The three-day national affairs conference on economics and trade, late last month, focused on two main issues: Taiwan’s economic development strategy in globalization and Taiwan’s participation in regional economic integration and its cross-strait economics and trade strategy.
The conference was met with opposition by those who felt it was a compromise on the part of the government to the call by students involved in the Sunflower movement protest for a public conference on the Constitution.
President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) said that the nation faced many challenges and had few bargaining chips, and he appealed to the dissenting voices to set aside any prejudices. If Taiwan is to survive, there is no room for fighting, and there is no time for prevarication; there is only time to work together and seek the best way forward, Ma said.
Premier Jiang Yi-huah (江宜樺) also said that the nation cannot be allowed to founder or run aground, and that people should exercise the greatest degree of patience and tolerance. Where there is disagreement, the nation should resort not to conflict, but to democratic mechanisms, Jiang said. He added that everyone should regard the conference in a positive way, and not as a political ploy or a waste of time.
Former minister of economic affairs Chang Chia-juch (張家祝) said that the government needs to be particularly cautious when it comes to cross-strait trade relations and its China policy in general, and make sure that comprehensive measures are in place, if the nation is to avoid being over-reliant on the Chinese market.
National Development Council Minister Kuan Chung-ming (管中閔) said that Taiwan should try to join the Trans-Pacific Partnership and the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership as soon as possible and continue to further cross-strait economic and trade cooperation while reinforcing cross-strait agreement oversight, risk management and policy communication.
Evidently, there is a discrepancy between how Chang and Kuan feel the nation should proceed when it comes to economics and trade: Chang favors a diversification of risk, while Kuan prefers cross-strait trade cooperation as a basis for progress.
However, if the government wants the national affairs conference on economics and trade to mean anything, it will have to reflect upon four key points.
First, the growth rate of Taiwan’s stock market is closely tied to that of the US, so Taiwan should concentrate more on the global economy for future economic and trade development and avoid excessive reliance on China. That being said, where is the government’s risk diversification strategy?
Second, the biggest problem Taiwanese face is the rising cost of living coupled with wage stagnation, together with the economy becoming increasingly weighted to the service sector. Was this conference actually relevant to the real situation ordinary people have found themselves in?
Third, each sector has its own needs, and this means a different economic and trade development strategy for each. Where was the discussion of different, tailored strategies during the conference?
Finally, exchange rates and interest rates are two important variables for trade strategy. Again, where was the discussion of these issues at the conference?
How has this national affairs conference on economics and trade left people feeling? Did the discussion have any real relevance to ordinary people’s lives?
The government must do more if it wants the public to believe that it is doing its best. It cannot just keep whistling the same old tune, because then nothing will ever get done.
Kuo Chen-hero is an adjunct professor in the School of Business at Soochow University.
Translated by Paul Cooper
Monday was the 37th anniversary of former president Chiang Ching-kuo’s (蔣經國) death. Chiang — a son of former president Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), who had implemented party-state rule and martial law in Taiwan — has a complicated legacy. Whether one looks at his time in power in a positive or negative light depends very much on who they are, and what their relationship with the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is. Although toward the end of his life Chiang Ching-kuo lifted martial law and steered Taiwan onto the path of democratization, these changes were forced upon him by internal and external pressures,
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (傅?萁) has caused havoc with his attempts to overturn the democratic and constitutional order in the legislature. If we look at this devolution from the context of a transition to democracy from authoritarianism in a culturally Chinese sense — that of zhonghua (中華) — then we are playing witness to a servile spirit from a millennia-old form of totalitarianism that is intent on damaging the nation’s hard-won democracy. This servile spirit is ingrained in Chinese culture. About a century ago, Chinese satirist and author Lu Xun (魯迅) saw through the servile nature of
The National Development Council (NDC) on Wednesday last week launched a six-month “digital nomad visitor visa” program, the Central News Agency (CNA) reported on Monday. The new visa is for foreign nationals from Taiwan’s list of visa-exempt countries who meet financial eligibility criteria and provide proof of work contracts, but it is not clear how it differs from other visitor visas for nationals of those countries, CNA wrote. The NDC last year said that it hoped to attract 100,000 “digital nomads,” according to the report. Interest in working remotely from abroad has significantly increased in recent years following improvements in
In their New York Times bestseller How Democracies Die, Harvard political scientists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt said that democracies today “may die at the hands not of generals but of elected leaders. Many government efforts to subvert democracy are ‘legal,’ in the sense that they are approved by the legislature or accepted by the courts. They may even be portrayed as efforts to improve democracy — making the judiciary more efficient, combating corruption, or cleaning up the electoral process.” Moreover, the two authors observe that those who denounce such legal threats to democracy are often “dismissed as exaggerating or
RSS