Two years ago, my article on the New Southbound Policy in the Taipei Times articulated its significance and implications, while pointing out possible challenges and hazards in terms of policy implementation and concrete deliverables (Prospects and risks of new policy,” Sept. 19, 2016, page 6).
Two years later — with the efforts of President Tsai Ing-wen’s (蔡英文) administration — forums, commercial exhibitions, exchange visits, bilateral cooperation and other initiatives have been launched. Official statistics indicate that the policy has gradually made significant progress in several areas.
An opinion poll in May showed that the policy had a 47.7 percent approval rating, the highest rating among Tsai’s policies. Most media interpreted this as an indication that the New Southbound Policy is well perceived by the public.
However, this interpretation seems to underestimate Taiwanese expectations of the Tsai administration. With a budget of NT$3.2 billion (US$104.5 million) for this year, a policy receiving an approval rating of less than 50 percent can hardly be said to be a satisfactory result.
Why has the policy — supposedly a signature initiative of the administration — become another mediocre and tedious bureaucratic routine, without any compelling appeal to most people? Why does the policy have a low “sense of existence” among Taiwanese?
The reason for this is not simply a lack of “policy visibility” in mass media, but can be attributed to a failure to invoke enthusiasm to explore the plentiful possibilities in the region the policy covers.
Any government policy is doomed to fail if it merely relies on public sector effort. Motivating and encouraging private-sector participation and collaboration is crucial for any public policy to succeed. The New Southbound Policy is no exception.
Unfortunately, its implementation seems to have falled into the trap of “bureaucratic cliche,” implying that if the policy’s title was changed, it would not be significantly different from other initiatives.
Needless to say, most of the New Southbound Policy’s initiatives are unable to stimulate passion and voluntary participation among Taiwanese.
It is regrettable, given that the design of the policy was ambitious and farsighted, with an ultimate goal of fostering “economic community” between Taiwan and the nations covered by the policy.
To facilitate its long-term sustainability, generate tangible deliverables and garner substantial domestic support, some adjustments should be made.
First, the political resolve to carry out the policy from the top seems insufficient. The political determination from the top to mobilize this gigantic bureaucratic system has only changed the distribution of funding, but has not actually boosted bureaucrats’ recognition of the policy.
If the policy is one of Tsai’s top priorities, she should take a leading role by regularly expounding on its importance, which would significantly enhance recognition among officials.
With consistent political impetus from the top, it would be easier to overcome bureaucratic indolence, while inducing more support and enthusiasm.
Second, the policy cannot be successful without human connections. However, current practices obviously lack the “sensitivity of the human touch.”
One key feature of the policy that is distinct from its predecessor, the “Go South” policy, lies in its emphasis on “people-to-people” connections.
Although it is laudable to hold forums and conferences to facilitate exchanges with target nations, it is more critical to alter the mindset of Taiwanese by truly viewing people in target nations as friends and partners.
It is questionable whether political leaders and officials have actually kept the policy in mind and delivered timely regard or assistance amid recent unfortunate incidents in these nations, such as the rescue of a soccer team from the cave in Thailand and the devastating floods in Cambodia.
If the government can pay its regards with a NT$20 million donation to the people affected by flooding in Osaka, Japan, why have virtually no prominent leaders or officials expressed the nation’s sincere concern over similar trials in nations covered by the policy?
It would be difficult to sustain long-term friendships with target nations if the government perceives the policy as a series of key performance indicators to be fulfilled, but does not wholeheartedly commit to the people in them.
Third, the policy execution is problematic. Since its inception, its policymaking mechanism has evolved and shifted from the presidential level to the Cabinet level.
The Tsai administration has placed the mission of implementing the policy on the Executive Yuan’s Office of Trade Negotiations. However, this office is also in charge of all economic negotiations, including Taiwan’s bid to join the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership and the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership, as well as negotiations with the US over steel and aluminum tariffs.
Overburdening one office is likely to undermine its performance and put policy outcomes in jeopardy.
Furthermore, the office serves as the policy’s coordinating unit among ministries, but possesses no power, authority or funding to leverage other entities. It would be a miracle if this mechanism produced consistent and coordinated achievements.
Fourth, the policy is short on inspirational and prominent initiatives. Critics have claimed that it provides no eye-catching focal point. Despite five flagship projects and three potential areas of involvement outlined by the New Southbound Policy, most people feel “indifferent” and see no relevance to it.
Given that invoking the public’s awareness on the significance of the policy is vital for its sustainability, the government should consider overhauling the practice of sporadic, intermittent, scattered, uncoordinated and unattractive bureaucratic routine into consistent, regular, concentrated, coordinated and appealing, carnival-like events.
Fifth, it is pivotal to reinforce public awareness of the policy’s importance and it is the responsibility of political leaders and the government to put in more effort.
It is pathetic that many promotional video clips have so few views. Even the policy’s Facebook page has fewer than 1,000 fans. With few updates and unattractive posts, the page seems to foresee its gloomy prospects.
These indicators reveal a pitiable reality that the policy remains in “bureaucratic operation” mode, rather than being a promising vision that draws participation.
Sixth, the implementation is struck in the myth of key performance indicators and misplacement of talent. Indeed, indicators are vital for the government to trace, monitor and evaluate policy performances, but they are not the way to stimulate and encourage novel thinking and creativity.
As a state with limited resources, Taiwan needs to play smart, be dexterous and flexible to stand out from the competition. Excessive emphasis on key performance indicators only breeds conservatism and undercuts officials’ passion for innovative ideas.
Furthermore, the Tsai administration has been criticized for using personnel involved in the Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement with China to run the New Southbound Policy. It would be another miracle to expect that the same people could suddenly make a U-turn and become professionals on the new policy’s target nations.
This is a slap in the face for experts on the target nations, not just because their hard work has not been recognized, but also because their expertise cannot be fully brought into play when the nation needs them most.
To re-energize the policy, I propose three things:
First, carry out an organizational restructuring and appoint a senior official to take exclusive charge of the policy, supported by sufficient personnel, budget and power to guide and execute plans.
Second, construct a distinctive image of the nation and market it to target nations. That would boost Taiwan’s positive reputation overseas, while facilitating friendship and business exchanges. However, a good image needs to be embodied with good deeds and a unique human touch.
Third, to radically heighten the policy’s “sense of relevance” among Taiwanese, convening an annual mega-New Southbound Policy expo in Taiwan might be a good solution.
The expo could provide a unique venue for people from Taiwan and the target nations to engage in discussions and arrange cooperation on various topics.
Such an annual event would improve Taiwanese appreciation and engagement of the policy.
By bringing the public into the expo, a virtuous cycle of involvement would not only become the focal point, but would also deliver many concrete outcomes.
Most importantly, it would pave the way for sustainable friendships and harmonious relations between Taiwan and New Southbound Policy nations.
Eric Chiou is an associate professor of international political economy at National Chiao Tung University.
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations