James Huang's Talk of “Ants" Demeans Taiwan

James Huang's Talk of “Ants" Demeans Taiwan
United Daily News Editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC) 
A Translation 
August 24, 2016

Executive Summary: The New Southern Strategy is a new frontier for foreign investment, not a panacea for the phenomenon of businesses “Going West”. It is an opportunity for industrial restructuring, not a weapon to use against the Mainland. James Huang's talk of “ants” misjudges reality and demeans Taiwan.

Full Text Below:

James Huang is the Director of President Tsai's "Office for New Southern Strategy". Recently, during a discussino of external economic strategy, Huang said "The Mainland China market is full of elephants. If an ant enters, what can he possibly get out of it?" His remark was wrong on two counts. First, it was self-demeaning. It reduced Taiwan businessmen to the status of ants. Second, it was an admission of strategic confusion. Expanding southward is about diversification. It is not an either/or proposition. Expanding southward and remaining part of the Mainland market are not mutually exclusive.

As the head of the Office for New Southern Strategy, James Huang's talk of ants was a serious faux pas. It reflected the government's lack of vision, and lack of concrete plans for implementation. Taiwan businessmen have been operating on the Mainland for over 20 years. The Hon Hai Group alone employs nearly one million people. How can James Huang use the term "ants" to describe Taiwan businessmen? One reason of course, is the DPP's hatred and ignorance of “China”, i.e., the Mainland Area. But when push comes to shove, they suddenly become so humble. Besides, if they truly see themselves as mere "ants", how can they possibly muster up the courage to “Go south”?

The New Southern Strategy substitutes wishful thinking for hard reality. This is its a blind spot. The new government is blind to its own self-demeaning assumptions. It cannot define a clear goal. It cannot map out a clear path. Yet is demands that everyone “Go south!” In fact, this very dangerous. One example is enough to make everything clear.

President Tsai has proposed a New Southern Strategy, including 10 Guidelines for Action. Meanwhile, Tamkang University's Southeast Asian Studies Research Institute, which has been around for 20 years, was closed down in August for lack of student interest. Currently only Jinan University still has a Southeast Asian Studies Institute. Lee Teng-hui began urging people to “Go south!” when he was president. But the research institutes established in conjunction with the policy still cannot attract any interest. As we can see, the government has yet to get past mere sloganeering. It cannot induce students to conduct research. Even more ironically, the Tsai government recently sounded a clarion call for its New Southern Strategy. National Chengchi University, the Taipei University of Education, and other schools applied to establish Southeast Asian Studies Institutes. Will they become the academic counterparts of the “egg tart fad”? That is deeply worrying.

Will this external policy succeed? That depends on whether it involves bilateral mutual benefits, or merely unilateral wishful thinking. The DPP has upgraded the status of the New Southern Strategy to "the nation's overall foreign trade strategy". It ignores the close political and economic relations the nations of Southeast Asia have with the Mainland. The government is shrilly egging people on. But all anyone sees is abstract goals with no concrete path. When entrepreneur Dai Sheng-tong “followed in the government's footsteps" and invested in Haiti, he lost his shirt and was eventually forced to close up shop. Does the government intend to bear responsibility for any future losses?

Ten nations in Southeast Asia have 650 million people. They are the world's youngest market. Naturally they have their place. But government policy must be more economics and less politics. Only then will it be consistent with the needs of the domestic economy, domestic employment, and the limitations imposed by international political realities. Japan's Southern Strategy has been the most successful one of its kind. We may be able to learn from their experience.

Japan began promoting its Southern Strategy during the 70s. The strategy was developed by the government's  External Trade Organization and the Asian Institute of Economic Research. Together they established the official "trinity" for economic strategy. First, in the name of economic aid, they helped local businesses enter the domestic market. The Japanese government loaned yen and provided infrastructure, enabling Japanese companies to assist Southeast Asian countries in highway and airport construction. This enabled them to enter the Southeast Asian market. By contrast, Taiwan businesses are merely investors in Southeast Asia. They merely take advantage of cheap labor. They do not find their way into the local domestic market.

Secondly, Japan understood the importance of cultivating talent in Southeast Asia. Japan's External Trade Organization helped businesses cultivate talent within Southeast Asia. It set up Southeast Asian language classes and economic and cultural classes. It provided professional advice for businesses entering the Southeast Asian market. This advice was specifically tailored to the industry's market strategy. By contrast, the government on Taiwan assumes that merely knowing English enables one to communicate with anyone in the world. University students have little interest in Southeast Asian languages. Companies are unable to recruit anyone with Southeast Asian language proficiency. This makes it difficult to lay down local roots.

Finally, Japan conducted in depth research on Southeast Asia. To promote its Southern Strategy, the Japanese government established an "Asian Economic Research Institute" to conduct long term analysis of the 10 nations of Southeast Asia. Each year, it publishes a political and economic white paper on Southeast Asia. By contrast, Taiwan's Southeast Asian Studies are scattered among various universities and research institutions. The lack of integration weakens our studies on Southeast Asia.

The New Southern Strategy is a new frontier for foreign investment, not a panacea for the phenomenon of businesses “Going West”. It is an opportunity for industrial restructuring, not a weapon to use against the Mainland. James Huang's talk of “ants” misjudges reality and demeans Taiwan.

聯合／黃志芳的「螞蟻說」是自我矮化
2016-08-25 03:38 聯合報 聯合報社論

總統府「新南向辦公室」主任黃志芳談到台灣對外經濟戰略說，「中國大陸市場已經站滿了大象，螞蟻進去能爭什麼。」他的說法犯了兩大錯誤：一是自我矮化，把台商小看成「螞蟻」；二是戰略思維錯亂，南向拓展是基於多元、分散之需，而不是和大陸市場互斥。

身為新南向辦公室負責人，黃志芳提出失當的「螞蟻說」，反映這個專案缺乏視野與具體可行的執行計畫。試想，台商在對岸廿多年深耕，僅鴻海集團僱用的人數就將近百萬人，黃志芳怎麼會用「螞蟻」來貶抑台商？其中原因，主要是民進黨因長年反中而昧於事實，到了漸要見真章的時候，卻突然變得如此卑微。更糟的是，若是自視為「螞蟻」，又要拿什麼膽識南進？

以想像混淆事實，正是新南向政策的盲點所在。新政府若自我認知矮化，連目標都說不清楚，又畫不出明確路徑，卻呼喚全民南進，其實是很危險的事。我們試舉一例，即一目了然。

就在蔡總統提出新南向十大行動準則之際，有廿多年歷史的淡江大學「東南亞研究所」卻因長期招生不足，在八月一日吹了熄燈號。至此，全台大學的東南亞研究，僅剩暨南大學獨撐。試想，從李登輝時代台灣就不斷鼓吹南向，但伴隨政策而生的系所，多年來竟仍招生不足，可見政府始終未脫虛浮的口號，根本無法誘發學生起而研究、學習動機。更弔詭的是，蔡政府的新南向號角一響，最近馬上又有政大和台北教育大學等校申請成立東南亞學系；這會不會演成學術市場的「蛋塔現象」，則令人擔憂。

對外政策能否成功，理當構築在雙向互惠的基礎上，而非片面的一廂情願。民進黨把新南向政策提升為「國家總體對外經貿戰略」，卻忽略了東南亞各國與大陸的綿密政經關係；政府大聲呼喚人民前進，卻只見抽象的目標，而不見具體的路徑。當年企業家戴勝通「跟著政府腳步」去海地投資，結果慘賠而歸，終告倒閉，政府又負了什麼責任？

東南亞十國擁有六點五億的人口，且是全球最年輕的市場，當然有其重要性。關鍵在，政府在政策操作上，必須要多一點經濟、少一點政治，以符合國內經濟、就業的需求與國際政治的現實。觀察推動南向政策最成功的日本，其經驗或可供我借鏡。

日本從一九七○年代開始推動南向政策，它是由政府開發援助、貿易振興會、亞細亞經濟研究所協力構築的產官學「三位一體」的經濟大戰略。首先，是透過國家的經濟援助為名，協助企業進入當地內需市場。日本政府以日圓貸款、基礎建設等方式提供經援，讓日本企業協助東南亞國家進行交通及機場建設，並藉此打進東南亞市場。反觀台灣企業，目前在東南亞僅扮演單純的投資者角色，無非利用當地的廉價勞工，並無打進當地內需市場的著眼。

其次，是重視東南亞人才的培育。日本「貿易振興會」協助企業培育東南亞人才，它不但開設東南亞語言、經貿及文化等各類課程，也為企業進入東南亞市場提供專業諮詢，針對企業的產業特性量身定做市場策略。反觀台灣，一直以為只用英語即可行遍天下，東南亞語在大學乏人問津，企業也找不到東南亞語言人才，不利於在當地生根。

最後，是深化對東南亞的研究。為推動南向政策，日本政府成立「亞細亞經濟研究」，對東南亞十國進行長期性的系統分析，每年出版東南亞政經白皮書。而台灣目前的東南亞研究則散落大學和研究機構，欠缺統合主導的機構，也因此削弱我對東南亞的研究動能。

新南向是台灣對外投資的新天地，而不是阻擋企業西進的特效藥；是產業轉型的契機，而不是抗衡中國的武器。就這點看，黃志芳的「螞蟻說」，完全是錯估現實的矮化論。