Do not stumble into Beijing's trap

By Huang Tien-lin

China's official English newspaper, the China Daily, and Xinhua News Agency reported on July 19 that Wang Zaixi, deputy director of the Tai-wan Affairs Office of China's State Council, officially proposed an agreement resembling a free-trade agreement (FTA) to Taiwan and called for both sides of the Taiwan Strait to quickly set up a mechanism for economic cooperation.

Why is China proposing an FTA with Taipei at this point in time? Not long ago China warned the US and Japan that it opposed any country signing an FTA with Taipei. Is it possible that Chinese leaders have come around to recognize our sovereignty and want to sign an agreement with us on an equal basis?

Of course not. If the people of Taiwan can cast aside the "Greater China" ideology, we will immediately understand China's evil plan to bait Taiwanese businesspeople and compel them to destroy President Chen Shui-bian's policy against direct transportation links under the "one China" principle.

Beijing's unification trick is indeed quite clever. If you don't fall into the trap of direct transportation links under the "one China" principle, Beijing will get you hooked by offering lures that make you lose reason and resistance. China will also beat drums and strike gongs around you to make you fall into its trap to be slaughtered.

For example, former premier Zhu Rongji's ASEAN plus China summit plan in 2001 and the subsequent ASEAN plus three summit plan both highlighted Taiwan's exclusion and tried to make us feel that Taiwan would be marginalized if it did not unify with China as soon as possible. This was effective at the time. Some economic think tanks even followed in the footsteps of those people who use commercial affairs to promote unification. They advocated direct transportation links and argued that Taiwan should integrate with China economically as soon as possible in order to make China a central region for Taiwan and enable it to march into east Asian markets.

Fortunately, China's beating of drums and gongs did not succeed because of our country's persistence in acting in a rational man-ner. The people also gradually understood through rational analysis that the negative impact of direct transportation links on the overall economy is far greater than the convenience and profit gained by the business enterprises and individuals. When he met with foreign reporters earlier this month, Chen said he objected to direct transportation links under the "one China" principle. It was a setback for Beijing's policy to absorb Taiwan economically.

The proposal of a quasi-FTA is an attempt by China to cope with the new situation. Most likely Beijing's objective is to use actual benefits and incentives to enhance the trick of using commerce to attack the government from all sides and support the unificationists forces in this country

Would signing an FTA with China be advantageous? No. Would signing an FTA with the US or Japan be advantageous? Yes. Any FTA between Taiwan and its trading partners would be advantageous to the long-term development of the nation's economy -- except for an FTA with China.

The reason China is the exception is the two economic systems of China and Taiwan use the same language and that there is a wide difference in the size of their populations and territory. Under these objective conditions in geography and culture, the more convenient the cross-strait traffic becomes, the more the two economies become integrated.

According to the market principle, the capital, technology and talented personnel of the small economy will gradually move toward the center of the big economy. The economic vitality of the small economy will decline until it becomes marginalized. An FTA and direct-transportation links will both speed up the marginalization process of the small economy. The Penghu economy and the Taiwan mainland economy (one small economy and one big economy, same language) during the past 50 years, as well as Hong Kong after 1997, are proof of this thesis.

Signing an FTA is similar to direct-transportation links, which is advantageous to some business enterprises but disadvantageous to the country's overall economy in the long term. Both a quasi-FTA and direct-transportation links are just strategies aimed at making Taiwan quench its thirst with poisoned drinks. Both carry political objectives of declaring the relations between Taiwan and China to be "domestic relations" and therefore China's internal affair.

If some of us believe China's proposals can possibly be considered and discussed, or we do not have to reject Beijing's proposals on purpose, we are already taken in. Beijing knows that this is a major election issue which can help it confound right and wrong, entice the Taiwanese people and serve its own strategy. Our people and government should not be careless.

Huang Tien-lin is a national policy advisor to the president.

Taiwanese leader sees White House ‘tilt’ toward Beijing

By David R. Sands

U.S. opposition to two planned referendums has fed fear of a “perceived tilt” by the Bush administration toward mainland China, the chairman of Taiwan’s parliamentary foreign affairs committee said in an interview yesterday.

Parris H. Chang, chairman of the Committee on Foreign Relations in Taiwan’s Legislative Yuan and a member of Chen Shui-bian’s Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), said the concerns are widespread among government officials and lawmakers, despite repeated assurances from Washington that there has been no change in policy toward the Republic of China.

“One government does not want to offend our greatest ally,” he said, “but the concern is rising that there is a perceived tilt toward China. For the United States to oppose a democratic voter referendum because it may displease China, that seems to negate our own statehood.”

The fears are remarkable given the early record of the Bush administration, which took a strongly pro-Taiwan stance in its long-standing dispute which China over the island’s ultimate political status.

The fears are remarkable given the early record of the Bush administration, which took a strongly pro-Taiwan stance in its long-standing dispute with China over the island’s ultimate political status.

The United States has approved a major new arms sale to Taipei and eased travel restrictions on Taiwanese senior leaders visiting the United States. In April 2001, Mr. Bush infuriated Beijing by asserting the United States was prepared to do “whatever it took” to defend Taiwan, going far beyond the more ambiguous formulations preferred by previous administrations.

But the need for Chinese cooperation in the post-September 11 war on terrorism and U.S. efforts to cultivate a new generation of Chinese leadership under Premier Hu Jintao has caused deep unease in Taiwan, said Mr. Chang, who heads a parliamentary delegation that is stressing these concerns to Bush administration officials this week.

“We certainly understand the United States is a great power with global interests and we are a small nation, but the subtle changes we see in the American line are causing great uneasiness,” he said.

Mr Chen’s plans to hold two nationwide polls in March – one on nuclear power and a second on applying for observer status in the World Health Organiation – sparked a rare public rift with Washington.

Taiwanese newspapers reported over the weekend that Douglas Paal, director of the American Institute of Taiwan and the de facto U.S. ambassador to Taipei, had personally pressed Mr. Chen, president of the Republic of China (Taiwan), not to hold the votes.

Although the issues involved are nonpolitical, Beijing has strenuously objected to the referendums, fearing they will prove a dry run for an eventual national vote on independence, which the DPP once advocated.

State Department spokesman Philip T. Reeker would not confirm the Paal-Chen meeting, but signaled that the United States, while supporting democracy in Taiwan, did not support the referendum idea.

Both Taiwan and China should “ refrain from actions or statements that increase tension across the [Taiwan] Strait or make dialogue more difficult to achieve, “Mr. Reeker said.

“That certainly has been our position for some time.”

Mr. Chen has vowed to press ahead with the nationwide votes, despite U.S. unhappiness.

“Direct democratic rights, including referendums, are part of our fundamental human rights,” he told voters in the southern city of Kaohsiung over the weekend. “I believe those rights could never be opposed or stripped by any individual, government or country.” Fears that the United States has moved away from the strongly pro-Taiwan stand on Mr. Bush’s early days in office.

Gary Schmitt, executive director of the neoconservative Project for the American Century, slammed Mr. Paal’s opposition to the referendums, saying it would only enoucrage hard’s liners in Beijing.

“U.S. policy on Taiwan has drifted dangerously close to the mainland’s by viewing Taiwan’s democracy and efforts at self-determination as irresponsible and provocative—dictatorship to democracy,” he said in an analysis released yesterday.

Taiwan News, an English-language newspaper in Taipei, called this week for the U.S. government to “recall Paal for improperly intervening in Taiwan’s domestic political affairs.”

People’s Daily, which reflects Beijing’s official thinking, said in a recent analysis that U.S. policy on Taiwan under Mr. Bush had followed a “roundabout course” but “has by and large moved back to the policy of the previous six governments.”

In a relationship in which subtle shifts of phrasing can create enormous controversy, Mr. Chang said there have also been other U.S. statements on the Taiwan-China dispute that sparked concern in Taipei.

He also noted that more than two years after Mr. Bush announced the United States would sell Taiwan as many as eight diesel submarines, no shipyard has been found that is able and willing to build the vessels.