Discussing the opposition parties’ recent protest over government policies, President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) said the national economy had no future unless the government eased the ban on US beef imports containing ractopamine residues.
The government criticized the opposition for its objection to easing the ban by saying Taiwan’s economic future was at stake. This was a case of choosing the lesser of two evils and the nation had no choice but to compromise for the greater good.
Ma would have Taiwanese believe that because South Korea has signed a free-trade agreement (FTA) with the US, Taiwan is doomed unless it signs one too.
Two years ago, he made a similar claim about the Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA) during a debate with then-Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) chairperson Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文).
It is now possible to see the extent to which the failings of the ECFA expose Ma’s flawed strategy and lack of determination.
First, the ECFA has been of limited use in boosting exports. Last year saw an increase of 8 percent in exports to China and only 9 percent growth in export volume for products on the “early harvest” list. Also, Taiwanese exports to China have fallen to 7.2 percent of the goods China imports, the lowest since 1993.
Despite Taiwan having no similar agreements with ASEAN countries, growth in exports to those nations last year was three times higher than the growth in exports to China. In the first five months of this year, exports to China shrank by 10 percent, compared with a 6.2 percent increase to ASEAN countries.
The ECFA has also not had any discernible effect on attracting foreign investment to Taiwan, while Taiwanese money continues to flow out of the country. When the ECFA was signed in 2010, the amount of foreign investment coming into Taiwan contracted by 29 percent, even lower than that going into Thailand, Indonesia and Vietnam. Last year, foreign investment in Taiwan was US$3.4 billion.
In addition, from 2008 to last year Taiwan experienced considerable cash outflows, the average annual amount being US$27.7 billion, with last year the most serious at over US$50 billion.
It was originally said that signing the ECFA might benefit FTA negotiations with Singapore. However, 18 months after talks with Singapore started, there are no tangible results. Moreover, even if we do sign an FTA with Singapore, trade between the two countries represents just 3.6 percent of Taiwan’s total trade, so the effect of such an agreement would be negligible.
Up to now, Taiwan has still not entered into FTA negotiations with its major trading partners: the US, Europe and Japan.
Council for Economic Planning and Development Minister Yiin Chii-ming (尹啟銘) has said that the ECFA was a framework agreement and never intended to have a significant economic impact. That is certainly not how Ma characterized it during a post-signing press conference. He claimed it was a big step in addressing Taiwan’s economic isolation; that it would make the nation a focus for foreign investment and invigorate domestic investment. In reality, the investment rate for this year is forecast to be 16.2 percent, a historical low.
Two years after the ECFA was signed, Taiwan’s situation has deteriorated. Ma and his government are now saying that the nation’s economic isolation will intensify if it fails to relax import restrictions on US beef.
It is true that Taiwan faces an economic crisis, but the government’s policies are flawed, its strategy is ill-founded and it lacks the resolve to grapple with the nation’s problems.
Will the US really be more willing to sign an FTA with Taiwan if the ractopamine ban is relaxed? Washington has never said as much, it has just reiterated that it would be prepared to resume talks on a Trade and Investment Framework Agreement (TIFA). A TIFA would of course be a prerequisite for a US-Taiwan FTA, but the problem is whether Taiwan will ever be in a position to secure a FTA with the US. Given that the public has serious concerns about the health implications of ractopamine, it is important to know whether, if this compromise is made now, there is a reasonable chance of getting an FTA further down the road.
If the US is willing to hold talks with Taiwan over a possible FTA, would the Ma administration be prepared to completely open up the economy? Even if the legislature relaxed the ban, a US-Taiwan FTA will still be a long way off when Ma finishes his second term. It is even possible that negotiations will not yet have started.
Tung Chen-yuan is a professor in the Graduate Institute of Development Studies at National Chengchi University.
Translated by Paul Cooper
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
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS