As we embark upon a new year, tensions across the Taiwan Strait continue to heighten by the day.
While countries around the world are preoccupied with combating a fresh wave of COVID-19, China is using the opportunity to employ increasingly repressive measures in Hong Kong, Xinjiang — particularly to Turkic Uighurs — and Inner Mongolia.
Meanwhile, the Chinese People’s Liberation Army is using every method at its disposal to continue to harass Taiwan, elevating the Taiwan Strait on a par with Ukraine as an issue of primary concern for the international community.
Paradoxically, Taiwan’s economic and trade dependence on China has not declined, despite the pandemic and the tense political and military situation.
Due to the wide disparities between the size of Taiwan’s and China’s respective economies, it is worth exploring in some detail how Taiwan can avoid its overreliance on China’s economy becoming a critical liability.
Taiwan’s total trade volume with China last year is estimated to exceed US$300 billion, an increase of 28 percent compared with the previous year, a significantly higher rate of growth than 2020’s 13.4 percent.
Last year, exports to China totaled approximately US$230 billion, while Taiwan imported about US$70 billion of Chinese goods and services.
Over the past decade, exports to China have consistently accounted for more than 40 percent of Taiwan’s total export volume.
The nation maintains a trade surplus with China of approximately US$160 billion, which is greater than Taiwan’s trade surplus with the US — its second-largest trading partner — of about US$33 billion.
Contrast this with other economies, such as Japan — which accounts for 10.9 percent of Taiwan’s total foreign trade — and the EU — 8.2 percent — and it is clear that there is a lot of room for Taiwan to wean itself off its trade dependence with China.
The thought process of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) differs utterly from that of the governments of democratic nations. Thus, before engaging with the regime, it is important to understand the logic that underpins the party’s decisionmaking.
Practically and logically, it should be possible for Taiwan to resolve any contradictions and conflicts with Beijing through social interaction.
However, the CCP is adept at using seemingly innocuous political tools to advance its “united front” strategy, and psychological and cognitive warfare offensives against its targets, including Taiwan.
The regime consistently uses soft and sharp power, such as culture, education and sports exchanges, as well as media organizations and economic means, to control and manipulate Taiwanese public opinion.
Beijing also harnesses Taiwanese elections as a tool and a “bargaining chip” to influence public opinion by supporting candidates with polarizing agendas, and to continue its military terrorization of the nation.
With the political stalemate showing no signs of a breakthrough, Beijing will intensify its economic influence over Taiwan. Its ongoing program of economic measures — dubbed “incentives” by Beijing — are a means to this end, and are designed to reach directly over the heads of government and appeal to Taiwanese businesses, entrepreneurs, expats and students, fostering a populace of pro-CCP Taiwanese.
Beijing hopes this will allow China to increasingly constrict Taipei’s scope for negotiation.
The CCP’s political machinations dictate that it must win over the hearts and minds of Taiwanese by capitalizing on the nation’s economic reliance on China by using “united front” tactics or sowing internal division.
Beijing’s packages of “Taiwan-friendly economic incentives” have, in the past few years, touched upon a number of policy areas and sought to attract Taiwanese to expand their participation in the development of China’s economy and society. This includes encouraging Taiwanese businesses to invest in China, establish high-end manufacturing and other industries in China, or to relocate their headquarters, and research and development centers to China to benefit from a range of tax incentives.
However, China’s state-strategic industries are not genuinely open to participation by Taiwanese businesses, not only because the CCP maintains ultimate control of these key sectors, but also because the party wishes to attract more economic resources and investment into the overall construction and development of China’s economy.
The Chinese government has always viewed “unification” as the primary task of its Central Leading Group for Taiwan Affairs. It is clear that the CCP’s grand strategy is to first “unify” with Taiwan economically, and then “unify” Taiwan politically.
Accordingly, China’s overriding goal is to achieve its agenda of “common prosperity” by harvesting investments by Taiwan’s large corporations and enterprises.
Taiwanese and the nation’s companies alike should conduct thorough assessments prior to investing in China and maintain a high level of vigilance.
Chang Yan-ting is a professor at National Tsing Hua University in Hsinchu and a retired air force lieutenant general. Paul Chiou is an associate professor of finance at Northeastern University in Boston.
Translated by Edward Jones
When US budget carrier Southwest Airlines last week announced a new partnership with China Airlines, Southwest’s social media were filled with comments from travelers excited by the new opportunity to visit China. Of course, China Airlines is not based in China, but in Taiwan, and the new partnership connects Taiwan Taoyuan International Airport with 30 cities across the US. At a time when China is increasing efforts on all fronts to falsely label Taiwan as “China” in all arenas, Taiwan does itself no favors by having its flagship carrier named China Airlines. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs is eager to jump at
The muting of the line “I’m from Taiwan” (我台灣來欸), sung in Hoklo (commonly known as Taiwanese), during a performance at the closing ceremony of the World Masters Games in New Taipei City on May 31 has sparked a public outcry. The lyric from the well-known song All Eyes on Me (世界都看見) — originally written and performed by Taiwanese hip-hop group Nine One One (玖壹壹) — was muted twice, while the subtitles on the screen showed an alternate line, “we come here together” (阮作伙來欸), which was not sung. The song, performed at the ceremony by a cheerleading group, was the theme
Secretary of State Marco Rubio raised eyebrows recently when he declared the era of American unipolarity over. He described America’s unrivaled dominance of the international system as an anomaly that was created by the collapse of the Soviet Union at the end of the Cold War. Now, he observed, the United States was returning to a more multipolar world where there are great powers in different parts of the planet. He pointed to China and Russia, as well as “rogue states like Iran and North Korea” as examples of countries the United States must contend with. This all begs the question:
In China, competition is fierce, and in many cases suppliers do not get paid on time. Rather than improving, the situation appears to be deteriorating. BYD Co, the world’s largest electric vehicle manufacturer by production volume, has gained notoriety for its harsh treatment of suppliers, raising concerns about the long-term sustainability. The case also highlights the decline of China’s business environment, and the growing risk of a cascading wave of corporate failures. BYD generally does not follow China’s Negotiable Instruments Law when settling payments with suppliers. Instead the company has created its own proprietary supply chain finance system called the “D-chain,” through which
RSS