In terms of cross-strait economic and trade issues, those who advocate "going west" -- ?namely, expanding investments in China -- have been portrayed as liberal and wise. On the contrary, legal restrictions and government actions that protect the public interest, and the assets and safety of the Taiwanese people, have been portrayed as conservative and stubborn. Such naivety puts Taiwan's economic achievements at the mercy of development based on populist ideology.
Many readers will recall the sensation caused by fruit exports to China. In July, Beijing invited both the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Farmers' Association of Taiwan Province (台灣省農會) to discuss this. Anyone of good sense could tell that this was a politically motivated move. Thanks to certain political parties, however, exporting fruit to China was publicized as the best way of boosting the income of local farmers.
As President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) repeatedly warned, food quarantine and safety standards are much lower in China. And, even though Taiwanese fruits were granted tariff-free status, they would have to compete with cheap products from Southeastern Asia. Once the novelty of fruits from Taiwan wore off, profit margins would be squeezed and our farmers would have no choice but to cut prices, the the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) government warned.
The Council of Agriculture repeatedly stressed that issues involving public rights should be handled by the government or authorized agencies so that a trade agreement could be reached that would protect farmers' rights. However, politicians and media with with their own agendas criticized the DPP government, saying that they were "sacrificing the interests of disadvantaged groups" for the sake of ideology.
Within six months, the pro-unification media were forced to eat their words and to admit that Taiwanese fruit fever in China had cooled substantially. Stands selling Taiwanese fruits in stores in Beijing were half the size they had been, and business was down by more than 50 percent.
Apart from the novelty having worn off, this was also the result of much fruit from Guangdong and Hainan Provinces having been labelled as being from Taiwan. Thus, the market was flooded with low-quality counterfeits. Even some wax apples exported from Thailand to China were labelled as coming from Taiwan. The Chinese government's failure to crack down on counterfeits and a lack of a classification system contributed to Taiwanese farmers being unable to secure a steady market.
Taiwanese farmers exporting fruits to China continue to face significant hurdles and the reputation of Taiwanese fruits has been damaged even before the farmers have begun to profit. In hindsight, the government's fears have been realized.
In light of these developments, the executive should not be fooled into acceding to the Chinese National Association of Industry and Commerce's (工商協進會) request that it cancel the 40 percent cap on China-bound investment by Taiwanese companies (Taiwanese businesses are banned from investing over 40 percent of their net value in China). Rather, it should carefully consider the risks. For example, if the investment ceiling is canceled, how will the flood of business relocation affect Taiwan's unemployment rate? And how will the capital outflow to China further marginalize Taiwan?
In recognition of the complex relationship created by investments in China, the government needs to have firm policies. The media should also view this from the perspective of public interest and should honestly uncover the failure of many Taiwanese businesses in China, so as not to lead the nation to its ruin.
Chiu Li-li is a Tainan City councilor.
TRANSLATED BY EDDY CHANG
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS