Since the review of the service trade agreement with China has been blocked since last year, President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) has asked former vice president Vincent Siew (蕭萬長) to form a committee to promote the agreement to the public and ask that the government and civil society work together to propose a plan for entry into the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) by next month.
Ma really does not seem to understand why the agreement is stuck in the legislature.
Ma did not ask Siew to help out because Siew used to be his “chief economic designer.” If he really believed that, why did he not make use of Siew while he was still Ma’s deputy?
The real reason is that Siew has a good relationship with the opposition and that he gained quite a reputation during Taiwan’s WTO talks.
Simply, Ma wants to use Siew’s personal network to control the opposition.
A comparison is would be when US President Barack Obama encountered problems during the TPP talks.
To speed up the signing, the Republican and the Democrat congressional leaders proposed a congressional trade priorities act to pave the way for the Trade Authority Promotion Act (TPA).
Due to the complexity of the TPP, Congress will vote on trade agreements signed under the TPA as a complete package, rather than reviewing each individual article. If Congress disagrees, it rejects the whole agreement and cannot delay it by introducing amendments.
The TPA is not a blank check for the government. It requires that representatives be included prior to the negotiation process begins, and Congress can only vote on the whole package once talks are completed.
Legislative Speaker Wang Jin-pyng (王金平) has pointed out that before trade talks can begin, Congress must first authorize talks, and representatives of both Congress and the Senate will participate in the talks and report back to Congress, which makes for a smooth review process.
That was why Wang called for the establishment of a legislative task force for handling cross-strait affairs. He also pointed out that it was only during former Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) chairperson Tsai Ing-wen’s (蔡英文) stint as Mainland Affairs Council (MAC) chairman that a similar task force had been previously suggested, although it was rejected.
Another example is the Democratic Progressive Party’s (DPP) suggestion for an act regulating the handling of agreements between Taiwan and China, and Huang Kuo-chang (黃國昌), a research professor at Academia Sinica’s Institutum Iurisprudentiae, who has suggested an act for monitoring the review and signing of cross-strait agreements.
The Ma administration has ignored all such suggestions.
Ma’s popularity rating is in the doldrums, but he will not take a direct look at the fundamental issue, which is to legally formalize the legislature’s right to take part in trade talks. Instead, he follows the fantastical notion that using Siew’s personal contacts will help him handle the opposition.
The service trade agreement only deals with the deregulation of 64 industries, but the legislature is still moving forward with excruciating slowness.
The future cross-strait trade in goods agreement will involve the deregulation of several thousands of products, but amazingly, Ma has simply decided to use Vincent Siew as a shield.
This complete disregard for public opinion is certain to create a backlash.
Julian Kuo is a former Democratic Progressive Party legislator.
Translated by Perry Svensson
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