A friend of mine said at a seminar that when people speak of "anti-imperialism" or "anti-superpower" nowadays, they are referring to the US. No one seems to have thought of the fact that China will be the superpower of the 21st century. Taiwan should be more concerned about China than about the US.
A few days ago newspaper reports announced the signing of the China-ASEAN Free Trade Agreement. In 2010, together with 10 other Southeast Asian countries, China will establish a free trade area, with a view to including Korea and Japan later on. Of course, it is still too early to tell whether all of this will actually come to pass and whether it will all operate smoothly. Regardless, this is already one step toward China becoming a superpower within Asia and sets it on the path to becoming a global one.
The words "empire" and "superpower" both have negative connotations. Like the British Empire of the 19th century, the "American Empire" relies on military force in dealing with countries with which it doesn't quite see eye to eye. However, a superpower can also be an entity that maintains international political and economic order. With its decline, the British Empire was no longer able to maintain the gold standard, causing the international economic system to descend into chaos until the US rose to take its place. By the 1970s, serious trade deficits in the US obliged it to adopt a floating exchange rate, leading to more economic instability internationally for the next three decades.
In 1985, the US forced Asian countries to revalue their currencies, deeply affecting exports from countries such as Japan, South Korea and Taiwan. This even caused Japan to fall from a peak in the 1980s into a trough that would last over a decade.
As the US began to lose its ability to maintain global economic order, multilateral negotiations became all the more important. This is why in the 1980s Taiwan moved toward entering the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, and later the WTO. Through participating in such multilateral organizations, one can guarantee one's rights in international trade.
The implications of this decline extend beyond America itself. Other countries, whose development had relied on the economic order it established, will have to make some painful adjustments. Taiwan, Korea, Japan, Hong Kong and Singapore were all hit by currency revaluation in the late 1980s, and the Asian financial crisis that occurred toward the close of the 1990s. As these countries restructured their industries, they relocated manufacturing to China, which would later become a market for their goods.
Those who bewail Taiwan's prospects tend to look at its internal problems in isolation, although each of Asia's "four little dragons," and Japan, which have relied on the US for their development, have had a bad time of it since the late 1980s.
South Korean farmers were bemoaning their situation throughout the 1980s and 1990s. More importantly, the troubles that Taiwan's farmers went through during the 1980s occurred prior to its entry into the WTO. At the time, farmers' income from alternative means surpassed income from agriculture: they had to work in factories or go into the cities to earn money for subsistence.
The fatal blow came when Taiwan's factories were moved to China. Should the rice bomber, who set off a series of bombs last year and this year, apparently in protest of rice imports, be protesting the rise of the Chinese superpower, or instead Taiwan's entry into the WTO?
The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) government has been criticized for being inept at running the country, for playing politics and not understanding economics. They have been blamed for the recent widening of the income gap, the drain in talent, a fall in the prices of agricultural produce and slipping competitiveness in the high-tech field. In fact, their guilt is evident, but where does the solution to all this lie?
The DPP government has also been criticized for being blind to major global trends, but are their critics in fact seeing clearly? Taiwan is currently caught between a declining US power and an ascending Chinese one.
The presence of a superpower will lead to both political and economic order and this will provide both advantages and disadvantages for society. The trouble is, the ascending superpower's political intentions
concerning Taiwan are very worrying, leaving Taiwan in a weak position compared to its Southeast Asian competitors.
Taiwan's most pressing problem is how to deal with China as its power grows, and there is no easy answer to this.
Ku Er-teh is a freelance writer.
TRANSLATED BY PAUL COOPER
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS