Less than two months ago, Premier Wu Den-yih (吳敦義) told reporters that he himself had a hard time explaining the so-called framework behind the proposed economic cooperation framework agreement (ECFA) with China. Wu’s humility implied a personal lack of understanding of the trade pact, which in a way should be excusable, since the Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) administration, in pursuing a top-down policymaking approach, has tried to sandwich all of its lengthy, sector-by-sector trade negotiations with China into one comprehensive mega-pact.
That has certainly led to a lack of understanding among the general public.
Wu’s confession also demonstrated a sincere desire to bridge the cracked channels of communication between the government and the public before the pact is deliberated on.
After all, a lot of myths remain about the deal, which must be clarified to pinpoint potential benefits and dangers to the local economy before Taiwan enters into such an agreement.
But on Friday, Wu went to the other extreme, saying that “Taiwan will be drowned or face serious economic danger” if the ECFA isn’t inked immediately.
He also urged the public not to think or talk negatively about the deal before it is struck, likening such thinking to “a couple who are about to tie the knot and are talking about nothing but divorce.”
If the ECFA is to be a marriage, it should be a well thought out one. A prenuptial agreement is often necessary, but that does not suggest that the marriage will fall apart; instead, it provides some guarantee that it will not end unpleasantly.
One must be careful entering into a marriage, let alone a comprehensive trade agreement that may take jobs from local workers or squeeze out investment.
That said, we should not ignore this window of opportunity to normalize trade with China. Instead, we should consider any potential downside and find ways to prepare for it — such as putting in place an “exit” mechanism in case the ECFA doesn’t work or China fails to honor its promises regarding dumping, trade disputes and market access.
Doing so will ensure a safety net to minimize any negative consequences from the inking of the ECFA, without sacrificing any of the deal’s potential benefits to Taiwan, as several Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT)-associated experts have suggested.
It is understandable that the KMT government wishes to “give face” and create an amicable atmosphere before it enters into official ECFA negotiations with China in the next few months.
For a responsible government to represent Taiwan and sit behind the negotiation table with another nation, however, the priority must be the national interest, not face or atmosphere.
If the ECFA were simply a party-to-party matter, no one would give a second thought about the KMT making a blind date with the Communist Party of China.
Now that the ECFA is a matter of national interest, however, the least we should expect from the government is to demonstrate some leadership and inform the public of its “plan B.”
China has not been a top-tier issue for much of the second Trump administration. Instead, Trump has focused considerable energy on Ukraine, Israel, Iran, and defending America’s borders. At home, Trump has been busy passing an overhaul to America’s tax system, deporting unlawful immigrants, and targeting his political enemies. More recently, he has been consumed by the fallout of a political scandal involving his past relationship with a disgraced sex offender. When the administration has focused on China, there has not been a consistent throughline in its approach or its public statements. This lack of overarching narrative likely reflects a combination
Father’s Day, as celebrated around the world, has its roots in the early 20th century US. In 1910, the state of Washington marked the world’s first official Father’s Day. Later, in 1972, then-US president Richard Nixon signed a proclamation establishing the third Sunday of June as a national holiday honoring fathers. Many countries have since followed suit, adopting the same date. In Taiwan, the celebration takes a different form — both in timing and meaning. Taiwan’s Father’s Day falls on Aug. 8, a date chosen not for historical events, but for the beauty of language. In Mandarin, “eight eight” is pronounced
US President Donald Trump’s alleged request that Taiwanese President William Lai (賴清德) not stop in New York while traveling to three of Taiwan’s diplomatic allies, after his administration also rescheduled a visit to Washington by the minister of national defense, sets an unwise precedent and risks locking the US into a trajectory of either direct conflict with the People’s Republic of China (PRC) or capitulation to it over Taiwan. Taiwanese authorities have said that no plans to request a stopover in the US had been submitted to Washington, but Trump shared a direct call with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平)
It is difficult to think of an issue that has monopolized political commentary as intensely as the recall movement and the autopsy of the July 26 failures. These commentaries have come from diverse sources within Taiwan and abroad, from local Taiwanese members of the public and academics, foreign academics resident in Taiwan, and overseas Taiwanese working in US universities. There is a lack of consensus that Taiwan’s democracy is either dying in ashes or has become a phoenix rising from the ashes, nurtured into existence by civic groups and rational voters. There are narratives of extreme polarization and an alarming
RSS