President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) and Straits Exchange Foundation Chairman Chiang Pin-kung (江丙坤) have started talking about the cross-strait economic relationship in terms of dependence. Ma says the Taiwanese and Chinese economies are interdependent. Chiang has reinforced this by saying that it would not necessarily be a bad thing for Taiwan’s economy to be dependent upon China. Ma is the highest decision-maker for cross-strait policy and Chiang is in charge of the practical implementation of these policies. By echoing each other, they are saying that economic dependence on China has become the centerpiece of government policy.
Economic relations between countries is a normal state of affairs, and close and frequent exchanges between nations is a good thing. However, Taiwan’s degree of trade dependence on China has reached 40 percent, while China’s dependence on Taiwan is 9 percent. This imbalance is an indication of the gravity of Taiwan’s dependence on its larger neighbor. Ma’s talk about mutual dependence is not true, and such asymmetric dependence is all but certain to bring trade or exchange rate friction or conflict.
Ma’s economic policy has focused on China, and the disappointing results of opening Taiwan to Chinese tourism and the direct links are far removed from any earlier predictions, evidence that dependence on China is not a panacea for Taiwan’s economy.
With China still bent on annexing this country, economic independence will translate into social and political dependence. When that happens, Beijing can achieve its goal of unification peacefully by using Hong Kong’s dependence on China as a model.
When Chiang says that economic dependence on China is not a bad thing, he shows that he is blind to the realities of international trade and national security.
A wave of bankruptcies has swept across China in the past year, while the international financial crisis has led to greatly reduced exports. Taiwanese businesspeople are now moving out of the Chinese market in droves, aggravating the problems with foreign capital outflows, factory closures and unemployment in China’s coastal regions.
But even as Taiwanese capital is flowing back into Taiwan, the government is encouraging Taiwanese businesses to go to China. This runs counter to the principles of a free economy, even though there are not many successful examples of governments distorting the economy.
Taiwan’s economic miracle was created by international trade, and Taiwan should once again make the world its market. China is only one small part of that global market, not its mainstay. The Ma administration is neglecting the importance of international markets to gamble Taiwan’s future on China.
In the past, the government made efforts to expand Taiwan’s trade opportunities and avoid international isolation by trying to negotiate free-trade agreements with Japan, the US and other countries and gain entry into the ASEAN plus three. Such efforts appear to have been sidelined by the Ma administration’s interest in a common Chinese market and closer economic cross-strait relations.
Whether we take a theoretical, realistic, national security, sovereignty, or industrial perspective, dependence on China will put Taiwan in immeasurable danger. It is a flawed policy that will only assist China in its attempts to annex Taiwan.
The conflict in the Middle East has been disrupting financial markets, raising concerns about rising inflationary pressures and global economic growth. One market that some investors are particularly worried about has not been heavily covered in the news: the private credit market. Even before the joint US-Israeli attacks on Iran on Feb. 28, global capital markets had faced growing structural pressure — the deteriorating funding conditions in the private credit market. The private credit market is where companies borrow funds directly from nonbank financial institutions such as asset management companies, insurance companies and private lending platforms. Its popularity has risen since
The Donald Trump administration’s approach to China broadly, and to cross-Strait relations in particular, remains a conundrum. The 2025 US National Security Strategy prioritized the defense of Taiwan in a way that surprised some observers of the Trump administration: “Deterring a conflict over Taiwan, ideally by preserving military overmatch, is a priority.” Two months later, Taiwan went entirely unmentioned in the US National Defense Strategy, as did military overmatch vis-a-vis China, giving renewed cause for concern. How to interpret these varying statements remains an open question. In both documents, the Indo-Pacific is listed as a second priority behind homeland defense and
Every analyst watching Iran’s succession crisis is asking who would replace supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Yet, the real question is whether China has learned enough from the Persian Gulf to survive a war over Taiwan. Beijing purchases roughly 90 percent of Iran’s exported crude — some 1.61 million barrels per day last year — and holds a US$400 billion, 25-year cooperation agreement binding it to Tehran’s stability. However, this is not simply the story of a patron protecting an investment. China has spent years engineering a sanctions-evasion architecture that was never really about Iran — it was about Taiwan. The
In an op-ed published in Foreign Affairs on Tuesday, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) said that Taiwan should not have to choose between aligning with Beijing or Washington, and advocated for cooperation with Beijing under the so-called “1992 consensus” as a form of “strategic ambiguity.” However, Cheng has either misunderstood the geopolitical reality and chosen appeasement, or is trying to fool an international audience with her doublespeak; nonetheless, it risks sending the wrong message to Taiwan’s democratic allies and partners. Cheng stressed that “Taiwan does not have to choose,” as while Beijing and Washington compete, Taiwan is strongest when
RSS