From ECFA to TPP: Taiwan's Way Out

From ECFA to TPP: Taiwan's Way Out
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
June 28, 2012

Summary: Taiwan faces two main challenges and opportunities. One. Can Taiwan maintain peaceful and stable cross-Strait coopetition? Two. Can Taiwan cope with globalization and participate in regional economic integration? Taiwan's economic way out and Taiwan's political way out are one and the same. Politics and economics must travel down the same road. There must be no contradiction between the two. They must live in harmony. They need not clash. Only this will enable us to go from ECFA to TPP.

Full Text below:

The recent economic summit was all about finding a way out for Taiwan. Taiwan faces two main challenges and opportunities. One. Can Taiwan maintain peaceful and stable cross-Strait coopetition? Two. Can Taiwan cope with globalization and participate in regional economic integration? The answer: Taiwan's way out is to go from ECFA to TPP.

Cross-Strait coopetition is inseparable from globalization, regionalization, and liberalization. Taiwan cannot globalize, regionalize, and liberalize without the Chinese Mainland. Taiwan's coopetition with the Mainland requires cross-Strait peace. Taiwan must participate in regional economic integration. It must also participate in the "Trans-Pacific Economic Partnership Agreement" (TPP) as a counterweight to the interdependence concomitant with its cross-Strait relationship.

The recent summit reached a consensus: Without cross-Strait peace, without the "cross-strait economic cooperation framework agreement" (ECFA), Taiwan cannot promote regional economic integration with other economies. Taiwan's failure to participate in regional economic integration could undermine cross-Strait coopetition and cross-Strait peace. Even summit panelists from the United States, Europe, and Japan agree.

Cross-Strait coopetition and regional economic integration co-exist and compete. Taiwan requires peaceful coexistence in cross-Strait political and economic relations. Taiwan also needs to participate in regional economic integration. Taiwan must turn around and use regional economic integration to stabilize cross-Strait political and economic relations. Without peaceful and stable cross-Strait political relations, Taiwan's economy has no way out. Taiwan's economy needs a way out, one compatible with cross-Strait relations and Taiwan's international relations. If Taiwan has no economic way out, then it has no political way out. Conversely, if it has no political way out, then it has no economic way out.

Cross-Strait coopetition and regional economic integration co-exist and compete. This is not something Taiwan can choose to accept or reject. Taiwan has no choice in the matter. We must face challenges and opportunities. Cross-Strait coopetition has persisted for over 20 years. Even during Lee Teng-hui's "avoid haste, be patient" era, Taiwan was never free of the Mainland's gravitational field. This is a truth that Taiwan must face. In regional economic integration, Taiwan's competitors, including South Korea, are signing free trade agreements (FTAs). The fear is that Taiwan will not be able to sign them. Not signing is not an option. Not signing equals marginalization.

Taiwan has signed ECFA with the Chinese Mainland. It is attempting to sign FTAs with other economies. Taiwan has economic considerations. Taiwan also has political considerations. Economic and trade exchanges with the Mainland improve cross-Strait political relations. This is essential if we want to sign FTAs, establish an international platform, or take advantage of international trade and economic ties to enhance Taiwan's political security.

The Ma administration has laid out its "Taiwan's Political and Economic Roadmap." It starts with ECFA, and moves from ECFA to FTAs, to a Kaohsiung Free Trade Zone, to TPP, and eventually a Taiwan Free Trade Island. It is a way out that serious leaders in the ruling and opposition parties should consider. We must avoid economic marginalization. We must also avoid political isolation and ostracism. If TPP is established but with Taiwan outside its political and economic realm, the consequences will become clear soon enough. 

Economic opening and political liberalization are strange bedfellows. Refusing economic openness makes it impossible to enhance competitiveness. But implementing economic openness could make economic survival difficult. The economic competition could be overwhelming. For Taiwan, a political and economic way out means that political liberalization must succeed. It is a path of no return. Failure is not an option.

Taiwan has no choice. It must take this route. Will this route enable us to reach our destination? That depends upon the ruling and opposition parties.  They share responsibility. If the Ma administration cannot do it, then the Democratic Progressive Party must. Alas, the DPP insists that the Kaohsiung Free Trade Zone "sells out Taiwan." How can it be expected to support TPP? How can it be expected to support a Taiwan Free Trade Island?

The road from ECFA to TPP is strewn with severe external obstacles. The journey will be impossibly arduous. Blue vs. Green bickering on Taiwan has no end in sight. If anything, it is intensifying. If so, we can forget our dreams. We reiterate our plea. If Taiwan wishes to take this route, bipartisanship is essential. Summit panelists were unanimous. End vicious infighting. End internal bickering. Morris Chang called for ruling and opposition party consensus on foreign policy. Former Democratic Progressive Party Legislator Hong Chi-chang called on opposition parties to be rational, responsible, and loyal.

Taiwan's economic way out and Taiwan's political way out are one and the same. Politics and economics must travel down the same road. There must be no contradiction between the two. They must live in harmony. They need not clash. Only this will enable us to go from ECFA to TPP.

台灣的出路：從ECFA到TPP
【聯合報╱社論】
2012.06.28

歸納這場高峰會的論辯，為台灣找出路，主要的挑戰與機遇有二：一、能否維持和平穩定的兩岸競合關係；二、能否因應全球化，及參與其他區域經濟整合。具體而言，台灣的出路就是：從ＥＣＦＡ走到ＴＰＰ。

兩岸競合關係本身，其實就是台灣全球化、區域化、自由化的重要課題，畢竟，台灣不可能出現「沒有中國大陸的全球化、區域化或自由化」；但另一方面，台灣在增進兩岸競合之際，亦須藉由兩岸的和平架構，推進參與其他區域經濟整合，如「跨太平洋經濟夥伴協議」（ＴＰＰ），以平衡兩岸的互賴關係。

此次高峰會有一主流共識：沒有兩岸的和平架構，或失去了「兩岸經濟合作架構協議」（ＥＣＦＡ）的支撐，台灣就很難再推進參與其他區域經濟整合；而不設法擴大參與其他區域經濟整合，則兩岸競合的平衡與和平亦可能傾斜或扭曲。連參加高峰會的美、歐、日代表亦有此類見解。

在「兩岸競合」與「參與區域經濟整合」相生又相剋的架構下，台灣必須以和平共生的兩岸政經關係為基礎，進而設法參與其他區域經濟整合，再回過頭藉區域經濟整合來改善及穩定兩岸政經關係。因此，沒有和平穩定的兩岸政治關係，無從談台灣經濟的出路；而台灣經濟的出路，也必須與台灣在兩岸及國際間的政治出路兼籌並顧。亦即，經濟沒出路，政治也不會有出路；反之，政治沒出路，經濟也沒出路。

再者，「兩岸競合」與「參與區域經濟整合」這個相生相剋的架構，已非台灣可作「接受或不接受」的選項，而是台灣別無選擇、必須面對的挑戰或機遇。因為，就「兩岸競合」言，二十餘年來，即使在「戒急用忍」年代，台灣也從未跳脫大陸的經濟磁吸作用，這是台灣必須誠實面對的課題。至於「參與區域經濟整合」，則在台灣的競爭對手如韓國等紛紛議簽「自由貿易協議」（ＦＴＡ）時，台灣只有恐怕簽不成的憂慮，而似乎沒有「不參加」的思考空間。因為，不參加，就必是邊緣化。

其實，不論是台灣與大陸的ＥＣＦＡ，或與其他國家議簽ＦＴＡ，除了經濟思維，亦是一種政治思考。與大陸進行經貿交流，當然有助於改善兩岸政治關係；想要議簽其他ＦＴＡ或建立國際平台，亦是欲藉國際的經貿紐帶來提升台灣的政治安全。

因此，馬政府如今攤開的「台灣政經路徑圖」：ＥＣＦＡ→ＦＴＡ→高雄自由經濟示範區→ＴＰＰ→台灣自由經貿島，確是朝野應當嚴肅思慮的台灣的出路。這不只是在經濟上不欲被邊緣化，也是在政治上不欲被孤立；只要想一想若在ＴＰＰ成立後，台灣倘仍置身其外的政經處境如何，即知其中道理。

眾所周知，開放及自由化其實是一個天生的悖論：不開放，不可能提升競爭力；若開放，卻不一定能禁得起、贏得了競爭。於是，對台灣來說，為了開闢政經出路，自由化即成了只許成功、不容失敗的不歸路。

台灣要不要走這條路，看來是別無選擇；至於這條路走不走得成，則是朝野共同的責任。今日若馬政府走不成，另日民進黨執政也必定走不成。然而，民進黨如果連高雄自由經濟示範區亦視為「賣台」，則更如何奢言ＴＰＰ，及台灣自由經貿島？

其實，由ＥＣＦＡ至ＴＰＰ這條路徑，所將面臨的外部挑戰之嚴峻，已幾乎是一個不可能的任務；何況，倘若台灣內部藍綠撕裂的衝突依然如故，甚至變本加厲，那也就根本不必有此夢想了。因此，我們一再呼籲，台灣若要穿越這條路徑，唯一的可通行車輛就是「兩黨一致」（Bipartisanship）；而在這場高峰會中，結束惡鬥、終止內耗，也是異口同聲的關注，如張忠謀主張朝野兩黨對外政策應當一致，而民進黨前立委洪奇昌也主張，反對黨應是理性負責的忠誠反對黨。

台灣的經濟出路與政治出路，其實是同一條路。必須政經同軌，不宜政經矛盾；應使相生，勿令相剋。如此，始有可能從ＥＣＦＡ走到ＴＰＰ。