ECFA, A Chance for a Brighter Future

ECFA, A Chance for a Brighter Future
China Times editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
April 3, 2009

After prolonged controversy, the Ministry of Economic Affairs has finally invited representatives from industry and academia to discuss the merits of signing ECFA. Opinion remains divided over the pros and cons of ECFA. But the parties have at least agreed to meet face-to-face. This dialogue should continue, as it will help clarify the relevant issues. Only then can we avoid the ideological confrontation that has hijacked substantive discussion of CECA and ECFA for the past several months.

Dialog has gradually made clear whether we should sign ECFA. Proponents and opponents alike are clearly concerned about the consequences of signing or not signing. Those who advocate signing as soon as possible feel that if we fail to seize the moment, those industries on Taiwan that are still competitive may face high tariffs and the loss of their competitive advantage. They will be forced to relocate in toto, leading to a decline in our GDP. Those who oppose signing worry that given lingering cross-Strait hostility, the hasty signing of ECFA will mean the loss of a bargaining chip. In the absence of tariff protection, less competitive small and medium enterprises may suffer from the dumping of cheap goods by the mainland.

Comparing these two very different positions brings us back to the fundamental question, should ECFA be seen as a threat, or an opportunity? Should the ROC aggressively face this challenge? Or simply bar the doors, curl up in a ball, and do nothing?

If we are willing only to see the signing of ECFA as a threat, then the conclusion is simple. We can refuse to discuss anything. We can lock ourselves behind closed doors and repeat to ourselves that we are masters in our own home. Why should we care about changes in the outside world? Whenever cross-Strait disputes arise, we need only invoke the issue of "sovereignty," of "missiles," and so on. We needn't discuss the issue at all. Approaching problems from such a mindset is easy. Essentially one need do nothing. Those in charge need only issue an impromptu provocation against the other side. If anyone criticizes them, they can accuse critics of "insufficient patriotism toward Taiwan." They can even paint them red. Isn't this what the ruling Democratic Progressive Party did during its eight years in office? The Democratic Progressive Party leadership relentlessly points the finger at the Ma administration. But the Ma administration's cross-Strait policy liberalization measures were formulated during the DPP's eight years in office. The measures were correctly formulated. So why weren't they implemented? The two sides have finally arrived at a promising consensus. Whether to sign ECFA is still under discussion. Yet the alarmists are already inciting fear. They even hope to transform that fear into some form of political mobilization. They hope to obliterate or distort the substance of the issue.

If, one the other hand, we are willing to see the bilateral signing of ECFA as an opportunity, then our work is cut out for us. For example, many internationally competitive industries must alter their regional strategies before the ASEAN Plus One Free Trade Area is officially established. They must position themselves properly before the new international division of labor takes shape. Industries that may be affected must respond or restructure themselves as soon as possible. They may face competition from cheaper goods. But at least they ought to have confidence in the "Made in Taiwan" label! After all, over the next few years an entirely new scenario will prevail. Only by seeing changes as an opportunity, can one deal with them wisely. Only then can one take decisive action, choose the right path, and discover one's proper role. One must not cower in fright behind closed doors, hurl wild accusations, or incite conflict.

Looking back over the past half century, when has the ROC's situation been better? When have the risks the ROC faces been fewer? Over the many winters that have gone by, what has the ROC had to be afraid of? Really? Haven't we who live on Taiwan characterized ourselves as adept at seizing opportunities amidst danger, at creating miracles in the face of adversity? In future consultations with the other side over ECFA, we will of course consider all sorts of risks. We will of course consider prudent responses to a wide range of variables. But we should have confidence in ourselves. We should seize opportunities that arise in a timely manner. We should take appropriate action to deal with them. We must not be afraid of taking even the first step, poor-mouthing our prospects all the way, frightening ourselves to death!

中時電子報
中國時報 　2009.04.03
社論－險中掌握生機 才能締造未來
本報訊


紛擾了許久，經濟部終於在日前正式邀集產學界代表，就未來是否與大陸洽簽ＥＣＦＡ的事宜，舉行座談會，這場對話儘管正反觀點依舊壁壘分明，但至少立場對立的各方總算有了面對面對話的機會。展望未來，這種對話與溝通形式應該持續下去，讓相關問題的全貌能夠呈現的更清晰，才能避免像過去幾個月，不論是ＣＥＣＡ還是ＥＣＦＡ，都一再讓意識形態的對立凌駕實質問題的討論。

透過對話，圍繞在應否洽簽ＥＣＦＡ的爭議核心，其實也漸漸明朗了。很顯然，正反雙方都在乎簽或不簽所可能造成的後果。譬如主張應儘快洽簽的論者，就認為若不儘快掌握時機，台灣現有若干還有競爭性的產業，很可能將面臨高關稅衝擊而喪失優勢，進一步被迫全面外移，造成台灣ＧＤＰ的下降；相對的反對者則擔心在兩岸敵意尚未完全消解下，倉促洽簽ＥＣＦＡ反而會讓台灣喪失談判籌碼，而少數競爭力薄弱的中小企業，也很可能在少了關稅保護後，將面臨對岸廉價品傾銷的衝擊。

對比這兩種截然不同的立場，其實還是可以將之歸結到問題的基本面：亦即面對兩岸未來是否應洽簽ＥＣＦＡ的爭議，究竟是要將之視為對台灣的一種威脅，還是一種機會？台灣該選擇的是面對挑戰，積極作為？還是乾脆關門鎖國，退縮無為？

假若只肯將兩岸洽簽ＥＣＦＡ視做是一種威脅，那麼結論倒也很簡單，乾脆什麼都不必談，就關起門來當皇帝就好了，何必還在乎外面世界的變化？什麼關乎兩岸的所有爭議，只須搬出「主權議題」、「飛彈議題」等論述就收住了，根本就不必再往下談了。要堅持這種思維邏輯其實最輕鬆，因為根本不必有任何作為，主事者只須三不五時發表個聲明挑釁對岸即可。若是碰到有人批評，既可指責對方「不愛台灣」，還可給對方扣上個紅帽子。不諱言的說，這種選擇，不就是民進黨在過去八年執政年代的具體寫照？民進黨主事者曾不斷的強調，指馬政府在兩岸政策上的諸多開放措施，都是在該黨執政期間所規畫，說得好，但為什麼過了八年的歲月，永遠只見規畫卻不見落實呢？如今兩岸之間好不容易見到難得的緩和榮景，連要否洽簽ＥＣＦＡ都還停留在討論階段，卻只見威脅論者已在不斷升高恐嚇的聲浪，甚至還有意將之轉化成一種政治動員，讓問題的實質層面持續被掩蓋，甚至被扭曲。

相對的，如果將兩岸能否洽簽ＥＣＦＡ視為一種機會，那麼台灣此刻需要做的功課，需要趕的進度就實在太多了。譬如不少還具有國際競爭性的產業，恐怕得趕在「東協加一」自由貿易區正式形成前，先調整好區域布局的策略，以便能在全新的國際產業分工新局中卡到位；而那些可能會受到波及的產業，也必須盡快做好因應或是轉型的準備，就算可能必須面對廉價品的競爭，至少也該對「台灣製造」的品牌具備最起碼的信心吧！畢竟，在接下來幾年全新的局面中，惟有將一切的變局視做是一種機會，才能有效展現智慧，也才能採取果斷的行動，選擇對台灣最有利的途徑，也找到對台灣最合適的角色與定位。終究不該是關起門來自己嚇自己，甚至扣帽子搞對立吧。

回顧過去半個世紀，台灣的處境有什麼時候真正好過？台灣所曾面對過的風險又何嘗真正少過？但幾十年寒暑過去了，台灣其實不曾真正畏懼過什麼，不是嗎？台灣人經常自我標榜的精神，不就是善於在風險中看到機會，在逆境中締造奇蹟嗎？未來若是要與對岸協商洽簽ＥＣＦＡ，本來就該考量各種風險，也本來就該審慎因應各種變數，不是嗎？台灣該有這個自信，善於在機會來到時，採取適當行動打開局面吧！總不能連第一步都還未踏出去，就一路唱衰，就頻頻自我恐嚇吧！