Toward a Truly Mutually-Beneficial Cross-Strait Exchange Policy

 Toward a Truly Mutually-Beneficial Cross-Strait Exchange Policy

China Times Editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)

A Translation

December 17, 2014

A Summary

Two days ago, former Vice President Vincent Siew and former Mainland Chinese Vice Premier Zeng Peiyan jointly chaired in Taipei the annual meeting of the “Cross-Strait CEO Summit." Citizen groups protested outside the venue, denouncing the Taipei meeting as a cross-Strait “Summit of the Rich and Powerful.” They expressed intense dissatisfaction with current cross-Strait economic cooperation. Siew said cross-Strait economic cooperation must abandon the old thinking in which only the minority of people are benefited, and adopt an upgraded new cross-Strait cooperation framework that will benefit the majority. Zeng Peiyan and Gong Qinggai echoed in their remarks the sentiments of SMEs and the grassroots.

＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊

See full text of the editorial below

Two days ago, former Vice President Vincent Siew and former Mainland Chinese Vice Premier Zeng Peiyan jointly chaired in Taipei the annual meeting of the “Cross-Strait CEO Summit." Citizen groups protested outside the venue and denouncing the Taipei meeting as a cross-Strait “Summit of the Rich and Powerful.” in Taipei. Hundreds of people from industry, government and academia on both sides of the Strait attended. Current ARATS chairman Chen Deming, former chairman Chen Yunlin, and Mainland’s Taiwan Affairs Office Deputy Director Gong Qinggai participated as advisors. The summit was held at a sensitive moment, right after Taiwan's nine-in-one elections. Citizen groups protested outside the venue, denouncing the Taipei meeting as a cross-Strait “Summit of the Rich and Powerful.” They expressed intense dissatisfaction with current cross-Strait economic cooperation. Siew said cross-Strait economic cooperation must abandon the old thinking in which only the minority of people are benefited, and adopt an upgraded new cross-Strait cooperation framework that will benefit the majority. Zeng Peiyan and Gong Qinggai echoed in their remarks the sentiments of SMEs and the grassroots.

The "Cross-Strait CEO Summit" was chaired by Vincent Siew and Zeng Peiyan, two representative cross-Strait figures. Participants included heavyweights from both sides. It was seen as a cross-Strait business exchange and cooperation platform equal in status with the KMT-CCP Forum, and the Cross-Strait Forum. It was an important symbol of cross-Strait economic cooperation. The summit was officially established last year. It promotes specific cooperation plans and projects covering macroeconomic exchange, smart appliances, energy and petrochemical equipment, financial services, cultural and innovative, biotech, health care, and small and medium enterprises.

It must be said that in recent years the effectiveness of cross-Strait economic cooperation has been diminished. The benefits have clearly titled to big business and consortia, provoking an intense political and economic backlash on Taiwan. During the nine-in-one election campaigns, insinuations and attacks abounded, saying that benefit from cross-Strait cooperation were monopolized by the rich and powerful, as well as the compradores. This had a negative impact on the ruling party in the election. Following the election, voices to review cross-Strait economic cooperation emerged within the KMT.

Since the Ma government took office in 2008, its main theme has been the promotion of cross-Strait economic liberalization and cooperation. Its goal has been to revive Taiwan's economy and reap a peace dividend that will benefit all walks of life, not just a few. Yet a few short years later, cross-Strait economic cooperation has become a major social issue. It has even become a liability to the ruling party's election efforts. The Ma government and many people are baffled. They even blame the problem on distortions spread by the Green camp cyber army.

Cross-Strait economic cooperation has caused social unrest, growing concern, and public resentment for three main reasons. One. The form of exchange. Economic exchange and cooperation platforms such as the "Cross-Strait CEO Summit" are attended mostly by representatives of big business and consortia. They inevitably take on the coloration of special interests. KMT elders often lead delegations of crony entrepreneurs to Beijing to meet with Mainland leaders. Top enterprises and conglomerates often scramble to seek appointment to meet with visiting Mainland heavyweights or to play host to them. This inevitably leaves ordinary people with the impression of business government collusion and political privilege. As such forms of cross-Strait exchanges become closer, they are bound to provoke public resentment. They are too easy to be criticized and demonized. They are unfavorable to be adverse to long-term cooperation and regular exchanges.

Two. The form of cooperation. Cross-Strait industrial cooperation tends to treat Mainland China as the main body. The cross-Strait industrial cooperation bridging plan of the Economics Ministry also concentrates on developing the Mainland market. This increases the magnetic effect that the Mainland has on Taiwan based talent, capital, and technology. This is of course unfavorable to full employment and salary increases on Taiwan. Furthermore, as economic growth has slowed sharply in recent years, the Mainland has switched its efforts to promote industrial restructuring and upgrading. Mainland companies have copied Taiwan experience, talent, and technology. This has swiftly narrowed the gap between the two sides. The result has been rapid economic transition from a complementary cross-Strait relationship to a competitive one. In recent years, Mainland investments abroad have increased multiply. However, political constraints have blocked Mainland investments in Taiwan. The transfer of talent, capital, and technology has remained a one-way street, leading to public unease.

Three. The distribution of benefits. The above model for cross-Strait exchange, cooperation, plus the STA and MTA which are aimed at market opening, clearly benefit consortia and large enterprises, not SMEs, young people, and the grassroots, who are often victims. As a result, cross-Strait economic cooperation continues to lose public support.

Over the past six years, the benefits of cross-Strait economic cooperation have gradually been diminished and distorted to the extent that reform is inevitable. In the future, Taiwan should consider the interests of a majority of people. Siew advocates an upgraded version of cross-strait economic relations. He suggested that cross-Strait business cooperation should have two strategic objectives. They should be "palpable" and they should "share the benefits." Zeng Peiyan also says the two sides should explore new modes of business cooperation to pave the way for SME cooperation, and improve the people's livelihood on both sides of the Strait. As we can see, both sides share the same objectives: Both sides want economic cooperation to benefit the grassroots more.

Specifically, cross-Strait economic cooperation should change in three major directions. One. Exchanges should be among the common folk. The cross-Strait exchange platform should not focus on large companies and consortia. It should try to help SMEs, young people, and the grassroots. Two. Cooperation should focus on improving people's livelihood. It should establish and expand SME partnerships, web services, and public services as the focus of future attention. Three. The benefits should be universal. Market opening and cross-Strait cooperation should make people feel good. They should not benefit only particular companies and organizations. We expect the "Cross-Strait CEO Summit" will work towards that goal, hoping the two governments will make joint effort to make that goal fulfilled.

(Courtesy of China Times Editorial)

Attachment : none