Many experts are currently discussing the pros and cons of signing an economic cooperation framework agreement (ECFA) with China.
However, remarks made by both the Taiwanese and Chinese governments and their representatives have deviated so far from common sense that the ECFA has already morphed into something never before heard of in the history of diplomacy.
The first oddity: Regardless of whether one is buying an apple or a piece of real estate, at its most basic such an act constitutes a transaction and such exchanges only ever take place when they meet the interests of both parties.
Failure to meet this condition invariably means that a deal will not take place.
Intergovernmental negotiations follow the same principle. Before negotiations, such things as what one considers acceptable and one’s bottom line are kept secret.
Whether or not to haggle or sign an agreement is then determined by the conditions set forth by the two sides.
In such a situation, how can it make sense for one party to declare that the agreement “must” be signed at all costs and even setting a time limit for its inking?
This is essentially the same as handing over one’s weapons to the enemy before the battle has even started and cannot but be considered an unfortunate joke.
However, this is exactly what the Taiwanese government has done.
In normal democracies, officials making such remarks would be forced to step down and governments displaying such ineptitude would have to face a vote of confidence in parliament and thrown out of office.
The second oddity: Whether private transactions or negotiations between governments, both sides are presumed to be working towards maximizing their respective interests.
However, during the talks on an ECFA between Taiwan and China, representatives of one of the parties announced that they would make “concessions” to the interests of the other party.
In short, they agreed to forgo elements of a deal that would be in the best interests of their country.
This is what the Chinese government has said. In a normal country, representatives that make such comments would be removed from their positions immediately and subjected to investigation.
Such a government would also face a legislative vote of no confidence and be replaced.
Of course, China is not a normal country, nor is it even a democracy.
China has done everything it can to attack Taiwan verbally, through military threats as well as diplomatically by limiting Taiwan’s international space.
It is only when China talks about signing an ECFA with Taiwan that it suddenly appears generous and thoughtful.
Instead of feeling honored and favored by such “forbearance,” the Taiwanese need to be made aware of the ill intent that hides behind China’s sweet talk.
These strange events are reported in the media on a daily basis.
If the Taiwanese public continues to ignore such oddities, I see no end in sight to the many abnormal situations that plague our society.
Peng Ming-min is a former presidential adviser.
TRANSLATED BY DREW CAMERON
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (傅?萁) has caused havoc with his attempts to overturn the democratic and constitutional order in the legislature. If we look at this devolution from the context of a transition to democracy from authoritarianism in a culturally Chinese sense — that of zhonghua (中華) — then we are playing witness to a servile spirit from a millennia-old form of totalitarianism that is intent on damaging the nation’s hard-won democracy. This servile spirit is ingrained in Chinese culture. About a century ago, Chinese satirist and author Lu Xun (魯迅) saw through the servile nature of
In their New York Times bestseller How Democracies Die, Harvard political scientists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt said that democracies today “may die at the hands not of generals but of elected leaders. Many government efforts to subvert democracy are ‘legal,’ in the sense that they are approved by the legislature or accepted by the courts. They may even be portrayed as efforts to improve democracy — making the judiciary more efficient, combating corruption, or cleaning up the electoral process.” Moreover, the two authors observe that those who denounce such legal threats to democracy are often “dismissed as exaggerating or
Monday was the 37th anniversary of former president Chiang Ching-kuo’s (蔣經國) death. Chiang — a son of former president Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), who had implemented party-state rule and martial law in Taiwan — has a complicated legacy. Whether one looks at his time in power in a positive or negative light depends very much on who they are, and what their relationship with the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is. Although toward the end of his life Chiang Ching-kuo lifted martial law and steered Taiwan onto the path of democratization, these changes were forced upon him by internal and external pressures,
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus in the Legislative Yuan has made an internal decision to freeze NT$1.8 billion (US$54.7 million) of the indigenous submarine project’s NT$2 billion budget. This means that up to 90 percent of the budget cannot be utilized. It would only be accessible if the legislature agrees to lift the freeze sometime in the future. However, for Taiwan to construct its own submarines, it must rely on foreign support for several key pieces of equipment and technology. These foreign supporters would also be forced to endure significant pressure, infiltration and influence from Beijing. In other words,