A symposium was held in Taipei on Aug. 9 to evaluate the country's economic policy and development during the reign of the late president Chiang Ching-kuo (蔣經國). It made people nostalgic about Taiwan's 16 years of strong economic performance between Chiang's takeover of the Executive Yuan in 1972 and his death in 1988.
It was a remarkably successful period in terms of common economic indicators -- economic growth rate, unemployment rate, income distribution, commodity prices and others. However, the remarkable success of this period should perhaps not all be credited to the authorities. There is continuity to history. Perhaps the remarkable success during this period was at the cost of subsequent ill effects. Besides, major problems were probably hidden behind those eye-catching numbers.
As everyone knows, the foundation of the so-called economic "miracle" of Taiwan was lain when the late Yin Chung-jung (尹仲容) led foreign-trade reform, or the so-called "first round of economic liberalization," from 1958 to 1962. However, the late Chiang Shuo-chieh (蔣碩傑), a former member of Academia Sinica, was not happy with what he viewed as a lackluster liberalization proces, as well as the inability of some systems and measures -- government-owned enterprises, finance and taxation -- to operate in acoordance with the reform.
After Yin passed away in 1963, the protection and control policies that were gradually lifted in the late 1950s turned around and went in the opposite direction and the situation worsened. The fixed "balanced" exchange rates and the system of foreign-exchange settlement remained the same. The prelude to the free-trade policy in the early 1960s became an accomplice of new mercantilism. The result is that the trade surplus increased year after year and foreign-exchange reserves accumulated along the way. In the early 1980s, the foreign-exchange reserves accumulated so quickly that the US opposed it.
Under the strong pressures of liberalization and internationalization, the government first pretended to be kind, then hesitated about what move to make next and finally looked upon the situation from the sidelines. The defense lines of fixed exchange rates and the system of foreign-exchange settlement finally broke down in the mid-1980s.
As the value of the NT dollar appreciated considerably, the export industry which was previously protected got into extreme difficulty. At that time, foreign exchange reserves accumulated over the years by the Central Bank of China led slowly to a currency overflow, thereby creating speculation in stocks and real estate.
Knowing where the profits lay, many business people would rather manipulate stock trading; they were not willing to help the export industry meet its challenge. The government attempted and accomplished nothing in the face of this unusual economic crisis, although it had huge sums of foreign exchange reserves.
All of these happenings finally led to the unbalanced development of industries, an explosive growth of big businesses and a corrupt social climate. It is difficult to explain the seriousness of these ill effects.
The above comments are part of an essay written by the late Hsing Mu-huan (邢慕寰), another member of Academia Sinica, in June 1995. The particular period Hsing described includes the entire term of Chiang Ching-kuo's rule. When he said that it is difficult to explain the seriousness of ill effects during this period, Hsing meant to indicate a deflationary phenomenon that has lasted until today after the burst of the speculative bubble.
Moreover, although the macro-economic indicators in the 1970s were satisfactory, economic growth rates manifested explosive rises and falls. The progress of labor productivity also tended to be sluggish. In particular, technological progress also slowed down quickly.
Another thing that should come up for discussion is the widely praised "Ten Key Infrastructure Projects" that started in 1974. The investment amount of this heroic undertaking reached more than NT$200 billion in five years. Because the first oil crisis that shocked the whole world was taking place at the same time, the giant investment of the Ten Key Infrastructure Projects happened to offset the deficit of private-sector spending and minimize the effect of the oil crisis on the domestic economy. It was an unexpected gain. A serious crowding-out effect and inflation could have happened if the implementation of the Ten Key Infrastructure Projects took place during a period of economic boom. Moreover, we should not give only accolades for the Ten Key Infrastructure Projects because there were also many project cases that proved to be unsuccessful.
In any case, it is very difficult to assess the development, merits and demerits of a certain historical period. Different people have different views, which are OK for reference only.
Wu Hui-lin is a research fellow at the Chung Hua Institution for Economic Research.
Translated by Grace Shaw
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has long been expansionist and contemptuous of international law. Under Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), the CCP regime has become more despotic, coercive and punitive. As part of its strategy to annex Taiwan, Beijing has sought to erase the island democracy’s international identity by bribing countries to sever diplomatic ties with Taipei. One by one, China has peeled away Taiwan’s remaining diplomatic partners, leaving just 12 countries (mostly small developing states) and the Vatican recognizing Taiwan as a sovereign nation. Taiwan’s formal international space has shrunk dramatically. Yet even as Beijing has scored diplomatic successes, its overreach
For Taiwan, the ongoing US and Israeli strikes on Iranian targets are a warning signal: When a major power stretches the boundaries of self-defense, smaller states feel the tremors first. Taiwan’s security rests on two pillars: US deterrence and the credibility of international law. The first deters coercion from China. The second legitimizes Taiwan’s place in the international community. One is material. The other is moral. Both are indispensable. Under the UN Charter, force is lawful only in response to an armed attack or with UN Security Council authorization. Even pre-emptive self-defense — long debated — requires a demonstrably imminent
Since being re-elected, US President Donald Trump has consistently taken concrete action to counter China and to safeguard the interests of the US and other democratic nations. The attacks on Iran, the earlier capture of deposed of Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro and efforts to remove Chinese influence from the Panama Canal all demonstrate that, as tensions with Beijing intensify, Washington has adopted a hardline stance aimed at weakening its power. Iran and Venezuela are important allies and major oil suppliers of China, and the US has effectively decapitated both. The US has continuously strengthened its military presence in the Philippines. Japanese Prime
After “Operation Absolute Resolve” to capture former Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro, the US joined Israel on Saturday last week in launching “Operation Epic Fury” to remove Iranian supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and his theocratic regime leadership team. The two blitzes are widely believed to be a prelude to US President Donald Trump changing the geopolitical landscape in the Indo-Pacific region, targeting China’s rise. In the National Security Strategic report released in December last year, the Trump administration made it clear that the US would focus on “restoring American pre-eminence in the Western hemisphere,” and “competing with China economically and militarily