Two weeks ago, President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) and Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Chairperson Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) debated the proposed economic cooperation framework agreement (ECFA) with China. Now that the dust has settled, two things seem clear. One is that the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) seems to hold most of the cards. Ma vowed to forge ahead with the deal regardless of the debate and, after his better than expected performance, he has no reason to reconsider.
The other is that the DPP wanted a public debate and got it. Tsai presented herself well and gained valuable exposure as a rising star on the political scene. However, she failed to deliver a decisive blow. With the deal due to be signed next month, Tsai is now reduced to calling for public protest, while supporters continue to push a referendum that is unlikely to be held.
The DPP seems to be running out of options — which does not mean the fight is over. ECFA negotiations continue and even after it is inked, changes are possible. DPP lawmakers have vowed to repeal the accord if they win a majority in 2012.
However, impassioned claims like this suggest it may be time to take stock — on both sides.
Ma, whose advisers seem to be giving him better guidance than before, should be pleased with his debate performance and the ECFA’s progress generally. Free-trade agreements are always hard to sell, especially when power relations are so unequal. Ma and the KMT have also been careful to avoid gloating and to continue reassuring voters that they will be protected, albeit by way of meaningless sound bites, as Tsai points out.
However, to advance his trade policy beyond his we-have-no-other-choice argument, Ma must do two things. First, he must add substance to his reassurances. This includes information about what is in the ECFA, balanced projections of gains and losses, assurances that backup plans and other trade pacts are in the works, programs for retraining and support in industries negatively affected and some indication that security concerns will be addressed.
Second, he must show a greater willingness to concede that Taiwanese have good reason to be worried. Dismissiveness and condescension have often been the KMT’s — and Ma’s — modus operandi. Ma would do well to recall that whatever an ECFA’s benefits, they will take time and results will be mixed. Even if the pact turns out well, it may not benefit a party that treats public fear as part of the cost of doing business.
As for the DPP, Tsai has had a lesson. Sensible questions and reasoned argument fared poorly against evasions and canned assurance. In her words, Ma won the debate with “political propaganda” and she lost it because she was not good at political talk.
Also, options still on the table must be carefully considered. The DPP must think about the consequences if voters approve the agreement. What then?
Public demonstrations raise awareness, but they are also dangerous. People get hurt and the DPP would be held responsible. Surely little is added to party esteem when legislative members resort to violence against bills they cannot block by legal means.
Those who promise repeal should remember that by 2012 the economy is likely to have improved. If ECFA is proven not to be the reason, the KMT will claim otherwise. It will also quote DPP politicians, including Tsai, who promise to cancel the pact, calling such promises a threat to newfound prosperity.
What the DPP needs most is a credible plan for engagement with China. Tsai’s offer of talks based on no political preconditions is nothing new. However, former vice president Annette Lu’s (呂秀蓮) warning last week against any such engagement suggests that Chinese demands are the least of Tsai’s worries. Whatever Tsai learned about politics in her recent encounter with Ma, it may serve her best in managing her party.
Taiwan’s victory in the World Baseball Softball Confederation Premier12 championship is an historic achievement. Yet once again this achievement is marred by the indignity of the imposed moniker “Chinese Taipei.” The absurdity is compounded by the fact that none of the players are even from Taipei, and some, such as Paiwan catcher Giljegiljaw Kungkuan, are not even ethnically Chinese. The issue garnered attention around the Paris Olympics, yet fell off the agenda as Olympic memories retreated. “Chinese Taipei” persists, and the baseball championship serves as a reminder that fighting “Chinese Taipei” must be a continuous campaign, not merely resurfacing around international
This month, the National Health Insurance (NHI) is to implement a major policy change by eliminating the suspension-and-resumption mechanism for Taiwanese residing abroad. With more than 210,000 Taiwanese living overseas — many with greater financial means than those in Taiwan — this reform, catalyzed by a 2022 Constitutional Court ruling, underscores the importance of fairness, sustainability and shared responsibility in one of the world’s most admired public healthcare systems. Beyond legal obligations, expatriates have a compelling moral duty to contribute, recognizing their stake in a system that embodies the principle of health as a human right. The ruling declared the prior
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) appears to be encountering some culture shock and safety issues at its new fab in Arizona. On Nov. 7, Arizona state authorities cited TSMC for worker safety violations, fining the company US$16,131, after a man died in May. The Arizona Division of Occupational Safety and Health released its six-month investigation into the fatality and cited TSMC for failing to keep the workplace free from hazards likely to cause death or serious harm. At about the same time, the chip giant was also sued for alleged discriminatory hiring practices favoring Asians, prompting a flurry of debate on whether TSMC’s
US president-elect Donald Trump is inheriting from President Joe Biden a challenging situation for American policy in the Indo-Pacific region, with an expansionist China on the march and threatening to incorporate Taiwan, by force if necessary. US policy choices have become increasingly difficult, in part because Biden’s policy of engagement with China, including investing in personal diplomacy with President Xi Jinping (習近平), has not only yielded little but also allowed the Chinese military to gain a stronger footing in the South China Sea and the Taiwan Strait. In Xi’s Nov. 16 Lima meeting with a diminished Biden, the Chinese strongman signaled little
RSS