When the Sunflower movement erupted in 2014, halting the passage of the cross-strait service trade agreement in its tracks, a number of major Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) figures with ties to China, seeing the deregulation they prized so much had been thwarted, offered a suggestion to Chinese agencies responsible for ties with Taiwan.
They recommended finding a way to take advantage of the very democratic processes that were placing obstacles in Beijing’s path and the their own, such as China taking the items from service trade agreement that it had control over and unilaterally implementing them, bypassing the need to secure Taipei’s approval.
These KMT figures knew all too well that with Taiwan being a democracy, the governing party was obliged to win the hearts and minds of the voters and, by the same token, if China desired peaceful unification with Taiwan, Beijing would have to vie with that party for those same hearts and minds.
After the service trade agreement fell through, Beijing’s attempts to win Taiwanese hearts and minds were met with some derision, considering the reports of how Beijing was treating its own citizens.
Now that Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) has further consolidated his power, and given that the recent 31 incentives announced by China are the official face of Beijing’s new approach, people in Taiwan might want to start taking such unilateral moves more seriously, until they are more certain about what is actually happening.
The Democratic Progressive Party government has begun a preliminary study into the matter. Several government officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, believe that the deregulation of certain items on Beijing’s list of 31 steps violate Taiwan’s laws.
For example, the government bars Taiwanese companies from investing in certain public infrastructure projects in China, such as irrigation projects, railways, airports or other mass rapid transport systems, and has stipulated that Taiwanese cannot serve in Chinese Communist Party or Chinese military posts, and that these matters are not for Beijing to decide.
If this is just government propaganda, then so be it. If, on the other hand, the government deludes itself into believing it can actually control such investments and keep the situation under control by citing the law, then it is in trouble.
All changes to policy and laws governing interaction between the citizens of China and Taiwan, ever since the time of former presidents Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) and Chiang Ching-kuo (蔣經國), have been driven from the bottom up. It was the Taiwanese who have pushed and necessitated political and legal reform.
This is how cross-strait marriages came to be, it is how changes in recognizing academic qualifications from Chinese universities came about. This is one of the “special characteristics” of government for the people, by the people.
The 31 incentives, collated by 29 institutions in China, constitute little more than an opening sally to attract Taiwanese, a gauntlet thrown to the floor in front of the government in Taipei.
More to the point: Beijing is using these incentives to subvert Taipei’s authority.
The government needs to be very careful about its next move. Before it makes any announcements about a strategy to counter Beijing’s moves, it needs to sound out all involved, and to be absolutely sure that its aim is true.
The way that most Taiwanese view Beijing is one thing; whether Taiwanese believe their own government is able to do anything about it is another.
Tzou Jiing-wen is the editor-in-chief of the Liberty Times (the Taipei Times’ sister newspaper).
Translated by Paul Cooper
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
Former president Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) trip to China provides a pertinent reminder of why Taiwanese protested so vociferously against attempts to force through the cross-strait service trade agreement in 2014 and why, since Ma’s presidential election win in 2012, they have not voted in another Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) candidate. While the nation narrowly avoided tragedy — the treaty would have put Taiwan on the path toward the demobilization of its democracy, which Courtney Donovan Smith wrote about in the Taipei Times in “With the Sunflower movement Taiwan dodged a bullet” — Ma’s political swansong in China, which included fawning dithyrambs