Recent discussions in Taiwan about reviving the cross-strait service trade agreement highlight a fundamental difference between political parties in Taiwan. Instead of talking about domestic reforms, and a new angle on trade and investment agreements with the EU and the US, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) insist on revisiting the idea of an agreement that passed its expiration date in 2014 with the Sunflower movement. Such an idea puts Taiwan at risk of losing broad support among Europeans, or could even cause other supporters to think that if Taiwan can seemingly decrease tension with China so easily, their support for Taiwan is less desired and less necessary.
Such a policy would not solve any of Taiwan’s real problems, but only make Taiwan more dependent on the Chinese economy and Chinese investment. Chinese economic power makes it inevitable that economic dependency on China creates risks for Taiwan’s sovereignty.
Instead, the KMT and the TPP should engage in a deep discussion and create new hope for Taiwan. They should develop policies that reform Taiwan to be an even better society. Apparently, this is not on their agenda.
The real threat to Taiwan comes from Taiwanese themselves, if fresh hopes for a better life are not fostered. Today, Taiwanese see only reforms that progress too slowly, and in the meantime, the population is becoming more dissatisfied with low wages, healthcare issues and difficulties for young people entering the housing market. This transformation through reforms is a critical balancing act.
Failure to reform is the greatest threat to Taiwan’s continued existence as a united and successful society. Without reform, Taiwan’s economy and welfare cannot continue, as Taiwan risks slowly becoming economically and politically more dependent on China, due to declining welfare development, and later giving in to further agreements with China.
In Taiwan, industry is largely driven by cost minimization with many subcontractors, and tends to demand lower wages, but is also unable to create many new industries, and Taiwan has limited experience with the entire value chain in product development. Wages risk remaining low, and Taiwan will find it harder to improve welfare unless further measures are taken to create a more robust knowledge economy. Wages in Taiwan have been surpassed by China, Singapore and South Korea.
The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) government has introduced initiatives in green technology, biotechnology, smart machinery and the Internet of Things. Critics say that the initiatives are too unambitious or that politicians should not interfere in industry. There is a need for even more dialogue in Taiwan and perhaps more new industries should be started from scratch to break free from outdated thinking.
This issue might sound familiar in other democracies, but the political solutions offered by the KMT and the TPP are simply more of the same, especially in areas such as the economy and the reform agenda, which will be decisive for Taiwan’s future. The situation is urgent, and this is why next year’s presidential and legislative elections are important.
Dissatisfaction among the population affects their perception of politicians. The DPP will have been at the helm with a majority in parliament for almost eight years on election day. The discontent revolves around the economy and living standards, ironically amplified by hopes that the DPP itself previously created and encouraged.
Taiwanese could be their own worst own enemies at the next election if they think that punishing the ruling party, the DPP, is the answer.
However, at the same time, the DPP needs to step up and urgently begin taking the necessary steps toward further reforms in association with other progressive political parties. Without reforms, Taiwan will have a weaker economy and increased dependence on China, and this will weaken Taiwan’s self-determination.
Michael Danielsen is chairman of Taiwan Corner.
A gap appears to be emerging between Washington’s foreign policy elites and the broader American public on how the United States should respond to China’s rise. From my vantage working at a think tank in Washington, DC, and through regular travel around the United States, I increasingly experience two distinct discussions. This divergence — between America’s elite hawkishness and public caution — may become one of the least appreciated and most consequential external factors influencing Taiwan’s security environment in the years ahead. Within the American policy community, the dominant view of China has grown unmistakably tough. Many members of Congress, as
After declaring Iran’s military “gone,” US President Donald Trump appealed to the UK, France, Japan and South Korea — as well as China, Iran’s strategic partner — to send minesweepers and naval forces to reopen the Strait of Hormuz. When allies balked, the request turned into a warning: NATO would face “a very bad” future if it refused. The prevailing wisdom is that Trump faces a credibility problem: having spent years insulting allies, he finds they would not rally when he needs them. That is true, but superficial, as though a structural collapse could be caused by wounded feelings. Something
Former Taipei mayor and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) founding chairman Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) was sentenced to 17 years in prison on Thursday, making headlines across major media. However, another case linked to the TPP — the indictment of Chinese immigrant Xu Chunying (徐春鶯) for alleged violations of the Anti-Infiltration Act (反滲透法) on Tuesday — has also stirred up heated discussions. Born in Shanghai, Xu became a resident of Taiwan through marriage in 1993. Currently the director of the Taiwan New Immigrant Development Association, she was elected to serve as legislator-at-large for the TPP in 2023, but was later charged with involvement
Out of 64 participating universities in this year’s Stars Program — through which schools directly recommend their top students to universities for admission — only 19 filled their admissions quotas. There were 922 vacancies, down more than 200 from last year; top universities had 37 unfilled places, 40 fewer than last year. The original purpose of the Stars Program was to expand admissions to a wider range of students. However, certain departments at elite universities that failed to meet their admissions quotas are not improving. Vacancies at top universities are linked to students’ program preferences on their applications, but inappropriate admission
RSS