Addressing the nation's economic woes, participants in the Conference on Sustaining Taiwan's Economic Development engaged in heated debate Thursday and Friday. The conference came at the end of several months of committee work which was also sharply divided. All told, the conference process displayed a national elite sharply divided on the nation's economic future.
Taiwan Solidarity Union lawmakers, who walked out of the session on Friday afternoon, described the conference as a "big hoax" -- a show staged for corporate Taiwan to push forward its agenda for cross-strait liberalization, with the Cabinet playing second fiddle. Businesspeople weren't happy with the conference either, and said that the event had been a failure as it didn't address their primary concerns nor reach agreement on measures to allow more economic exchanges with China.
But what did people expect would happen? Did they really believe that simply bringing together the 190 or so participants -- which included representatives of political parties, the business community, academics and environmental activists who have never agreed with each other before -- would magically generate a useful list of medium and long-term goals for the economy? Could these people do any better in a two-day meeting, which covered a vast array of controversial policy options, than our elected representatives have over years of legislative debate and brawling?
While the conference was initially proposed to collect ideas on how to deal with the nation's long-term, structural and contentious economic problems, it actually turned out to be a "mega gathering" of economic interests with a variety of conflicting views on investment, trade and cross-strait matters. Not surprisingly, the conference appeared about as polarized as the Legislative Yuan.
Virtually no one needed to be persuaded that Taiwan's economy is overly dependent on the Chinese market, a situation which is neither reliable nor sustainable. Everyone accepted that the Chinese market is only part of the global economy, not the center of it. At the same time, participants agreed that the future of Taiwan's industrial and national competitiveness resides in our own technological upgrading and industrial transformation, not solely on China's growth.
There was also no dissent that an outdated limit on China-bound investment should be fixed, but that the policy should be adjusted carefully and with due attention to the downside risk. An immediate and complete liberalization of cross-strait ties that would put Taiwan's national security in jeopardy was never up for debate. Similarly, participants universally agreed that government deficits have risen too high too fast and that something needs to be done to reduce the debt.
One other agreement on process was particularly instructive: Conference participants resolved that the best solution to their divergent views was to put a total of 166 contentious suggestions on the conclusion list under the category of "other opinions." This meant that while they couldn't directly agree on some issues, they wanted the opinions used as a reference point in future policy development.
So if there was a message from the conference, it was not about how participants performed or the final outcome. It was also not about the perception that the conference participants were avoiding tough decisions. The message was that people want those who rule this country to make the economic policy decisions that need to be made.
The government may be trumpeting the achievement of reaching consensus on a total of 516 opinions in the conference, but make no mistake -- these were "motherhood" opinions opposed by no one. The government now needs to carefully look into the suggestions under the "other opinions" list -- which is the true challenge presented by the conference.
It is employment pass renewal season in Singapore, and the new regime is dominating the conversation at after-work cocktails on Fridays. From September, overseas employees on a work visa would need to fulfill the city-state’s new points-based system, and earn a minimum salary threshold to stay in their jobs. While this mirrors what happens in other countries, it risks turning foreign companies away, and could tarnish the nation’s image as a global business hub. The program was announced in 2022 in a bid to promote fair hiring practices. Points are awarded for how a candidate’s salary compares with local peers, along
China last month enacted legislation to punish —including with the death penalty — “die-hard Taiwanese independence separatists.” The country’s leaders, including Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), need to be reminded about what the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has said and done in the past. They should think about whether those historical figures were also die-hard advocates of Taiwanese independence. The Taiwanese Communist Party was established in the Shanghai French Concession in April 1928, with a political charter that included the slogans “Long live the independence of the Taiwanese people” and “Establish a republic of Taiwan.” The CCP sent a representative, Peng
Japan and the Philippines on Monday signed a defense agreement that would facilitate joint drills between them. The pact was made “as both face an increasingly assertive China,” and is in line with Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr’s “effort to forge security alliances to bolster the Philippine military’s limited ability to defend its territorial interests in the South China Sea,” The Associated Press (AP) said. The pact also comes on the heels of comments by former US deputy national security adviser Matt Pottinger, who said at a forum on Tuesday last week that China’s recent aggression toward the Philippines in
The Ministry of National Defense on Tuesday announced that the military would hold its annual Han Kuang exercises from July 22 to 26. Military officers said the exercises would feature unscripted war games, and a decentralized command and control structure. This year’s exercises underline the recent reforms in Taiwan’s military as it transitions from a top-down command structure to one where autonomy is pushed down to the front lines to improve decisionmaking and adaptability. Militaries around the world have been observing and studying Russia’s war in Ukraine. They have seen that the Ukrainian military has been much quicker to adapt to