signed before entering the TPP, that is, if integration with China happens first, joining the TPP would be meaningless, and no economic development plan would be able to save the economy.
Fourth, the Ma administration has said that unless Taiwan first signs the service trade and trade in goods agreements with China, Beijing would obstruct Taiwan’s accession to the TPP.
However, the exact opposite is true: Whether and when Taiwan should sign the two agreements are in fact among the few chips the government can use to its advantage when negotiating with Beijing. If the two agreements were signed before Taiwan’s entry into the TPP, China’s colonialist unification framework would become firmly established. Should this happen, it would be of no cost to China to oppose Taiwan’s TPP membership and it could even propose the view that China represents Taiwan.
Delaying the signing of the two agreements would give Taiwan considerable leverage in negotiating with China, and consequently raise its chances of joining the TPP. It is a leverage the government should not give away, and it is important to remember that signing the EFCA did not lead to Taiwan’s accession to a free-trade agreement, as the Ma administration falsely promised.
Telling China that if it were willing to show goodwill, Taiwan would seriously consider signing service trade and trade in goods agreements after joining the TPP is one of the few bargaining chips that the government has.
Taiwanese must remember that the Ma administration’s claim that free-trade agreements with other nations would only be possible after the ECFA was signed has been proven to be a lie.
Fifth, using the same line of reasoning as when the government was promoting the ECFA, Chang said that a trade in goods agreement with China is important for Taiwanese industry. The ECFA only benefited Taiwan’s panel and machine tool industry.
However, these industries were all on the priority list in Beijing’s 13th five-year plan and would enable China to make its own panels and machine tools in a few years.
The benefits Taiwan has secured through the pact are all short-term, lasting only two or three years. On the other hand, the 830 agricultural products that China wants to be allowed to export to Taiwan would be a permanent benefit. China wants to exchange short-term benefits for Taiwan for long-term benefits for itself. Would it really be worth signing such an agreement?
Taiwan’s panel makers and machine tool manufacturers, instead of promoting a trade in goods agreement, should focus on improving their products and strive to secure a larger share of international markets to remain competitive. In addition, the New Taiwan dollar should also be allowed to depreciate.
The government should harden its resolve and postpone signing a cross-strait trade in goods agreement until Taiwan enters the TPP — or, better still, not sign the agreement at all — to ensure economic sustainability and security.
Huang Tien-lin is a former advisory member of the National Security Council and a former Presidential Office adviser.
Translated by Yu-an Tu
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