No Closed Doors! Taiwan Needs Glasnost and Perestroika

No Closed Doors! Taiwan Needs Glasnost and Perestroika
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
April 22, 2010

What Taiwan needs is glasnost and perestroika, i.e., openness and reform. Deng Xiaoping's trademark was openness and reform, or more precisely, reform (gai ge) and openness (kai fang). Thirty years ago Mainland China had hit bottom. Openness and reform allowed the Mainland to experience a rebirth. Today its "peaceful rise" has made the world sit up and pay attention. It may make some on Taiwan uncomfortable, but we need to say it anyway. What Taiwan needs is openness and reform!

The DPP in particular, needs to hear this.

The Republic of China was once an international exemplar of openness and reform. It had a highly liberalized economy, and a highly democratized political system. These were achievements of openness and reform. But globalization, the proliferation of regional economic organizations, the end of Cold War confrontation, and the peaceful development of cross-Strait relations, provoked a reactionary counter current. This counter current opposes reform, opposes openness, and demands for a Closed Door Policy. If this reactionary counter current cannot be overcome, it is unlikely the Republic of China will be able to meet its future challenges.

Taiwan faces a new strategic scenario. One. Globalization. Two. The rise of Mainland China. Mainland China has become the world's factory and the world's marketplace. Three. The small scale of Taiwan's economy. Taiwan has been unable to shed its export-oriented economic model. It must remain linked to the global division of labor chain. It cannot ignore Mainland China. Four. The Republic of China has a free and democratic system. It cannot prevent people from making use of resources from both sides of the Strait to prosper and survive. In other words, openness is the only way out for Taiwan. The government's political and economic reforms must move in the direction of openness.

The real crisis for the government on Taiwan is that it can no longer prohibit the outflow of personnel and capital. Over the past decade or so the government erected all manner of barriers to prevent outside resources from flowing in. The result was resources flowed out, never to be replenished by resources flowing in. The concept of "keeping one's root in Taiwan," and "turning Taiwan into an Asian Pacific Platform" turned out to be impossible and impracticable.

The controversy over Mainland students studying on Taiwan is a clear example. Students from Taiwan have not been prevented from studying on the Mainland. But the DPP is using all its might to prevent students from the Mainland from studying on Taiwan. The Mainland recognizes academic test scores for students from Taiwan. It allows students to use these scores to gain admission to Mainland universities, particularly exceptional students. It even grants them "treatment as citizens," allowing them to obtain occupational licenses and to seek employment on the Mainland. By contrast, the KMT's policy for students from the Mainland includes "three restrictions and six prohibitions." The Democratic Progressive Party's policy is even worse. It calls for an across the board ban. Such is the perverse nature of our Mainland policy. It cannot stop the outflow, and can only stop the inflow. Actually the problem extends far beyond Mainland students studying on Taiwan. It impacts the long term balance in cross-Strait exchanges. It has a major influence on the humanities and politics. One need only look at what overseas Chinese contributed to Taiwan upon their return to appreciate the impact Mainland students on Taiwan could have on society and culture. Besides, for a Closed Door Policy to work, one must block the exits in addition to the entrances. What's the point of blocking the entrances without blocking the exits?

The cross-Strait economic agreement (ECFA) is a perfect example of blocking the entrances without blocking the exits. Trade between Taiwan and the Mainland cannot be stopped. But resources from Taiwan have long flowed toward the Mainland. Taiwan meanwhile, has lost its appeal to Taiwan capital and foreign capital. We are even more resistant toward Mainland capital, and politely decline. This includes the long-term ban on Mainland tourists visiting Taiwan. This is hemorrhaging without recirculating, because recirculating has been deliberately obstructed

Most people see only ECFA's outflow, for example, tariff reductions. Of course this is conducive to the exchange of capital between Taiwan enterprises and the Mainland. But critics fail to see ECFA's inflow. This inflow improves investment conditions on Taiwan. It makes Taiwan capital, foreign capital, and Mainland capital more inclined to invest in businesses on Taiwan. This is conducive to "keeping one's roots in Taiwan." The economic and trade provisions of the DPP's Closed Door Policy have always locked the entrance but not the exit. During its eight years in office, the DPP significantly increased cross-Strait economic interdependence. But it did nothing to "keep one's roots in Taiwan" and to "prevent Taiwan's marginalization." The Democratic Progressive Party opposes ECFA. But in a perverse sense, it is opposing "keeping one's roots in Taiwan" and "turning Taiwan into an Asian Pacific Platform."

Taiwan faces globalization. It faces regional economic organizations such as ASEAN plus N. Taiwan faces Mainland China, which has "peacefully developed" into the world's factory and the world's marketplace. Taiwan must implement perestroika and glasnost, i.e., reform and openness. Of course there will be pain. But unless we open up, we cannot increase our competitiveness. We will lose our attractiveness to global capital. Opening up will improve the conditions required to "keep our roots in Taiwan." Allowing Mainland students to study on Taiwan and signing ECFA are essential to promoting openness and reform.

A Closed Door Policy is unworkable. A Closed Door Policy that blocks only the entrances but not the exits is even less workable. The DPP sees students and capital from Taiwan flowing toward the Mainland. But all it can do is deceive the masses by posturing as a "champion of neglected industries." All it can do is sit back and watch Taiwan's gradual marginalization. One thing is certain. The more the DPP clings to its policy, the less it will be able to keep students on Taiwan, the less it will be able to keep businessmen on Taiwan. Because human and financial capital will never stay in a society whose competitiveness becomes weaker by the day, whose attractiveness declines by the day. Openness will surely inflict suffering. But only reform will offer us hope.

The engine of Deng Xiaoping's reform and opening was the emancipation of the intellect. The DPP could do worse than heed Deng's wisdom.

反對鎖國 台灣需要改革開放
【聯合報╱社論】
2010.04.22 02:01 am

台灣現在需要的是改革開放。改革開放是鄧小平的品牌標語，使得三十年前極度破敗的中國脫胎換骨，如今以「和平崛起」之姿令世人刮目相視。縱然說起來會使國人覺得不太舒服，但是我們仍要說：台灣現在需要的是改革開放！

這句話，尤其要說給民進黨聽。

台灣原是「改革開放」的國際楷模。高度自由化的經濟，與高度民主化的政治，皆是「改革開放」的成就。但是，值此全球化及區域經濟組織成為國際主流之際，又值兩岸關係從冷戰對抗轉向和平發展之時，台灣卻反而出現了一股「反改革／反開放」的鎖國逆流；如果不能打通這任督二脈，台灣恐怕難以迎對未來的嚴峻挑戰。

台灣當前所處的大局大勢是：一、全球化；二、中國崛起，成為世界工廠及世界市場；三、台灣的經濟規模甚小，不能擺脫出口導向的經濟形態，必須與全球分工鏈聯結，也就無法與中國大陸切割；四、台灣是自由民主體制，不能阻禁人民以兩岸為生涯平台。也就是說，「開放」是台灣唯一的生路，而台灣的政經「改革」亦應以「開放」為指向。

台灣真正的危機是：已無可能阻禁人員及資金向外流，十餘年來卻又設下種種障礙，阻禁外面的資源向內流。因而，台灣長期呈現資源外流的「出血」情勢，而不能形成「循環」；所謂「根留台灣」、「建設台灣為亞太平台」等思考，因而皆無實現的條件與憑藉。

是否開放陸生來台的爭議即是一例。台生赴大陸就學已無法阻禁，但民進黨卻全力阻擋陸生來台。大陸採認台灣學測成績讓台生免試入學，更針對台灣的「頂標生」，且以「國民待遇」准許台生考照及就業；相對而言，國民黨版的陸生政策則採「三限六不」，而民進黨更主張完全禁止。這就是「擋不住流出／只阻禁流入」的畸形政策。然而，陸生來台不止是「教育產業」的問題，更對兩岸交流的長期均勢，在人文上及政治上皆有極為重大的影響；只要檢視過去「僑生」返回居地後對台灣的回饋，即知陸生來台在社會及人文上所可能產生的重大意義。何況，鎖國政策必須鎖住兩頭才有用，豈能只鎖進不鎖出？

兩岸經濟協議（ECFA）又是鎖進不鎖出的一例。台灣在經貿上絕不可能與大陸切割，但長久以來，也只見台灣的資源流向大陸，而台灣卻對台資、外資漸漸失去扎根的誘因，對陸資更是敬謝不敏，包括曾經長期禁阻陸客來台觀光。這是「出血」，而無「循環」，且禁阻「循環」。

一般人只見到ECFA「向外流」的部分，例如減免關稅，當然有利於台企台資與大陸來往；卻未能注意，ECFA「向內流」的效應，這是因為改善了台灣的投資條件，使得台資、外資及陸資皆有更大的誘因在台灣投資，亦即有利於「根留台灣」。民進黨在經貿方面的「鎖國政策」，也一直是鎖進不鎖出；八年執政使兩岸經濟依存大幅提高，但對「根留台灣」及「防止台灣邊緣化」卻拿不出對策。民進黨反對ECFA，就某種意義而言，其實就是反對改善「根留台灣」及「將台灣建設為亞太平台」的客觀條件。

面對全球化及區域經濟組織東協加Ｎ，面對台灣必須與已經成為世界工廠及世界市場的中國「和平發展」，台灣必須「改革開放」。開放當然會有一定程度的痛苦，但不開放就不可能鍛鍊台灣自己的競爭力，亦不能維持台灣對全球資源的吸引力。開放，是為了提升「根留台灣」的條件，而陸生來台及ECFA等政策，皆是為了迎對「開放」，而必須有所作為的「改革」。

鎖國政策不可行，而「只鎖進／不鎖出」的鎖國政策尤其不可行。民進黨的這一套鎖國政策，恐將眼看著台生更流向大陸，台資更流向大陸；而只能以「弱勢產業代言人」的角色欺蒙群眾，坐視台灣一步一步趨向邊緣化。可以斷言，民進黨愈這麼幹，愈留不住台生，愈留不住台商；因為人才和資金不會守在競爭力日弱、吸引力日竭的下沉社會。「開放」必有痛苦，「改革」才有希望。

鄧小平「改革開放」的引擎口訣是「解放思想」，何妨借此四字勉民進黨？