One would be hard pressed to find anyone in Taiwan who is against making money. Likewise one would be hard pressed to find anyone in Taiwan who is against trade between nations. That said, there are trade agreements and then there are trade agreements and among these, certainly, not all agreements are equal — some might be unequal and some can even be disastrously unequal. This is the situation that Taiwan now finds itself in as the critical consideration of the cross-strait service trade agreement and the occupation of the Legislative Yuan reach their conclusions.
President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) administration has from the very beginning been doing all in its power to impose this trade agreement on the nation without proper legislative review. The students, opposition parties and others have been opposed to this ham-fisted way of running a country. For them this signifies an attempted return to the old authoritarian one-party state ways of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) — the days of the White Terror and Martial Law. Throughout the past standoff, all sides had called upon PR agents, spin-doctors and pundits of all sorts to aid their cause, but beneath this, the real issue has been about more than trade, it has been that of representative democracy and a government that thinks it can subvert that.
With more resources, the Ma government has of course been able to call on a greater variety of commentators and pundits to bolster its position. These even included American Institute in Taiwan (AIT) affiliates David Brown and Richard Bush, who take its side over the agreement. However, rank and sheer volume do not mean such commentators are correct. The whole business recalls the well-known business proposition of the chicken to the pig. The chicken suggests that they go into business together.
What product, asks the pig. The chicken states happily, “We can make ham and egg sandwiches and market them. They are very popular and we will both get rich.” The pig declines, saying, “Thanks, but no thanks, I don’t mind profit, but getting rich in the way that you suggest is a slanted agreement. From your side, you are only involved, but for me it is a life-ending commitment.” For the Ma government and its pundits, the standpoint on trade that they have been promoting reflects the involvement of the chicken. For the people of Taiwan, it sounds too much like they are being asked to be the sacrificed pig.
Hence the impasse. Such trade promotion is of course what is echoed by the majority of “chicken pundits” outside Taiwan and Ma continues to refuse to let the dangers of this trade agreement receive proper examination. However as has been contended, this has not been just a matter of those for trade and those against. It even suggests the difference between a president who is involved with but not committed to the country he represents.
This precarious position also reflects the wider plight and position of Taiwan over the past six decades. Taiwan is a mid-sized nation; it is larger in population than 75 percent of the countries in the UN. Its economy places it in the top 20 countries of the world. It has a thriving, hard-won democracy and yet because of the financial pressure and politicking of the People’s Republic of China (PRC), it is at risk. Furthermore, as Taiwan strives for long overdue international recognition it also watches the failed promises of democracy the PRC gave Hong Kong and the way in which the people of Hong Kong classify the Chinese — as locusts streaming across their border.
The more things change, the more they stay the same. Back in 2007, this writer joined four other scholars and advocates of Taiwan on a tour of seven major capitals in Europe. The purpose was simple and direct: We sought to gain economic space and recognition for Taiwan and to balance the continued efforts of the PRC to isolate the nation. In each of those capitals, we met with and spoke to legislators, members of think tanks, educators, the media, etc, and as we did so we found a striking difference in reception.
The capitals we visited were Brussels, Paris, Prague, Berlin, Warsaw, Budapest and London. In Brussels, Paris, Berlin and London the majority of responses were similar to the standpoint on involvement characteristic of “chicken pundits”: “Don’t rock the boat; don’t upset China. Just let trade flow and we will all get rich,” was their major mantra. In sharp contrast to this was the reception we received in Prague, Warsaw and Budapest. These people had a completely different way of thinking. Their countries had experienced decades of life in the Soviet bloc. They understood trade and economics from the standpoint of a pig living in a communist socialist system.
This is why Taiwanese must ask questions of their president and the KMT. The trade agreement has not yet had proper legislative review. For Ma to claim that it cannot be taken back is nonsensical. Why does he say that? Has a secret deal been brokered that he would have to renege on? Is the Ma government so desperate to boost its ratings and bolster flagging economic promises that it would endanger the country? Is it simply a matter of saving face for Ma? Have certain select industries been promised a big slice of the pie at the risk of the others? With regards to this deal Ma seems to take the chicken standpoint by only being involved with Taiwan but not committed to it.
The students and all who support them, on the other hand, have not been in this protest for financial gain. In many respects like the pig, they realize the risk to their future and know they have a lot more to lose. By their commitment the students are putting their education and career on hold. They, like the public as a whole, sense they are being asked to commit to an unexamined trade deal where a few may profit, but at a great cost to the rest. They also see that their democracy is at stake. What of China? China is more like the wolf looking to enjoy a nice ham sandwich.
Jerome Keating is a commentator in Taipei.
This article has been corrected since it was first published.
In the event of a war with China, Taiwan has some surprisingly tough defenses that could make it as difficult to tackle as a porcupine: A shoreline dotted with swamps, rocks and concrete barriers; conscription for all adult men; highways and airports that are built to double as hardened combat facilities. This porcupine has a soft underbelly, though, and the war in Iran is exposing it: energy. About 39,000 ships dock at Taiwan’s ports each year, more than the 30,000 that transit the Strait of Hormuz. About one-fifth of their inbound tonnage is coal, oil, refined fuels and liquefied natural gas (LNG),
On Monday, the day before Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) departed on her visit to China, the party released a promotional video titled “Only with peace can we ‘lie flat’” to highlight its desire to have peace across the Taiwan Strait. However, its use of the expression “lie flat” (tang ping, 躺平) drew sarcastic comments, with critics saying it sounded as if the party was “bowing down” to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Amid the controversy over the opposition parties blocking proposed defense budgets, Cheng departed for China after receiving an invitation from the CCP, with a meeting with
To counter the CCP’s escalating threats, Taiwan must build a national consensus and demonstrate the capability and the will to fight. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) often leans on a seductive mantra to soften its threats, such as “Chinese do not kill Chinese.” The slogan is designed to frame territorial conquest (annexation) as a domestic family matter. A look at the historical ledger reveals a different truth. For the CCP, being labeled “family” has never been a guarantee of safety; it has been the primary prerequisite for state-sanctioned slaughter. From the forced starvation of 150,000 civilians at the Siege of Changchun
The two major opposition parties, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), jointly announced on Tuesday last week that former TPP lawmaker Chang Chi-kai (張啟楷) would be their joint candidate for Chiayi mayor, following polling conducted earlier this month. It is the first case of blue-white (KMT-TPP) cooperation in selecting a joint candidate under an agreement signed by their chairpersons last month. KMT and TPP supporters have blamed their 2024 presidential election loss on failing to decide on a joint candidate, which ended in a dramatic breakdown with participants pointing fingers, calling polls unfair, sobbing and walking
RSS