When the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) so vigorously campaigned for Taiwan to sign the Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA) with China two years ago, it not only viewed it as a way to improve economic and political ties across the Taiwan Strait, but also as a major political achievement.
The KMT thought the ECFA would boost its votes in last year’s special municipality elections and January’s presidential and legislative elections. However, the results of the elections in New Taipei City (新北市) and Taipei City at the end of last year suggest the ECFA had no apparent effect, especially when compared with the lively debates concerning the Taipei International Flora Expo: Local administrative issues completely marginalized the far more national concern of cross-strait relations.
In the past, political views regarding cross-strait relations, unification and independence were a dividing factor and a major source of competition in domestic politics. However, the Taiwanese-versus-Chinese identity debate has not been the only wellspring of political momentum. Nevertheless, at the national level the issue of unification or independence has restructured the party-political spectrum.
Now that cross-strait relations are ostensibly warmer, why isn’t it being discussed in election campaigns? What seemed to be a thriving KMT is now dancing to a new tune. Do the difficulties the KMT faced during last year’s municipality elections herald any significant shift in the public’s understanding or opinion of cross-strait relations?
The issue of cross-strait relations under the KMT is no longer simply an issue of unification versus independence, but rather a relationship dealing with special interests and material gains. Although the ECFA has a tinge of political opacity, it is basically an agreement about China cutting import tariffs for Taiwan.
However, the fact that the ECFA blatantly favors Taiwan should be an omen of how we are being forced to see only the benefits of more intimate cross-strait relations, instead of what it means further down the line. Whether it is high-level Chinese officials leading purchase groups visiting Taiwan — such as the governor of Shandong Province last month, the deputy chairman of the Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Straits the month before or the Chinese Minister of Culture, who advocated a cultural version of the ECFA — it all boils down to economic determinism. The more Taiwan relies on China economically, the easier political integration becomes.
The problem is that if economic ties are reduced to a relationship purely about material gains, then the previously dichotomous pan-blue pro-unification and pan-green pro-independence political structure becomes useless in explaining the effect of cross-strait relations on Taiwan. Moreover, this newly formed relationship will become a critically important element in the restructuring of the pan-blue and pan-green political terrain.
The redistribution of wealth and the more apparent distinctions among social classes that the ECFA ushers in will not simply develop according to society’s current ethno-linguistic groups, pan-blue versus pan-green or even north versus south.
The newly polarized demographics of an exploitative existence expressed in the binary advantaged--disadvantaged system might very well replace our conventional notions of national identity and independence---unification politics, eventually causing progress in cross-strait relations to backfire. This explains why the issue of the ECFA lost its appeal in the special municipality elections last year, and why it is still not clear how it will affect the presidential and legislative elections at the beginning of next year.
Hsu Yung-ming is an assistant professor of political science at Soochow University.
As Taiwan’s domestic political crisis deepens, the opposition Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) have proposed gutting the country’s national spending, with steep cuts to the critical foreign and defense ministries. While the blue-white coalition alleges that it is merely responding to voters’ concerns about corruption and mismanagement, of which there certainly has been plenty under Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) and KMT-led governments, the rationales for their proposed spending cuts lay bare the incoherent foreign policy of the KMT-led coalition. Introduced on the eve of US President Donald Trump’s inauguration, the KMT’s proposed budget is a terrible opening
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus in the Legislative Yuan has made an internal decision to freeze NT$1.8 billion (US$54.7 million) of the indigenous submarine project’s NT$2 billion budget. This means that up to 90 percent of the budget cannot be utilized. It would only be accessible if the legislature agrees to lift the freeze sometime in the future. However, for Taiwan to construct its own submarines, it must rely on foreign support for several key pieces of equipment and technology. These foreign supporters would also be forced to endure significant pressure, infiltration and influence from Beijing. In other words,
“I compare the Communist Party to my mother,” sings a student at a boarding school in a Tibetan region of China’s Qinghai province. “If faith has a color,” others at a different school sing, “it would surely be Chinese red.” In a major story for the New York Times this month, Chris Buckley wrote about the forced placement of hundreds of thousands of Tibetan children in boarding schools, where many suffer physical and psychological abuse. Separating these children from their families, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) aims to substitute itself for their parents and for their religion. Buckley’s reporting is
Last week, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), together holding more than half of the legislative seats, cut about NT$94 billion (US$2.85 billion) from the yearly budget. The cuts include 60 percent of the government’s advertising budget, 10 percent of administrative expenses, 3 percent of the military budget, and 60 percent of the international travel, overseas education and training allowances. In addition, the two parties have proposed freezing the budgets of many ministries and departments, including NT$1.8 billion from the Ministry of National Defense’s Indigenous Defense Submarine program — 90 percent of the program’s proposed
RSS