Today’s rally in protest against a “one China” market and calling for a referendum on the soon to be signed cross-strait economic cooperation framework agreement (ECFA) appears likely to attract large crowds. President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) and his ministers, for their part, have not sat idly by in the face of mounting public opposition to an ECFA. Government departments have been spending taxpayers’ money to trumpet the supposed benefits of the agreement, while at the same time speeding up negotiations with China to get the pact signed as soon as possible.
On Tuesday, Japanese business strategist Kenichi Ohmae was invited by the Office of the President to give a lecture. Ohmae used the occasion to extol the virtues of an ECFA, describing it as a finely concocted dose of vitamins that would revive Taiwan’s economy and keep it on the track to success.
Attending the talk, Ma lauded Ohmae as a master of future trends, but many things the supposed guru said raise questions about his understanding of Taiwan and China. For instance, he said that Asia as a whole is becoming more and more dependent on China, but that Taiwan, with its distinct advantages, has avoided becoming excessively reliant on its giant neighbor. He should be aware that China’s “united front” strategy is to use economic means to draw Taiwan more closely into its orbit. Once Taiwan has become completely dependent, it will be firmly in China’s grasp.
Prominent Chinese economist and government adviser Hu Angang (胡鞍鋼) once said that Taiwan needs trade with China like a diabetic needs insulin and questioned whether Taiwan could survive without regular doses. He added that if China were to start a trade war with Taiwan, it would be over within seven days. Ohmae would do well to learn a bit more about China’s strategy to force unification on Taiwan by economic means.
He went on to say that the Taiwan must forge ahead with signing the ECFA. Once an ECFA is signed, he said, it will evolve into a free-trade agreement (FTA), allowing Taiwan to compete on a level playing field.
It appears that Ohmae failed to do his homework before seeking to enlighten Ma and his government officials. If he had done so, surely he would know why the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and Communist-led governments are signing an ECFA, which is not a country-to-country agreement, instead of an FTA, which is a pact between two countries.
Moreover, Chinese officials have already made it very clear that once the ECFA is signed, Taiwan will have to obtain China’s approval before signing an FTA with any other country. Yet Ohmae seemed to be completely unaware of this. His seminar was clearly intended to cast the ECFA in the best possible light, without mentioning any drawbacks. Only bureaucrats serving in Ma’s government, shrouded as they are in self-deception, could stand to hear such a one-sided sermon.
We suggest that Ohmae take advantage of his visit to Taiwan to do some on-the-ground research. China paints a marvelous picture of an ECFA’s benefits and Ohmae himself describes the proposed agreement as packed with vitamins needed for Taiwan’s continued good health. He should ask himself why, despite all the propaganda, most Taiwanese people still harbor doubts. Why do they still worry that Taiwan’s economy will become locked into the Chinese market, that job opportunities will dry up and real wages fall and that Taiwan’s sovereignty will be threatened?
This weekend’s protest march opposing a “one China” market and calling for an ECFA referendum can be seen as an expression of these worries. Opposing a “one China” market means rejecting both dependence on a single Chinese market and the so-called “one-China principle.”
If Taiwan’s economy is locked into a single Chinese market, its industries and jobs will be hollowed out even more than they are already and the national economy and people’s livelihood will suffer. If Taiwan’s sovereignty is locked into a single China, Taiwanese will lose the right to determine their own future. In the end, they will be like lambs to the slaughter. That is why so many people insist on exercising their constitutional right to a referendum.
Ohmae hails from a sovereign, independent nation, so surely he wouldn’t suggest that the Taiwanese should just bow down and accept this fate.
When he ran for president, Ma said that Taiwan’s future should be decided by the 23 million Taiwanese, without any interference from the Chinese communists. Now, however, he has gone back on those words. Ma’s administration has evaded public and legislative oversight by negotiating with China in secret. By so doing, it will bind Taiwan to China, first economically and then politically.
What Taiwan gets in the process is neither favors from China nor Ohmae’s so-called “vitamins.” A more likely outcome is Hu’s “diabetes.” Anyone with the slightest medical knowledge knows that if Taiwan had diabetes, then it would depend on China’s insulin to keep it alive. In that kind of relationship, if Taiwan happened to offend China in any way, China could cut off the insulin supply and Taiwan would perish. Once Taiwan’s sickness became incurable, China could negate its sovereignty with ease.
The Taiwanese public have long since wised up to Ma’s desire for eventual unification. It seems they are smarter than Ohmae, who, despite his reputation as a master of future trends, seems to have little idea about where an ECFA with communist China is likely to lead.
TRANSLATED BY TAIJING WU AND JULIAN CLEGG
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
It is being said every second day: The ongoing recall campaign in Taiwan — where citizens are trying to collect enough signatures to trigger re-elections for a number of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators — is orchestrated by the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), or even President William Lai (賴清德) himself. The KMT makes the claim, and foreign media and analysts repeat it. However, they never show any proof — because there is not any. It is alarming how easily academics, journalists and experts toss around claims that amount to accusing a democratic government of conspiracy — without a shred of evidence. These
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
RSS