This past May Chinese Vice Premier Qian Qichen (
Qian also emphasized that direct links are an economic issue, and should not be influenced by political factors. Qian's painstaking emphasis on the point that direct links are an economic issue was of course especially made for the ears of visitors from Taipei who desperately pine for direct links.
He understood that these visitors have consistently called for the opening up of direct links in Taiwan on the grounds that "economic [issues] should be treated as such," believing that the current ban on direct links is political in nature and the cause of the current economic downturn in Taiwan.
Qian, of course, seized the opportunity to echo that stance, so that these Taiwanese businessmen would have be able to talk about it with a stronger voice, and pressure Taiwan's government after they get home.
For now, let us not talk about the threat to our country's sovereignty and international status that treating directs links as a domestic issue would bring. Instead, let us analyze the pros and cons of direct links from a purely economic perspective.
In the economic domain, people, unfortunately, will often accept certain opinions as the supreme truth without thinking critically about it. Millions and millions of innocent people have suffered as a result.
Communism is a most glaring example. Marxism stormed the world in 19th and 20th century. Sixty years ago in China, anyone who opposed Marxism was deemed an enemy of the people.
However, the experience of Russia, Eastern Europe and China, shows that Marxism is a mistake because it overlooks the selfish and greedy nature of human beings. It eventually brought pain and suffering and massive loss of life.
In the past decade or so, some seemingly correct yet off-the-point economic ideas have surfaced in Taiwan. Among them are "economic [issues] should be treated as such," and "save Taiwan with cross-strait direct links."
The relationships between the economy, politics and human nature are an everlasting truth across times and cultures.
Yet, there are still those who insist that politics and economy should be treated as independent subjects.
They elaborate extensively on the theory and extend its application indefinitely.
If this theory is right, then the US' embargo against Cuba, and the termination of air links between Israel and Arab states would all be short-sighted government policies.
In recent years, these people have also called for the opening up of cross-strait direct links. They use theories on the mutual benefits of trade and different economic models to make the point that direct links would be beneficial to Taiwan.
They seem to have either forgotten the fact that the other side is much bigger than us in terms of political and economic resources.
They ignore the other side's obvious attempt to engulf Taiwan, and the lack of national identity in Taiwan. The various models of economic predictions they use do not take into consideration these factors.
Therefore, if conclusions are made purely on the basis of economic models, then the fatal mistake made by Karl Marx will be repeated. Irreparable damage to Taiwan's economy will result, causing harm to everyone in Taiwan. Will direct links be good for Taiwan's tourism? Our countrymen must understand that China is not yet a free country.
The number of tourists from China that can come to Taiwan will be determined strictly by Beijing.
In the year and a half since the opening of "small direct links," several thousand people have travelled from Kinmen to China. However, the number of tourists traveling from China to Kinmen is zero. This proves that whether tourists will come and how many of them will come are uniformly determined by Beijing's policies. Once direct links open, tourists from China may come, because it is compatible with Beijing's policy of engulfing Taiwan.
But, even if the number of tourists from China to Taiwan reached 500,000, the number of Taiwanese traveling to China will probably be between 1.5 million to 2 million.
Obviously, while direct links will bring some business for a few tourism agencies, in the grand scheme of things, Taiwan will still be on the losing end. This is true especially in view of the fatal blow to the tourism industry caused by a decline in domestic travel by Taiwanese.
Will direct links benefit the real-estate industry in Taiwan? The government is also considering the possibility of opening up the real-estate market to Chinese capital.
Once direct links begin, perhaps some Chinese will become media darlings by buying property in Taiwan. But, the people of Taiwan must realize that China imposes strict foreign exchange controls.
The number of Chinese coming to Taiwan to buy real estate will be limited.
However, if the number of Taiwanese traveling to Shanghai increases as a result of direct links, the number of Taiwanese businessmen buying property near West Lake in China will sharply increase.
Then the price of real estate in Taiwan will decline. The wealth of Taiwanese will depreciate in general.
It would certainly be a disaster for both the banking and real estate sectors. Under the same logic, the stock market would also lose its vitality.
The decline in real estate prices and the stock market would without question cause domestic consumption to fall, affecting nearly all industries in Taiwan.
More businesses would be forced to relocate to China. Production would fall and unemployment rise, further accelerating decline in consumption.
By then, "keep [one's] roots in Taiwan (
The former will shut down one by one. This is how Hong Kong's economic downturn has unfolded over the past five years. Ever since Taiwan's government allowed investments in China by Taiwanese business in 1990, Taiwan has suffered the pain of economic marginalization in the form of low economic growth, stagnant cash flows and excessive bank loans.
The pain has increased along with the Sinization of Taiwanese businesses. In view of Hong Kong's experience, opening up direct links will surely increase the severity and the speed of Taiwan's marginalization. To the people of Taiwan, this would of course be very damaging.
Obviously, the ban on direct links in the past have inconvenienced Taiwanese business with ambitions in China.
However, the ban has also served as an economic safety valve and an insulator against threats from China.
At a time when China is using its economy and military to intensify its unification rhetoric, Taiwan's government should give top priority to the interests of everyone in Taiwan.
Do not forget that the biggest responsibility of a government is to defend the country and protect the welfare of the people. The interests of the businesses come second.
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
On a quiet lane in Taipei’s central Daan District (大安), an otherwise unremarkable high-rise is marked by a police guard and a tawdry A4 printout from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs indicating an “embassy area.” Keen observers would see the emblem of the Holy See, one of Taiwan’s 12 so-called “diplomatic allies.” Unlike Taipei’s other embassies and quasi-consulates, no national flag flies there, nor is there a plaque indicating what country’s embassy this is. Visitors hoping to sign a condolence book for the late Pope Francis would instead have to visit the Italian Trade Office, adjacent to Taipei 101. The death of
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then
As the highest elected official in the nation’s capital, Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an (蔣萬安) is the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) candidate-in-waiting for a presidential bid. With the exception of Taichung Mayor Lu Shiow-yen (盧秀燕), Chiang is the most likely KMT figure to take over the mantle of the party leadership. All the other usual suspects, from Legislative Speaker Han Kuo-yu (韓國瑜) to New Taipei City Mayor Hou You-yi (侯友宜) to KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) have already been rejected at the ballot box. Given such high expectations, Chiang should be demonstrating resolve, calm-headedness and political wisdom in how he faces tough
RSS