ECFA: Opiate or Panacea?

ECFA: Opiate or Panacea? 
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
June 27, 2013

Summary: The "Trade in Services Agreement," signed in accordance with ECFA, has provoked an uproar. Two issues are involved. One. The administration failed to communicate properly in advance. Two. some local industries whose markets have been opened up may be at risk. Will ECFA and the service industry agreement become a case of "boiling the frog?" That remains to be seen. The key is awareness. We must realize that the pot is being warmed up, either by Beijing or by ourselves.

Full Text below:

The "Trade in Services Agreement," signed in accordance with ECFA, has provoked an uproar. Two issues are involved. One. The administration failed to communicate properly in advance. Two. some local industries whose markets have been opened up may be at risk.

These two issues are real. They must be dealt with appropriately. But if we concentrate exclusively on them, we may overlook the bigger picture, and a more serious problem. If Taiwan becomes addicted to Mainland China's concessions, we may cling to them for dear life, the way infants cling to their baby bottles. We may focus all our attention on cross-Strait trade negotiations, and neglect the larger battlefield of global trade that awaits. By the time we come to our senses and attempt to catch up, it may be too late.

Frankly the crisis is already here. Twenty years ago, Taiwan businesses moved to the Mainland in droves. The NT dollar was appreciating. We successfully invested it outside the island. Within a few short years, we vastly expanded the reach of Taiwan's economy. These opportunities were created through our courage and wisdom. But consider the situation today. The GATS agreement allows beauty parlors, printing shops, herbalists, and other traditional service industries to operate on Taiwan. This has provoked a massive backlash. The opposition DPP has accused the government of "forfeiting our rights and humiliating the nation," and of "selling out Taiwan." But the DPP is pointedly ignoring other, positive aspects of the agreement. Taiwan has retreated, from offense to defense. This is cause for regret. This is precisely why Taiwan is on a path of economic stagnation.

Two indicators reveal Taiwan's stagnation. One. Compare the present to the past. We have lost our momentum. Salaries have not increased for years. This is a key indicator. Two. Compare Taiwan with the Mainland. The gap between the two is rapidly narrowing. People are apprehensive about permitting the Mainland to invest on Taiwan. This is another key indicator. These indicators leave little room for self-deception.

Taiwan's economy has stagnated in recent years. But why? Is it really, as the opposition DPP alleges, because "ECFA is poison?" Taiwan External Trade Association figures show that this is not the case. Last year Taiwan's foreign exports amounted to 300 billion US. Exports to the Mainland amounted to 130 billion US, 43% of the total. Taiwan's imports amounted to 270 billion US. Imports from the Mainland amounted to 37 billion, a mere 14%. Taiwan enjoyed a trade surplus relative to the Mainland amounting to over 90 billion US.

Let us keep it simple. If Taiwan's stagnation was the consequence of opening up the Mainland market, our trade deficit would have been 60 billion US. Taiwan has long trumpeted itself "an economy built on trade." Such a figure is inconceivable. It proves that the allegation that "ECFA is poison" is nonsense. On the other hand, does this figure prove that ECFA was a magic pill that revived Taiwan's economy? Alas, the answer is also no.

Taiwan's stagnation has nothing to do with whether ECFA is good or bad, a poison or panacea. The problem lies elsewhere. Cross-strait issues dominate the thinking of ruling and opposition party politicians and even the public on Taiwan. This makes it impossible for them to see the bigger global picture. They may even reflexively perceive Taiwan's relationship to the world through the lens of cross-Strait relations. Doing so turns ECFA into a funhouse mirror. This makes it impossible for us to accurately evaluate our relationship with other trading partners. Becoming addicted to Mainland concessions is akin to becoming addicted to opiates. We mistakenly begin to think that this is a world without pain, and that everything we desire can be obtained cost free.

For years, Taiwan has harbored two contrasting perceptions of the Mainland. The first is that the Mainland market offers endless opportunities. The second is that the Mainland conceals endless threats. The perception of endless opportunities induced Taiwan businessmen to invest in the Mainland. The perception of endless threats induced Beijing to make endless strategically motivated concessions to Taiwan for the sake of reunification. But lest we forget, the endless opportunities and the endless threats are two sides of the same coin. Constant worry, fear, or complacency may lead to lost opportunities. Blind naivete without vigilance may lead to the threats coming true.

The GATS agreement has been signed. From the perspective of individual industries, trade-offs are inevitable. The government must respond. From the perspective of Taiwan's overall economic well-being, if the benefits outweigh the costs, if the opportunities outweight the threats, then the agreement is worth trying out. More importantly, we must not allow ourselves to become hooked on ECFA concessions. We must not fall into the trap of low standards for cross-Strait talks. We must not forget that the ROC must conduct bilateral negotiations with other countries. Global multilateral negotiations are proliferating. Taipei's diplomatic allies remain few, and on the fringe.

Will ECFA and the service industry agreement become a case of "boiling the frog?" That remains to be seen. The key is awareness. We must realize that the pot is being warmed up, either by Beijing or by ourselves.

ECFA是台灣的麻醉劑或還魂丹
【聯合報╱社論】
2013.06.27 05:14 am

兩岸根據ＥＣＦＡ架構簽署的「服務貿易協議」掀起軒然大波，主要爭議有二：一是行政部門沒有做好事前的溝通工作；二是開放項目可能使國內若干產業陷於險地。

這兩項爭議，都不是假議題，必須妥慎處理。但是，如果只把目光放在這兩處，人們可能會忽略一個更大的危機：台灣若對中國大陸的「讓利」上了癮，因而緊抱著奶瓶不放；或者大家將全副心神全放在兩岸經貿談判的錙銖計較，卻忘了全球貿易有更廣闊的戰場等待台商馳騁，屆時，等回過神來再要追趕，台灣的腳步可能已經遲了。

說真切些，這樣的危機其實已經是「現在進行式」。從廿多年前台商成群結隊地登陸，成功在新台幣升值的壓力下跨出對外投資之路，幾年間大大擴張了台灣的經濟版圖，那是憑藉勇氣和智慧創造出來的機遇。反觀今天，兩岸服貿協議要向陸資開放美容、印刷、中藥材等傳統服務產業，卻遭遇莫大的反彈；在野黨並指控政府「喪權辱國」、「出賣台灣」，而刻意漠視談判中取得的其他積極成就。觀察台灣這種由「攻」退而為「守」的變化，恰恰與台灣經濟停滯不前的軌跡相互映照，令人唏噓。

台灣的停滯不前，有兩個參考點：一，與過去的台灣相比，我們失去了進步的動能，薪資多年不曾調升是一大指標；二，與對岸的大陸相比，兩邊的落差正在急速縮小，人們對於開放陸資來台充滿憂懼是最大指標。從這兩方面看，台灣都已經沒有自欺欺人的空間。

然而，台灣經濟近年的停滯，果真應驗了在野黨一直以來指稱的「ＥＣＦＡ是毒藥」的預言嗎？只要檢視一下台灣對外貿易數字，便知實情並非如此。台灣去年對外出口額為三千億美元，其中對大陸出口達一千三百億美元，占了四成三的比重；台灣進口貿易總額為兩千七百億美元，其中自大陸進口三百七十億，僅占了不到一成四的比重。台灣對大陸享有九百多億美元的順差。

簡單地說，若不是由於大陸市場的開拓，我國對外貿易將出現五、六百億美元的逆差；這對一向自詡「貿易立國」的台灣而言，將是無法想像的事。這個數字，證明「ＥＣＦＡ是毒藥」的說法，是一項偽說。但反過來看，這個數字能說明ＥＣＦＡ是台灣經濟的「還魂丹」嗎？很抱歉，答案恐怕也是否定的。

究其原因，其實不在ＥＣＦＡ的本質是好是壞，是毒藥或是萬靈丹；問題在，一旦兩岸議題主宰了我朝野政治人物乃至整個台灣社會的思維，人們就難有餘裕去觀照更大的環球圖景，甚至可能習慣性地以看待兩岸關係的模式來看待台灣與世界的互動。如此一來，ＥＣＦＡ可能像一個扭曲的稜鏡，讓台灣看不清我們對其他貿易夥伴的真實而對等的關係為何。一旦對大陸的讓利「上癮」，就好像用慣了麻醉劑的患者，會誤以為這是個無痛的世界，對誰都可以予取予求。

多年來，台灣對大陸一直存在兩種截然不同的想像，一種認為大陸市場充滿機會，另一種則認為大陸對我充滿威脅。正是因為「機會論」，促使台商前仆後繼地投向大陸；也正是因為「威脅論」，使北京基於統戰策略不斷向台灣讓利。但別忘了，「機會論」和「威脅論」其實互為表裡：若一味擔心害怕而不思進取，勢必失去機會；若一味天真妄想而不瞻前顧後，威脅必接踵而至。

兩岸服貿協議的簽署，從個別產業看，必然有得有失，政府應該做好因應布局；但從台灣總體經濟看，若是得大於失、機會多於威脅，便值得一搏。更重要的是，我們不要對ＥＣＦＡ讓利的麻醉劑上了癮，更不可掉進兩岸談判的「低標準」陷阱，忘記台灣與其他國家的雙邊談判尚有待開展，而在全球興起的多邊談判中，邦交國不多的台灣其實還處在邊緣地帶。

ＥＣＦＡ或服貿協議會不會變成「溫水煮青蛙」，仍有待觀察。關鍵在，我們必須知道這鍋溫水是北京燒的，還是我們自己燒的。