Following the revelation that some Taiwanese food manufacturers have unwittingly been using contaminated raw materials from China, the public should question the wisdom of signing a Closer Economic Partnership Arrangement (CEPA) with China. There should be no doubt after the past year’s chain of scandals that toxic products are a chronic problem in China. The public wants guarantees that what Chinese-language media have labeled “black-hearted” foods will not enter the country.
The CEPA would be a free-trade pact to enhance trade exchanges with China. Earlier this month, Straits Exchange Foundation (SEF) Chairman Chiang Pin-kung (江丙坤) cited the CEPA between China and Hong Kong as a model that could be used as a starting point in negotiations. The goal, Chiang said, would be to promote and protect Taiwanese businesses in China.
Hong Kong signed a CEPA with China in June 2003, the goal of which was to boost trade and introduce measures such as allowing Hong Kong companies to sell products tariff-free in China. On Jan. 1 the following year, Macau signed a CEPA with China to receive similar trade benefits.
What Chiang failed to mention, however, is that the pact is modeled not as an agreement between two countries, but as a deal between a country and its territories.
Chinese Vice Minister of Commerce Jiang Zengwei (姜增偉) recently suggested that Taiwan and China ink a partnership based on the CEPA model “to allow Taiwanese compatriots to enjoy more preferential treatment and opportunities.”
It is hardly surprising that Beijing is eager to sign a CEPA with Taiwan. But by doing so, Taiwan would bolster China’s scheme to link Taiwan with Hong Kong and Macau as part of a Greater China economic zone, with ultimately political intentions.
Signing a CEPA with Beijing is, in other words, no light matter. It is not simply an issue of helping Taiwanese companies, because the arrangement could deal a blow to national sovereignty and bolster Beijing’s claim that Taiwan is little more than a local economic entity. Sadly, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is not interested in a public debate on the matter.
The KMT administration seems so focused on reaping the benefits of China’s growing economy that it is blind to the fact that Beijing would use the CEPA to further its political goals. For China, there’s no such thing as “non-political.”
China made its agenda perfectly clear when Vice Minister of Commerce Liao Xiaoqi (廖曉淇) said: “The CEPA is a successful implementation of ‘one country, two systems.’”
President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) has long proclaimed that his goal is “ultimate unification” with China. In an interview with the Mexican daily El Sol de Mexico, he clearly stated that relations between Taiwan and China were not state-to-state. Vice President Vincent Siew (蕭萬長), meanwhile, is well-known for his “cross-strait common market” proposal, something that fits all too well with Beijing’s hopes for a CEPA with Taiwan.
Regardless of all the fantasies of Chinese riches, the sobering reality is that a CEPA based on Hong Kong and Macau’s trade with China could have an impact on Taiwan that all would come to regret.
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