On Monday, Chinese-language newspapers quoted Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) vice presidential candidate Vincent Siew (
It seems Siew doesn't fully grasp the inner workings of the EU.
First, this year the EU gained two new members, Bulgaria and Romania, which puts the total number of EU member states at 27.
Second, economic integration in the EU is built on the basic premise that the 27 sovereign member states all recognize each other and the need to build mutual relationships based on equality and cooperation. They are not permitted to be hostile to each other, which is why they can cooperate on the establishment of a joint European army.
In contrast, China at present has deployed more than 800 ballistic missiles targeting Taiwan on its southern coast and refuses to recognize the Taiwanese government. China's hostile cross-strait policies will make it very difficult to build a cross-strait common market.
Third, the Maastricht Treaty signed by all EU member states gives EU citizens the fundamental rights to move freely, work and live anywhere in the EU.
The title of Article II-75 in the draft EU constitution mandates the "freedom to choose an occupation and right to engage in work."
Item 2 of the text reads: "Every citizen of the Union has the freedom to seek employment, to work, to exercise the right of establishment and to provide services in any Member State."
With the entry of 10 Eastern European nations into the EU in 2004, the lower wage levels in these countries resulted in workers using the right to freedom of movement to move to Germany, France, Italy and other countries with higher standards of living.
At the time, France began seriously debating what was said to be the phenomenon of "Paris being flooded by Polish plumbers."
Many of the workers from the Eastern European member states not only competed with French workers by accepting lower wages, but they also evaded taxes and this caused much disgruntlement among French workers.
The differences in salary structure between Taiwan and China is much greater than the differences between the countries in Eastern and Western Europe. According to the French newspaper Le Monde, in 2005 more than 1,000 workers in the EU textile industry lost their jobs every day because the EU removed the import restrictions on Chinese textile products.
Since Taiwanese and Chinese share the same language and because the two governments have no negotiation mechanism to manage the situation, the creation of a cross-strait common market would lead to a great influx of people from China using the right to free movement to come to Taiwan to work.
Given the lower salary requirements of Chinese workers, salaries in Taiwan would probably plummet, or, in the best-case scenario, would be highly unlikely to rise.
With jobs going to those who were willing to accept lower salaries, one can only wonder what impact Taiwanese unemployment would have on social stability.
For these reasons, it seems quite clear that we should give careful thought to Siew's suggestion for a cross-strait common market.
Wu Chih-chung is secretary-general of the European Union Study Association in Taiwan.
Translated by Lin Ya-ti
US$18.278 billion is a simple dollar figure; one that’s illustrative of the first Trump administration’s defense commitment to Taiwan. But what does Donald Trump care for money? During President Trump’s first term, the US defense department approved gross sales of “defense articles and services” to Taiwan of over US$18 billion. In September, the US-Taiwan Business Council compared Trump’s figure to the other four presidential administrations since 1993: President Clinton approved a total of US$8.702 billion from 1993 through 2000. President George W. Bush approved US$15.614 billion in eight years. This total would have been significantly greater had Taiwan’s Kuomintang-controlled Legislative Yuan been cooperative. During
Former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) in recent days was the focus of the media due to his role in arranging a Chinese “student” group to visit Taiwan. While his team defends the visit as friendly, civilized and apolitical, the general impression is that it was a political stunt orchestrated as part of Chinese Communist Party (CCP) propaganda, as its members were mainly young communists or university graduates who speak of a future of a unified country. While Ma lived in Taiwan almost his entire life — except during his early childhood in Hong Kong and student years in the US —
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers on Monday unilaterally passed a preliminary review of proposed amendments to the Public Officers Election and Recall Act (公職人員選罷法) in just one minute, while Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) legislators, government officials and the media were locked out. The hasty and discourteous move — the doors of the Internal Administration Committee chamber were locked and sealed with plastic wrap before the preliminary review meeting began — was a great setback for Taiwan’s democracy. Without any legislative discussion or public witnesses, KMT Legislator Hsu Hsin-ying (徐欣瑩), the committee’s convener, began the meeting at 9am and announced passage of the
In response to a failure to understand the “good intentions” behind the use of the term “motherland,” a professor from China’s Fudan University recklessly claimed that Taiwan used to be a colony, so all it needs is a “good beating.” Such logic is risible. The Central Plains people in China were once colonized by the Mongolians, the Manchus and other foreign peoples — does that mean they also deserve a “good beating?” According to the professor, having been ruled by the Cheng Dynasty — named after its founder, Ming-loyalist Cheng Cheng-kung (鄭成功, also known as Koxinga) — as the Kingdom of Tungning,
RSS