The actual direction of Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) presidential candidate Frank Hsieh's (謝長廷) "happiness economy" is now clear. Despite the proposal to dynamically manage the cap on China-bound investments, the basic principle is to continue opening up to China. This "new silk road" is similar to the policy of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) presidential candidate Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) and his running mate, former premier Vincent Siew (蕭萬長).
Of course, there is room for rational debate about the "Taiwan victorious" strategy, but if the predicament from 17 years of growing economic integration with China is not confronted and China-bound investments are allowed to continue, Taiwan will be threatened, not renewed.
In the past seven years, I have repeatedly made suggestions about Taiwan's economic policies. Yet, the supposed new trend of "confident openness" proposed by the DPP still holds sway. Is this phenomenon a consensus reached after logical debate, the arrogance of political factions or a persistent enthusiasm for China resulting from being permanently lost along the "Silk Road?"
In 2001, the North American Taiwanese Professors' Association's public policy committee formed an economic and technological policies team. I was responsible for drafting several policy recommendations that were published on April 28 of that year, including "three strategic considerations, four major obstacles and 10 policy proposals."
In brief: "Taiwan's globalized economic integration should aim toward North America, the European Union, Japan and other technologically innovative global centers. Only then would it aid in the importation and dissemination of technological advancements and raise Taiwan's ability to evolve economically. Contrariwise, over economic integration with technologically weak developing countries, including China, would remove Taiwan's limited resources from innovative global centers and distance Taiwan from high tech markets in developed nations. This is not conducive to Taiwan's long term interests."
This kind of strategic discourse is vastly different from the "active opening and effective management" policy set by the 2001 Economic Development Advisory Conference. Seven years later, our previous concerns have materialized. As an opinion piece about Taiwan's economic policy and its alienation from the US and Japan in the Nov. 14 edition of the Liberty Times (the Taipei Times' sister newspaper) said: "On the surface, Taiwan's outward economy appears prosperous. However, deeper analysis reveals the reverse of these: a one China structure diametrically opposed to the DPP's independent position which alienates allied nations and leans self-destructively toward the enemy state."
Some say that to open further to China and increase Taiwan's "winning circle" is the way to go. There is some basis for this belief. Yet one should remember that this theory assumes that key production elements do not migrate across countries and technologies remain in stasis. Once Taiwan's capital and technology migrates to China en masse, and Taiwan has to invest in itself to increase its lead in advance of China, then the so-called "winning circle" will be expanding in China, not Taiwan.
Hsieh's "sovereignty versus opening-up" thinking that seeks to relax economic cross-strait strictures over-simplifies the issue. Taiwan's winning strategy lies in proactive innovation and increasing globalization.
Hwan C. Lin is a research fellow at the Taiwan Public Policy Council, a US think tank, and associate professor of economics at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte.
Translated by Angela Hong
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