Rejection of Partial Sovereignty is the Key to Taiwan's Survival

Rejection of Partial Sovereignty is the Key to Taiwan's Survival
China Times editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
July 14, 2013 

Summary: Our position is "A ruler must never accept partial sovereignty over his nation. He must remain aggressive and never hesitate." We must be aggressive in the face international challenges. Chiang Ching-kuo said, "take a step back and survive." Opening up Taiwan means giving up something. Being aggressive means gaining something. This is the key to Taiwan's economic policy. Reject this and we are lost.

Full text below:

During the Three Kingdoms era, Kong Ming, aka Zhuge Liang, launched six campaigns against the Kingdom of Wei from Qishan. He never achieved his dream. But his ringing declaration that "Heroes and villains cannot share power. A ruler must never accept partial sovereignty over his nation." has echoed down through the ages.

Zhuge Liang knew that the Three Kingdoms struggle meant that either Shu would annihilate Wei or Wei would annihilate Shu. Many within the Kingdom of Shu disagreed. But Kong Ming embarked on his Northern Expedition nevertheless. He knew that if Shu resigned itself to sovereignty over only part of the country, that would lead to its downfall. History proves that Zhuge Liang was right.

Consider today's Taiwan. Consider its geography and population. Consider the ROC's national strength. Compare it to the Kingdom of Shu, which faced relatively fewer challenges. The Kingdom of Shu was protected by natural barriers. It was an agriculture-based society. It enjoyed self-sufficiency. The time and place were different. Today's Taiwan faces dangers greater, more complex, and more varied than those faced by the Kingdom of Shu. 

Therefore what is the key to Taiwan's survival? Zhuge Liang argued that "Heroes and villains cannot share power. A ruler must never accept partial sovereignty over his nation." He was speaking politically. But Mr. Zhuge's wisdom applies economically as well. Our implicit strategy must be "A ruler must never accept partial sovereignty over his nation. He must remain aggressive and never hesitate."

"A ruler must not accept partial sovereignty over his nation." Taipei and Beijing have signed FTAs with each other and with foreign governments. They have also signed a TISA. These agreements are manifestations of our refusal to accept partial sovereignty over our nation. We must refuse to accept partial sovereignty over our nation. We must actively seek FTAs with foreign countries and the Mainland. If we accept partial sovereignty over our nation, we will inevitably fall victim to great danger.

Beginning in 2000, many countries signed intercontinental or regional FTAs. We worried about our economy becoming marginalized. These fears were warranted. We are not like the Kingdom of Shu. We cannot close our doors and ignore the outside world. We cannot adopt an ostrich, head in the sand mentality in the face of international trade integration. If we do, we will lose business. We will lose in the international marketplace. Our people will face death or destitution. They will not be able to live and propsper.

"A ruler must never accept partial sovereignty over his nation. He must remain aggressive and never hesitate." That is easy to say but hard to do. Every FTA we sign requires us to give something up to get something in return. This is why the position that "A ruler must never accept partial sovereignty over his nation." is so difficult to uphold. Has any FTA, signed anywhere in the world, ever allowed on to only take and not give? The answer is no. Both parties must give something. They must also gain something. Only such a Free Trade Agreement is a fair trade agreement.

If one party gains something while losing nothing, then that is an unequal treaty. Therefore losing something is essential to any trade agreement. We must not focus on a single point but lose sight of the Big Picture.

Some say the recent TISA agreement may impact the beauty parlor and hairdressing industries. Will a massive influx of Mainland businesses impact the industry? That remains unknown. But Japanese, Korean, Hong Kong, Singaporean, American, and European companies have been operating beauty salons on Taiwan for some time. Taiwan is already a venue for global industry competition. Can Mainland hairdressers on Taiwan really displace international and local companies? Will allowing Mainland companies in this sector to operate on Taiwan really have a catastrophic impact? The answer should be clear.

As we can see, the impact should not be that great. But other businesses may still be affected. This possibility must not be ruled out. Therefore signing a TISA with the Mainland, a GAT with New Zealand, or an FTA with Singapore should be the same as joining the WTO and committing to open markets. We must first be psychologically prepared to give something up. Those industries that will be most seriously impacted must make advance preparations. They must be provided with the necessary trade relief, grants, or assistance, These are commonly used government countermeasures. Since Taiwan joined the WTO, we have had years of experience with trade remedies. This is something we can handle.

In early 2002, Taiwan formally joined the WTO. This move had the full support of the nation. As we can see, refusal to accept partial sovereignty over one's nation is the high road that will ensure our long term economic survival. As matters stand, multilateral WTO negotiations on international agreements have been blocked. Taipei cannot join the TPP or RCEP overnight. The situation is complex. The aforementioned bilateral trade agreement is an important agreement that does not require us to accept partial sovereignty over our nation.

Our position is "A ruler must never accept partial sovereignty over his nation. He must remain aggressive and never hesitate." We must be aggressive in the face international challenges. Chiang Ching-kuo said, "take a step back and survive." Opening up Taiwan means giving up something. Being aggressive means gaining something. This is the key to Taiwan's economic policy. Reject this and we are lost.

中時電子報 新聞
中國時報 　2013.07.14
社論－進取不偏安 才是台灣生存之道
本報訊

    　三國時代，孔明六出祁山伐魏，最後雖壯志未酬，但他「漢賊不兩立、王業不偏安」的一席話，留傳千古。

    　諸葛亮當時深知，三國之爭，不是蜀亡魏，就是魏亡蜀，故其北伐之策雖在當時蜀國內有不小雜音，但仍勉力而行，因為他知道，偏安的結果就是國家的覆亡，歷史也印證諸葛亮的看法。

    　爾今台灣，我們不論就地理位置、國力與人口數來說，比起三國時的蜀國所面臨者更是相對上小了許多；再加上，當時的蜀國有天險可守，蜀國的經濟在當時農業為主的社會下，能自給自足，這些時空環境下的不同，亦可對比出現今台灣所面對的情形，實較三國時代下的蜀國不但差很大、復又險很多。

    　若此，台灣的生存之道何在？諸葛亮的漢賊之說是政治上的觀點與語言，若從經濟的角度而言，諸葛先生的智慧與方略仍可適用，我們或可將其方略引伸成「王業不偏安，進取不遲疑」。

    　而所謂王業不偏安的道理，就台灣目前與各國乃至中國大陸所簽的各個自由貿易協定與服務業貿易協議，都是我們不偏安的最好實踐與註解。若是我們偏安，不積極地與各國乃至中國大陸洽簽各相關貿易協定，其結果將會落入偏安必不可得的險境中。

    　在二○○○年之後，世界各國間不論是跨洲際的，或是區域內的自由貿易協定蜂湧而至，為此，常擔心我們在經濟上很可能被邊緣化，這個擔心是正確的，因為，我們並不是當年的蜀國能關起門來過日子，相反的，若是我們以鴕鳥心態關起門來不參與國際經貿整合時，必將快速的失去訂單、失去國際市場，卒至民生凋敝，若此台灣將無安身立命之所。

    　「不偏安、求進取」這樣的策略說的容易，但做起來困難，因為，每個自貿協定我們都要捨一些，才能得一些，但這也是不偏安的重要之處與困難之處。試問，世界任何兩兩自貿協定間，有哪一方是只有得而沒有失的，答案是沒有。兩方間一定是各有所失，也一定各有所得，這才是公平的貿易協定。

    　否則若只有一方有得而沒有任何失時，那肯定是強權下的不平等條約了。所以「失」一定是任何一個貿易協定下的必然，我們不必、也不能單點無限放大，而至全盤皆輸。

    　以這次服貿協議中常被提及可能受衝擊的美容、美髮業而言，大陸該行業的業者將來會不會大舉入境猶未可知，然事實是，現今不論是日本、韓國、香港、新加坡，或是美歐的業者早已可在台灣從事美容美髮業，台灣已是世界各國業者角逐的場所，若此，則大陸美容美髮業者真能在台灣打敗上述各國業者及本國業者嗎？開放大陸業者來台經營此一行業就會有很不得了的衝擊了嗎？答案應是清楚的。

    　以上述的例子來說，它的衝擊應不是很大的，但其他業者是否仍可能受到衝擊，這個可能性仍不能被排除，故不論與大陸所簽服貿協議或是與紐西蘭、新加坡所簽的自由貿易協定，就如同當年我們在進入ＷＴＯ的貿易協定中承諾要開放市場般，我們須先有須捨、能捨的心理準備，當然，對於可能會受到真正衝擊的業者，也要及早因應，並積極進行相關的貿易救濟，給與輔助及協助也是可行，亦是各國常用的應對之策，我們台灣自ＷＴＯ簽訂後，已有許多年的貿易救濟上的施行經驗，相信定能妥善處理的。

    　於二○○二年初時，從台灣正式加入ＷＴＯ，當時舉國上下全力支持，足可說明，不偏安是台灣經濟上生存的王道。事值今日，國際間ＷＴＯ多邊協定談判受阻，台灣在加入ＴＰＰ或ＲＣＥＰ復又一蹴不可及的情況下，上述各雙邊的貿易協定就是現階段不偏安政策的重要試金石。

    　且讓我們以「王業不偏安、進取不遲疑」的態度，積極地面對國際間的各種挑戰，因為，也正如當年經國先生所說的「退一步即無死所」般，開放（捨）與進取（得）是台灣在經濟上最重要的策略，捨此已無它矣。