At a press conference on July 1, 2010, President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) said the Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA) would ensure that Taiwan did not become economically marginalized. However, as can be seen from the two free-trade agreements (FTA) entered into by South Korea — with the EU last year and with the US this year, as well as the proposed FTA between South Korea, China and Japan — Taiwan will not be able to escape the shadow of economic isolation after all. It is clear that the ECFA is not the panacea it was promised to be and the public are right to be concerned for the future.
The ECFA is a framework agreement and as such, it only includes the preferential items on the early-harvest list and issues for planned future negotiations. It is not an FTA. The products on the early-harvest list account for only 16 percent of Taiwan’s exports to China and 10 percent of its imports from China. Issues to be discussed in follow-up negotiations include trade in goods and services and a mechanism for resolving disputes, although the two governments have not yet fixed a timetable for talks. That means that the economic effect of the ECFA is currently limited to the deregulation of early-harvest items, as well as the effects it has on the expectations of domestic and international companies.
Judging from export competitiveness alongside domestic and international investments, the overall effect of the ECFA is rather limited thus far. According to data from Chinese customs, China’s imports from Taiwan grew by 8 percent last year, while imports of early-harvest items grew by 9.9 percent, which is not much higher. It is true that some Taiwanese items on the early-harvest list saw rapid growth in exports to China, but this is limited to a few isolated items and will not do much to promote Taiwan’s overall exports to China.
Judging the export competitiveness of various countries by their share of China’s import market implies that the ECFA has not really been of great benefit to Taiwan. In the first six months after the ECFA came into effect early last year, Taiwan’s China market share dropped to 7.4 percent. It then dropped further to 6.9 percent in the second half of the year, the lowest figure since 1993.
Foreign direct investment in Taiwan remains low and real foreign investment dropped sharply for three consecutive years after Ma came to power. The figure increased slightly last year, by 7.6 percent to US$3.4 billion, but that is still relatively low. If we observe international capital flows, including both direct investment and securities investments, average net international investment in Taiwan was a negative US$27.67 billion per year during Ma’s first four years in power. That is twice as high as during the Democratic Progressive Party’s (DPP) eight-year rule, making it the period with the largest capital outflows ever.
Domestic investment momentum has also continued to decline: During the 1990s, the real investment rate was 28 percent and under the eight years of DPP rule, the figure was 23.7 percent. By contrast, during Ma’s first term, the average real investment rate was only 17.7 percent. The Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics forecasts that the figure may even drop to 16.2 percent this year, an all-time record low.
As for a breakthrough in Taiwan’s participation in the process of East Asian economic integration, the ECFA might be able to help the nation initiate FTA talks with Singapore as well as a feasibility assessment on an FTA with New Zealand. However, trade with Singapore only accounts for 3.6 percent of Taiwan’s total external trade and a trifling 0.2 percent with New Zealand. Even if Taiwan signs FTAs with these countries, the contribution to the nation’s economic growth would be limited. On the other hand, there has been no progress on initiating FTA talks with major trade partners such as the US, the EU and Japan.
By comparison, Taiwan’s major economic rival South Korea has completed nine FTAs, including ones with ASEAN, India, the EU and the US, and it is currently holding FTA talks with another eight economies, including talks with China, which were launched on May 2. The impact on Taiwan’s exports of South Korea’s FTAs with the EU and the US alone could cost as much as NT$500 billion (US$16.9 billion) in lost revenue. At the moment, China, Japan and South Korea have agreed to start FTA talks by the end of the year. Such an agreement would mean that 90 percent of Taiwan’s exports would be affected by South Korea’s FTAs.
In the face of the severe challenge posed to Taiwan by its inability to participate in East Asian economic integration, Ma should display sincerity, determination and executive ability by fully integrating domestic opinions and interests and switching to a balanced and multilateral strategy. Apart from actively pushing for a multilateral international free-trade system and a unilateral liberalization of Taiwan’s economic system, the nation should concentrate its resources on simultaneous completion of free-trade talks with China and the US. That would be the only way to minimize China’s international political containment of Taiwan and maximize Taiwan’s own international economic benefits at the same time.
Tung Chen-yuan is a professor in the Graduate Institute of Development Studies at National Chengchi University.
Translated by Eddy Chang
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
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion
RSS