Mainland Capital Turns to Korea, Taiwan Increasingly Marginalized

Mainland Capital Turns to Korea, Taiwan Increasingly Marginalized
China Times Editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
June 9, 2015

Executive Summary: South Korea is Taiwan's major trade competitor. It is also Mainland China's major trading partner. Ask Mainland business leaders whom they prefer to do business with. Is it Korea or Taiwan? The answer is obviously important. The decisions made by business people will determine the future of cross-Strait and PRC-ROK economic and trade relations. As matters stand, the answer appears self-evident.

Full Text Below:

South Korea is Taiwan's major trade competitor. It is also Mainland China's major trading partner. Ask Mainland business leaders whom they prefer to do business with. Is it Korea or Taiwan? The answer is obviously important. The decisions made by business people will determine the future of cross-Strait and PRC-ROK economic and trade relations. As matters stand, the answer appears self-evident.

Ma Yun likes Taiwan. He has gone to a great deal of trouble to lecture at NTU. Two thousand admission tickets were snapped up instantly, paralyzing the Net. Unfortunately young peoples' passionate response to Ma Yun has not persuaded the government. As of March and May this year, Alibaba and Taobao remain accused of being "Mainland capital disguised as foreign capital". The Ministry of Economic Affairs has demanded divestiture within six months and a 120,000 NT fine. Ma Yun joked bitterly, saying that the world was changing so fast even he didn't know whether his capital was foreign capital or Mainland capital. 

By contrast, Ma Yun's simultaneous overtures to South Korea have been a roaring success. Taobao established itself in South Korea this May. South Korean Deputy Prime Minister gave Alibaba's South Korean Pavilion plentiful media coverage and a high profile debut. According to Mainland China's Commerce Department, the Mainland invested 1.19 billion USD in South Korea in 2014, up from 481 million USD in 2013, a 147.2% increase.

In 2014, the Chinese mainland became, for the first time, a net exporter of capital. Foreign investment reached 120 billion USD. During the first four months, foreign investment surged 36.1% over the same period last year. Mainland capital is welcomed among developed regions. During 2014, Mainland investment in the US increased 23.9%. Mainland investment in the EU increased 1.7 times, far higher than the overall increase in foreign investment. British Ambassador Sebastian Wood said that over the past five years, Mainland Chinese investment in Britain has grown by 85% per annum. The Financial Times estimated that over the next 10 years Britain would desperately need capital for basic infrastucture projects, and provide a major opportunity for Mainland capital.

Mainland capital is welcomed the world over. Only on Taiwan is Mainland capital unwanted. Mainland investors encounter huge institutional barriers on Taiwan. Prior to 2009, Taiwan flatly rejected all Mainland capital. During Ma Ying-jeou's term, the door was opened ever so slightly. But over the past several years, the door has remained partly closed. Consider market access. Foreign capital is allowed unless specifically prohibited. Mainland capital is prohibited unless specifically allowed. Foreign investment is approved after the fact. Mainland investment requires approval before the fact. An excessively high threshold for Mainland capital has long made capital investment in Taiwan difficult. Last year, the Sunflower Student Movement halted the entry of Mainland capital. According to Executive Yuan Investment Commission statistics, January-November 2014 approved Mainland capital projects fell by 10% over the same period last year.

Taiwan still has a considerable store of wealth. It considers its funds sufficient. It says it "lacks markets, not capital". But regional economic integration is real. Taiwan and South Korea have highly similar industrial and trade structures. In recent years, the global economy has cooled.  Governments everywhere are seeking opportunities abroad. South Korea has taken the lead. 2014 data shows that the FTA coverage rate for the US, EU, ASEAN, and other economies reached 36.81%, six times that of Taiwan. South Korean FTA is expected to take effect. Mainland capital is turning toward South Korea. Foreign capital is also likely turn toward Mainland China. Investment in Taiwan continues to shrink.

Taiwan should have little difficulty recognizing its own dilemma. A sluggish domestic market, low return on capital, a substantial outflow of foreign capital, money unable to make money, and a loss of economic dynamism. Private capital investment in real estate has inflated housing prices, provoking public resentment. Faced with similar predicaments, South Korea maintained open markets. Taiwan did the opposite. Beginning last year, Taiwan broke off talks on the STA, MTA, and other market integration processes. It continues to impose limits on industry, and sits idly by while the Mainland and South Korea increase cooperation, enhancing the competitiveness of South Korea relative to Taiwan. Taiwan fears competition, yet stubbornly rejects Mainland capital. This is sure to accelerate the economy's downward spiral.

The Mainland economy is a giant magnet. It has large volume and a strong magnetic field. Taiwan has no alternative. Ernst & Young says the purpose of the Mainland's One Belt, One Road is to advance its competitive industries and transfer surplus production capacity to countries along the way. Mainland capital is leading regional economic change. If Taiwan's habitual rejection of Mainland capital persists, it will soon be marginalized by regional integration. By then the question will not be whether Taiwan allows Mainland capital to come to Taiwan, but whether the Mainland is willing to let Taiwan play at its table.

Taiwan's difficulties require clear thinking. Taiwan must change course and get back on track. For Beijing, Taiwan's upcoming 2016 election presents a multitude of political variables. To avoid uncertainty, the Mainland's policy toward Taiwan will naturally become more cautious and conservative.

The Mainland authorities must realize that winning hearts and minds is the basis of all political and economic strategy. The Sunflower Student Movement marks the appearance of the younger generation on the stage of history. Their vision will determine the peoples' future. Mainland China must adopt a policy that inspires young people. For example, young people on Taiwan are most concerned about rising housing prices and their inability to buy a home. The Mainland may wish to consider consultation with the SEF. The Mainland could invest in the construction of decent housing, providing low-cost housing to young people wh need homes. Shattering stereotypes, and exploring the feasibility of such moves is better than nothing.

陸資轉向哈韓 台灣邊緣化加速

2015-6-9 中國時報

南韓是台灣主要貿易競爭對手，也都是中國大陸主要貿易夥伴，如果問陸商企究竟比較哈韓還是哈台？答案顯然非常重要，因為商企的動向將決定中韓與兩岸經貿關係的榮枯，眼下這個問題的答案似不言自明。

馬雲很哈台，不辭辛苦到台大演講，當然人氣爆棚，2000張門票秒殺，還一度造成網路癱瘓。但馬雲的熱情與年輕人的回應並未能說服政府對馬雲手下留情。今年3月和5月阿里巴巴和淘寶涉嫌「陸資冒充外資」，被經濟部限半年撤資並罰款12萬元。馬雲自我解嘲「世界變化太快」，連自己也搞不清「是外資還是陸資」。

相對照的是，馬雲同步哈韓卻大獲成功。繼淘寶進入南韓後，今年5月阿里巴巴「南韓館」請到南韓副總理高規格站台後光榮登場。根據大陸商務部數據，中國大陸2014年對韓全年投資申報額由2013年的4.81億美元升至11.9億美元，增幅高達147.2%。

2014年，中國大陸首次實現資本淨輸出，對外投資達到1200億美元，今年前4個月對外投資同比勁增36.1%。陸資在發達地區廣受接納，2014年對美國投資增23.9%，對歐盟投資更暴增1.7倍，遠高於對外投資總體增速。英駐華大使吳百納稱，過去5年中國大陸對英投資年均增85%，英國《金融時報》預計未來10年英國基建投資缺口巨大，陸資極具潛力。

陸資進軍全球都受到歡迎，反觀台灣，陸資想「哈台」卻難於上青天。大陸投資人在台灣遭遇巨大的制度壁壘，2009年之前台灣對陸資完全關閉，馬英九執政後才小小開放，但好幾年過去仍是「猶抱琵琶半遮面」。在市場准入上，對外資實施「負面表列」，對陸資則是「正面表列」；對外資「事後申報」，對陸資則「事先申報核准」。過高門檻使陸資投資台灣始終難以開展，去年太陽花學運更造成陸資卻步後果，據行政院投審會統計，2014年1至11月獲核准的陸資入台項目同期銳減超過一成。

當然，今天台灣仍有相當的財富積累，自認資金充裕、「只缺市場不缺錢」。但要正視的是，區域經濟融合是大趨勢，台灣與南韓產業及貿易結構高度相似，近年全球經濟遇冷，各國都在創造更大的外部機會，這方面南韓已占盡先機。2014年資料顯示，其與美國、歐盟、東協等多個經濟體出口貿易的FTA覆蓋率達36.81%，是台灣的6倍。預計中韓FTA生效後，不僅更多陸資轉投南韓，外資亦可能減少來台而轉往大陸，對台投資將繼續萎縮。

台灣認清自身困境的前因後果並不難：內需市場不振，資金回報率低，外資大幅流出，「錢不能生錢」，經濟活力消退。以民間資本為主導的投資轉向房地產，炒高房價又引發民怨。在相似的困境下，南韓秉持積極開放的策略，台灣卻是反其道而行。去年以來台灣與大陸中斷了包括《服貿協議》、《貨貿協議》在內的所有一體化進程，產業上繼續劃地自限，坐視大陸和南韓深化合作基礎，提升南韓對台灣的競爭力。台灣懼怕競爭，又對陸資「嚴防慎拒」，經濟勢必加速陷入內縮困局。

大陸經濟是巨型磁石，體量之大，磁場之強，一衣帶水的台灣別無選擇。安永事務所稱，大陸意欲借助「一帶一路」，推進其優勢產業和富餘產能向沿線國家轉移，陸資正在主導區域經濟變局。若台灣「防拒陸資」格局不破，不要許多時日，台灣就將在區域一體化的進程中自動退居邊緣，或許，屆時要傷腦筋的就不是「台灣讓不讓陸資來」，而是「陸資帶不帶台灣玩」。

台灣的困境要靠台灣自己想通，改弦易轍才能回到正軌，尤其就北京而言，台灣2016大選在即，政治變數甚多，為避免不確定風險，大陸對台政策自然轉趨謹慎保守。

但大陸當局應該認識，贏取民心是一切政治、經濟策略的基礎。太陽花學運以來，台灣青年一代已登上歷史舞台，他們的願景就是未來民心所向。大陸應該選擇一個讓年輕人最有感的政策，大膽推動。譬如，台灣年輕人最在意房價高漲「沒有房產」，大陸不妨以新思維主動與海基會協商，由大陸投入資金廣建合宜住宅，低價供應無住屋年輕人。打破成見，探討可行性，積極作為，聊勝於無。

Tsai Ing-wen Reaffirms ROC Constitution: A Step in the Right Direction

Tsai Ing-wen Reaffirms ROC Constitution: A Step in the Right Direction
United Daily News Editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
June 7, 2015

Executive Summary: Tsai Ing-wen visited the US in her capacity as DPP presidential candidate, hopeing to win Washington's trust and avoid further obstacles on her road to the presidency. Given how she was treated, Tsai Ing-wen apparently passed muster with the US government. The key was not her deliberately ambiguous lip service to "maintaining the status quo", but her pledge to "reaffirm the constitutional framework of the Republic of China". This was a step in the right direction.

Full Text Below:

Tsai Ing-wen visited the US in her capacity as DPP presidential candidate, hopeing to win Washington's trust and avoid further obstacles on her road to the presidency. Given how she was treated, Tsai Ing-wen apparently passed muster with the US government. The key was not her deliberately ambiguous lip service to "maintaining the status quo", but her pledge to "reaffirm the constitutional framework of the Republic of China". This was a step in the right direction.

Tsai Ing-wen prepared diligently for her trip. First she spoke before overseas Chinese at a banquet in Los Angeles. She promised that the "democratic status quo would not change". She promised to "ensure stability across the Taiwan Strait". Then she wrote a letter to the Wall Street Journal, promising to establish a transparent mechanism to increase cross-Strait trust and cooperation. She promised principled exchanges, cooperation, and dialogue. She promised that a spirit of cooperation would continue to guide cross-Strait relations. Most importantly, she spoke before Washington's Center for Strategic and International Studies, where she vowed that "After I am elected president, I will abide by the current ROC constitutional framework, respect public opinion, and continue to promote the peaceful development of cross-Strait relations."

Before her visit, Tsai Ing-wen ducked the issue of the 1992 consensus. She merely reiterated that she would "maintain the status quo", while refusing to say what the "status quo" was. When questioned, she bobbed and weaved. As President Ma Ying-jeou quipped, if Tsai Ing-wen's definition of the status quo is "no [immediate] reunification, no Taiwan independence, and no use of force," then Tsai Ing-wen is guilty of plagiarism. Tsai Ing-wen has said nothing about the 1992 consensus, but has chosen to reaffirm the "Republic of China Constitution". This was her way of compromising without losing face.

As we have long reiterated, the Republic of China is the common denominator for the blue, green and red camps. The ROC Constitution evolved on the Chinese mainland. It is a legacy of China as a whole. It was amended on Taiwan to meet the practical requirements of democracy. It represents the current position of the Kuomintang. Beijing may not endorse it openly, but privately it accepts it. If Tsai Ing-wen wants to run for President the Republic of China, she must swear allegiance to the Constitution of the Republic of China. She must declare that she accepts the current constitutional framework of the Republic of China.  This is both logical and essential. Deep green supporters have no grounds for opposition. She has used this method to offer her "different interpretation". We hope she can strike an agreement with the Mainland.

When governments have differed in the past, they have usually relied on diplomacy. The Shanghai Communique was an example. So was the 1992 consensus. On the one hand, they struck agreements with the other side. On the other hand, they appeased domestic factions. The most recent example of was the four points of consensus reached in November last year between Beijing and Tokyo. The Mainland Chinese version says "The two sides have different ideas on the sovereignty of Diaoyutai". The Japanese version acknowledges that the two sides have "different understandings". The two sides of course understand what the other is saying, but this is a mutually acceptable solution. Beijing and Tokyo have gone from sabre rattling to two summit meetings. Relations have gradually been normalized.

The Mainland is still evaluating Tsai Ing-wen's remarks. So far it has not expressed an opinion. The US government, including congressional representatives and officials such as US Deputy Secretary of State Antony Blinken, welcomed Tsai Ing-wen's statement. From the macro level there were three main reasons.

One. The KMT has yet to nominate a candidate for the 2016 presidential election. But polls and the political situation suggest that Tsai Ing-wen is the likely winner. The US knows this. Four years ago, the US preferred to support the re-election of President Ma Ying-jeou. As a result, national security officials criticized Tsai Ing-wen, saying that times have changed. US attitudes have changed.

Two. Tsai Ing-wen has not recognized the 1992 consensus. From Beijing's perspective, this is unsatisfactory. She has been careful recently never to mention the term. When asked about her CSIS speech, she repeatedly says that her position on cross-Strait relations is clearly laid out in her speech. From Beijing's perspective, she is still being evasive. But from Washington's perspective, she is being cautious about the big picture.

Three. As long as Tsai Ing-wen does not provoke a conflict between the two sides and drag the US into a quagmire, current Washington-Beijing relations allows for some tension between the two sides. From the US perspective, that is not necessarily a bad thing. The Asian-Pacific situation and Sino-Japanese tensions have led to new guidelines for security. Tensions are running high between Vietnam, the Philippines and the Chinese mainland. This has brought Vietnam and the Philippines closer to the United States. Recently the US Assistant Secretary of State visited Taiwan, and ROC generals attended US Pacific Fleet swearing in ceremonies. This means Washington has expectations regarding Taipei. The DPP position is actually more consistent with the current US strategy of rebalancing than the KMT's.

In fact, it does not matter how well the United States treated Tsai Ing-wen, or whether Mainland China accepts her. What Tsai Ing-wen really needs to confront and seek, is the trust and affirmation of the Taiwan public. How she talked and walked during a short visit is irrelevant. Tsai Ing-wen has chosen to reaffirm the ROC Constitution. That is a step in the right direction. We hope she is not merely putting on a show

回歸憲法：蔡英文跨出正確的一步

2015-06-07聯合報

蔡英文以民進黨總統參選人身分訪美，希望能夠贏得美國的信任，以免總統之路再橫遭險阻。由此行受到的接待規格看，在美國政府眼中，蔡英文的表現算是過關的；其中關鍵，並非其「維持現狀」的曖昧論調獲得認可，而是她「回歸中華民國憲政體制」的表態，跨出正確的一步。

蔡英文此行，經過周全的準備。她先在洛杉磯僑宴演說，宣示「民主現狀不變」和「確保台海局勢穩定」；然後在《華爾街日報》投書，強調將建立透明機制，強化兩岸互信與合作，並透過有原則的交流、合作及對話，確保合作精神繼續指引兩岸關係的改善。最重要的是，在華盛頓智庫「國際與戰略研究中心」（CSIS）的演講，她說出了：「當選總統之後，我將在中華民國現行憲政體制下，依循普遍民意，持續推動兩岸關係的和平發展」。

訪美前，蔡英文避談「九二共識」，僅一再重申「維持現狀」，卻又無法說清「現狀」為何，因此遭外界一再質疑她投機閃躲。誠如馬英九總統對她的批評，如果說清楚現狀就是「不統、不獨、不武」，就會涉嫌抄襲馬英九的主張；在這種情況下，蔡英文避談九二共識，卻選擇回到「中華民國憲法」，是一個正當而不失顏面的妥協。

我們過去再三指出，中華民國是藍綠紅的最大公約數，中華民國憲法是在大陸制定，有全中國的傳承；而在台灣的增修條文，則兼顧了民主的實際要求。這是國民黨目前的立場，也是北京雖不能公開贊同、卻私下認同的。蔡英文既然要參選中華民國總統，必須對中華民國憲法宣誓效忠，宣稱接受現行中華民國憲法體制，原是自然及必然之事，內部深綠支持者亦無法反對。而她藉此發揮「各自表述」的精神，希望與大陸求取協議。

過去，國與國之間以「各說各話」的形式，發揮外交智慧的範例，比比皆是。上海公報如此，九二共識也是如此；一方面求取對方之協議，另外一方滿足內部之堅持，最新的例子是去年十一月的中日四點共識。中方版本是「雙方對釣魚台主權有不同主張」，日方版本則是承認雙方有「不同認識」，雙方當然都懂彼此的語文，但這是雙方都接受的解決方案。中日從原本劍拔弩張、互不往來，到現在兩國最高領導人兩度會面，關係逐漸正常化。

對於蔡英文此行，大陸方面仍在研究其演說內容和觀點，迄今尚未表態。至於美方，包括與蔡英文會晤的國會議員及副國務卿布林肯等美方官員，都對蔡英文的說法表示歡迎。從大形勢觀察，這主要有三點原因：

首先，台灣的二○一六總統大選，國民黨雖尚未推出具體人選，但根據既有民調及政治情勢，蔡英文的當選機率不小；這點，美國看得很清楚。四年前，美國寧願支持連任的馬英九總統，因此由國安會官員放話批評蔡英文；四年後時移勢易，美國態度已有改變。

其次，蔡英文不承認九二共識，讓北京不滿，但她近日小心翼翼不提這四個字，即使在CSIS的演講中，她再三被問到，始終只說關於兩岸關係她已在演說中清楚表達。這看在北京眼中，她仍是迴避閃躲，但看在華府眼中，卻是她謹慎顧全大局。

第三，只要蔡英文不挑起兩岸衝突，把美國捲入，以目前的美中關係，能讓兩岸之間保持些許緊張，從美國角度來看，未必是壞事。環顧亞太形勢，日中緊張，導致安保新指針簽署；越菲與大陸緊張，也讓兩國更向美國靠攏。日前美國助理國務卿來台，或是我高階將領參加美軍太平洋司令就職，都代表美國對台灣有所期待，而民進黨的立場甚至比國民黨更符合美國目前的再平衡戰略。

其實，不論美國如何禮遇也好，中國大陸是否接受也罷，蔡英文真正要面對與爭取的，是台灣人民的信任與肯定，而不只是她在短暫的訪問中展現了什麼詞令和身段。就這點而言，蔡英文選擇回歸憲法，是跨出正確方向；我們也期待，這不是即興表演之作。

Asian Tigers Struggle: Taiwan Changes from Hare to Tortoise

Asian Tigers Struggle: Taiwan Changes from Hare to Tortoise
United Daily News Editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
June 5, 2015

Executive Summary: Mainland China and South Korea have signed a free trade agreement. Taiwan meanwhile has closed itself off to the outside world in the name of democracy. It does not realize it is now sitting at the bottom of the lake. South Korea and Taiwan were once coequals among the Asian Tigers. Now  Taiwan is no longer in the same league as South Korea. It is likely to fall even further behind in the future.

Full Text Below:

Mainland China and South Korea have signed a free trade agreement. Taiwan meanwhile has closed itself off to the outside world in the name of democracy. It does not realize it is now sitting at the bottom of the lake. South Korea and Taiwan were once coequals among the Asian Tigers. Now  Taiwan is no longer in the same league as South Korea. It is likely to fall even further behind in the future.

Five years ago in Chongqing, Taipei and Beijing signed ECFA in Chongqing. The South Korean media, terrified of falling behind, coined the term "ChiWan" to describe the cross-Strait economic alliance created by ECFA. It viewed ECFA as an unimaginable threat. Driven by anxiety, South Korea rushed to catch up. Three months later, Mainland China and South Korea held their first FTA working session. Over the next four years, they held 14 talks. Recently they signed the current FTA, the most comprehensive and largest scale FTA in terms of bilateral trade volume so far.

Taiwan meanwhile, has changed from hare to tortise. Ruling vs. opposition party political confrontation has led to irrational economic barriers to Taiwan's policy of economic coopetition. First, the green camp demanded a line item review of the STA. Then it called for outright opposition to the STA. In fact it was motivated by Sunflower Student Movement hatred for Mainland China. Ultimately the green camp demanded Berlin Wall-like Cross-Strait Agreement Oversight Regulations. The PRC-ROK FTA will soon go into effect. Five years ago "Chiwan" caused South Korea many sleepless nights. Today, it has been relegated to slim pickings from the "early harvest list".

The Sunflower Student Movement transformed blue vs. green confrontation between the ruling and opposition parties. It forced Taiwan's economy into winter hibernation. In fact, all policy-making has been permanently frozen. The only realm that remains unhindered is populist democracy. Populist democracy is now de rigeur. Buzzwords such as "people power" and "the peoples' choice" fill one's ears. Populism has seized the political high ground.  Everything else is of little importance. The STA has been frozen. MTA negotiations stop then start. The FEPZ has been postponed indefinitely. The long-controversial Number Four Nuclear Power Plant has been mothballed as a result of Lin Yi-hsiung's hunger strike.

The first thing Tsai Ing-wen did during her visit to the US, was sing the praises of democracy, stressing this value shared by Taipei and Washington. This was her answer to the Sunflower Student Movement. She severed the economic umbilical cord across the Taiwan Strait, and adopted an attitude of hatred toward Mainland China. The Sunflower Student Movement trumpets democracy. But its championing of "democracy" is merely Taiwan independence extremism, motivated by Taiwanese ultranationalism, wrapped in the cloak of democracy. It is shot through with introversion, xenophobia, and intolerance. It mercilessly condemns, defames, and attacks anyone who dares dissent. Those who incite hatred of Mainland China cite social justice as their motivation, yet never even attempt to solve the problem.

Economic globalization will never march to the beat of "Taiwanese" political correctness. Global economic competition will never defer to "Taiwanese" definitions of ethnic and national identity. Ballots will never make wealth and goods flow in and out of Taiwan. FTAs, by contrast, will. They will catalyze economic transactions. Ballots may make Tsai Ing-wen president. But ballots will never resolve the political and economic contradictions between Taipei and Beijing. Tsai Ing-wen's election will only turn Taiwan into an economic wasteland.

Mainland China's trade volume with South Korea last year reached 290.5 billion USD. Mainland China's trade volume with Japan reached 312.4 billion USD, a mere 20 billion less. Cross-Strait trade volume, by contrast, was only 198.3 billion USD, billions less than with South Korea, Once the PRC-ROK FTA goes into effect, PRC-ROK trade may reach 400 billion USD within five years. This would leapfrog Japan, and leave Taiwan far behind, solely because Taiwan insists on running in place .

The PRC-ROK FTA is not limited to tariffs. It also covers industrial cooperation in many fields. Beijing has a "China 2025" plan. Last year Germany published its "Sino-German Cooperation Plan of Action: Joint Innovation". It includes "Manufacturing 4.0", by which to obtain revolutionary technology. The upgrade of other traditional industries may be achieved through mass production and cooperation with South Korea, especially in ten key areas of "new generation information and communications technology industries". The two sides can cooperate in many ways.

Mainland China continues its rise. It is a manufacturing country turning into a manufacturing superpower. How can Taiwan possibly be so obtuse as to march down a blind alley? Tsai Ing-wen's choices are increasingly clear. Four years ago she still assumed she could blindly rely on the United States. All she had to do was grovel. She would then be allowed to join the TPP, even while rejecting trade relations with the world's number one trading partner.

Taiwan has reached a fork in the road. One path is based on ethnic and national identity. The other on economic principles. The former is illusory. The latter is real. Which path will Taiwan take? Before they decide, people must return to reason, demand genuine democracy, and think clearly.

小龍之爭，台灣何以從兔子跑成烏龜

2015-06-05聯合報

中國大陸與韓國正式簽署自由貿易協定，台灣以民主為名的閉關自守風潮，卻不知伊於胡底。韓國與台灣的經濟，從當年的「四小龍」逐漸走向不同量級，往後的分殊恐怕會更嚴重。

五年前的六月，兩岸在重慶簽署ＥＣＦＡ；當時，深恐落後的韓國媒體發明了ChiWan一詞，形容兩岸因ＥＣＦＡ而結成的經濟同盟關係，將對該國造成難以想像的威脅。在憂慮的驅使下，韓國急起直追，三個月後，中韓便舉行了自由貿易協定（ＦＴＡ）的首次工作會議。此後四年多，兩國進行十四輪談判，最近終於簽署了這紙對大陸而言迄今覆蓋領域最廣、雙邊貿易額最大的自由貿易協定。

與此同時，台灣卻從一隻兔子，跑成了一隻烏龜。由於朝野在政治上的對峙，台灣的兩岸經濟競合之路一再出現非理性的障礙，先是對兩岸服貿協議要求逐條審查，接著爆發了以「反服貿」為名，實則是以仇中為底蘊的太陽花學運，最終並設下了「兩岸協議監督條例」這堵高牆。而今，韓中ＦＴＡ馬上就要生效，而五年前令韓國夜不成眠的ChiWan，至今還只能撮取「早收清單」的蠅頭小利。

朝野的藍綠對峙，遇上太陽花學運之轉折，使台灣經濟進入了一個冬蟄階段；說透徹些，其實是所有領域的決策同時進入了凍土期。唯一在國家空間裡暢行無阻的，是民粹式的民主。公民民主儼然成了一種高調的時尚，人民力量、公民決策之類的詞彙充斥公共場域，由於政治高地皆被民粹占領，其餘的事務都變得毫不重要。不僅服貿被打入冷宮，兩岸貨貿談判走走停停，自由經濟示範區被無限期攔阻，而爭議已久的核四則因林義雄的一人絕食而黯然封存打包。

這次蔡英文訪美，一落地就高唱民主，強調台灣與美國的價值鏈結。這無非是在回應太陽花的精神脈絡：不惜割斷兩岸經濟臍帶，也要堅持仇中排中的立場。然而，太陽花呼喊的民主並不是真正的民主，而是與台灣國族主義互為表裡的急獨同義詞；它包裹著民主的外衣，卻充滿內向、排外和不包容的色彩，對不同主張者毫不留情地譴責、詆毀和攻擊。最大的問題是，仇中邏輯利用了分配不正義為藉口，卻從未試圖解答這個問題。

事實上，全球化的經濟潮流並不隨「政治正確」而升跌，全球經濟競爭更不會為台灣的國族信仰而轉彎。選票無法使財貨流動，ＦＴＡ卻會催化交易的熱情。蔡英文可能被選票推上總統大位，但若不能解開其兩岸論述的政經矛盾，她將把台灣帶上荒蕪之境。

中國大陸與韓國去年的貿易額達到二九○五億美元，與中日的三一二四億美元相比，僅少了二百億美元。而兩岸貿易額則僅為一九八三億美元，與中韓相較，已有千億美元的差距。中韓ＦＴＡ生效後，韓方樂觀推估雙方貿易額可在五年內躍升到四千億美元；不僅將一舉超越日本，並可能把我國遠遠拋在後頭，只因為台灣仍困在原地徘徊。

陸韓ＦＴＡ的焦點不只在於關稅，也包括了多個領域的產業合作。中共正在擘畫「中國製造二○二五」，除了藉去年與德國發表《中德合作行動綱要：共塑創新》，將「製造４．０」納入合作項目以取得革命性科技外，其餘的傳產升級即可大量透過與韓國的合作達成，尤其是十大重點領域中的「新一代資訊通信技術產業」，雙方可以著力之處甚多。

在中國大陸繼續躍升與崛起，將要從製造大國打造為製造強國的關鍵時期，台灣豈可再走向閉關自守的窮巷？蔡英文的選擇，從其言談已愈發清晰，一如四年前，她仍以為可以一味依賴美國，卑躬屈膝地表態欲加入ＴＰＰ，卻排斥與第一大貿易夥伴之間的貿易關係。

國族意識與經濟治理，是擺在台灣面前兩條截然不同的路，一條虛妄，一條現實，我們該走哪一條？人民必須回到理性的、真實的民主原則，冷靜思索。

How Tsai Ing-wen Can Demonstrate Leadership

How Tsai Ing-wen Can Demonstrate Leadership
China Times Editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
June 4, 2015

Executive Summary: On June 1, South Korea signed a free trade agreement (FTA) with Mainland China, scheduled to take effect at year's end. The short-term impact on Taiwan will be limited. Tariff reduction will not go into effect until 2025, nine years after the FTA is implemented. This could encourage the government and the public to underestimate the magnitude of the threat.

Full Text Below:

On June 1, South Korea signed a free trade agreement (FTA) with Mainland China, scheduled to take effect at year's end. The short-term impact on Taiwan will be limited. Tariff reduction will not go into effect until 2025, nine years after the FTA is implemented. This could encourage the government and the public to underestimate the magnitude of the threat, and result in a "boiled frog effect". Alas, Taiwan-based manufacturers cannot afford to take this matter lightly. Panel maker Innolux has urged the government to accelerate cross-Strait negotiations on the follow-up MTA so that Taiwan's flat panel industry can be more competitive. Former SEF chairman Hong Chi-chang thinks that although the impact of the PRC-ROK FTA on Taiwan may not be felt immediately, Taiwan and South Korean exports overlap substantially. Therefore the impact will be all too real. He called on the DPP not to obstruct passage of the STA and MTA, and if necessary, convene an extraordinary session of the Legislative Yuan so that the Cross-Strait Agreement Oversight Regulations may be reviewed before the passage of the two agreements.

Tsai Ing-wen has been officially nominated the DPP presidential candidate. On April 20, the DPP held a major issues coordination meeting. It resolved that the DPP chairperson will vigorously promote passage of the Cross-Strait Agreement Oversight Regulations. When the time comes, we call on Tsai Ing-wen to don sword and sandals, and do what she pledged to do. She must have the courage to shake the Taiwan independence hardliners on her back, pass the Cross-Strait Agreement Oversight Regulations during the current legislative session. This will facilitate review of the STA and MTA.

Alas, Tsai Ing-wen still cannot stand up to Taiwan independence hardliners. She cannot persuade Taiwan Solidarity Union legislators to cease their obstructionism. Tsai boasted that "The DPP would push through the Cross-Strait Agreement Oversight Regulations. But the moment she ran into resistance, she took it all back. The Cross-Strait Agreement Oversight Regulations bill has once again been frozen. Vigorous promotion has become passive inaction. No matter how big a show she puts on, it will not pass during this legislative session. President Ma Ying-jeou has repeatedly promised to pass the Cross-Strait Agreement Oversight Regulations. Both ruling and opposition party leaders have vowed that it will pass. But the legislature continues to mark time. This shows that Tsai Ing-wen is just like Ma Ying-jeou. Both lack the ability to get things done. Some pundits have mocked Tsai Ing-wen as "Ma Ying-jeou 2.0". They are not off the mark.

Some people think the impact of the PRC-ROK FTA is neither as pressing nor as significant as once imagined. They think therefore it can be dealt with next year, after the election. But as presidential office spokesman Chen Yi-hsing noted, the ruling and opposition parites must acknowledge the problem. They must not pretend all is well, and that nothing untoward has happened. They must acknowledge the negative impact on Taiwan's economy. Kurt Tong is Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for the Bureau of Economic and Business Affairs at the US Department of State. Last year, when Tong visited Taiwan, he said Taiwan is now officially behind South Korea. If Taiwan does not pick up its pace, it will soon be marginalized by Asian regional integration.

Executive Yuan spokesman Sun Li-chung said that many South Korean and Taiwan industries overlap.  Once the supply chain is broken, reconvergence will be difficult. The PRC-ROK FTA will have a huge impact on Taiwan. We must accelerate bilateral trade negotiations with Mainland China and with other governments. We hope the Legislative Yuan will review the Cross-Strait Agreement Oversight Regulations as soon as possible.

Following the Sunflower Student Movement, "first pass the legislation, then review it" became de rigeur. |As long as the Cross-Strait Agreement Oversight Regulations failed to pass, the STA, MTA, and other agreements will remain blocked. They cannot be submitted for review, therefore cannot be passed. Everything will be reduced to empty talk. Under the circumstances, we are in no position to demand that the Mainland negotiate the MTA as soon as possible. Also, as long as the Cross-Strait Agreement Oversight Regulations have not been passed, the situation remains unclear. Under those circumstances, why should the Mainland take MTA talks with Taiwan seriously?

How massive will the impact of the PRC-ROK FTA be? When will it take effect? Do not waste time and energy talking about it. If something can be done to increase Taiwan's industrial competitiveness, add vitality to Taiwan's economy, and avoid being surpassed by South Korea, why not do it? Right now? Why this willingness to debase oneself and forfeit market opportunities? We agree with Hong Chi-chang. The Legislative Yuan should convene an extraordinary session and pass the STA and Cross-Strait Agreement Oversight Regulations as soon as possible. .

In fact the Legislative Yuan convened a three week long extraordinary session last June. The KMT legislative caucus wanted to pass the STA, the Cross-Strait Agreement Oversight Regulations and the FEPZ Regulations. But green camp obstructionism blocked the way. In the end, only the Examination Yuan and Control Yuan Personnel Appointments Bill was passed. Green Camp leaders hate Mainland China so intensely they have no qualms about strangling Taiwan's economy. They appare genuinely determined to marginalize Taiwan.

Tsai Ing-wen has repeatedly stressed that her premise for cross-Strait relations is "maintaining the status quo". The Cross-Strait Agreement Oversight Regulations, the STA, and the MTA, have all been stopped dead by the DPP. Is this the "status quo" Tsai Ing-wen intends to maintain? If she intends to maintain the status quo, why has she instructed the DPP to pass the Cross-Strait Agreement Oversight Regulations Bill? Isn't that self-contradictory? Isnt' that saying one thing and doing another?

We prefer to think that Tsai Ing-wen instructed the DPP to pass the Cross-Strait Agreement Oversight Regulations Bill for real. We prefer to think that she wanted to prove she has the ability to lead the nation. We call on Tsai Ing-wen to immediately convene an extraordinary session of the Legislative Yuan upon her return to Taiwan. Shake the Taiwan independence hardliners off her back. Remedy the situation as soon as possible. Cooperate with the KMT. Pass the Cross-Strait Agreement Oversight Regulations Bill, the STA, and the FEPZ Regulations. The next Legislative Yuan session will involve a budget session and will take place during election season. Negotiations will be subject to endless struggles. It is better to deal with the Cross-Strait Agreement Oversight Regulations and STA during this session.

If Tsai Ing-wen wants to prove she is not Ma Ying-jeou 2.0, then she should settle down and instruct the DPP caucus to pass these two bills in the Legislative Yuan, now.

蔡英文可以這樣展現領導力

2015-6-4 中國時報

摘要: 南韓6月1日與中國大陸簽署自由貿易協定（FTA），預定年底生效。雖然短期對台影響有限，譬如面板降稅要在FTA實施後第9年，約2025年才會生效，政府與社會可能因而降低危機意識，造成

南韓6月1日與中國大陸簽署自由貿易協定（FTA），預定年底生效。雖然短期對台影響有限，譬如面板降稅要在FTA實施後第9年，約2025年才會生效，政府與社會可能因而降低危機意識，造成「溫水煮青蛙效應」，但廠商不敢掉以輕心，面板大廠群創就呼籲政府，加速兩岸後續貨貿談判、生效，讓台灣面板業更具競爭力。海基會前董事長洪奇昌也認為，中韓FTA對台灣雖沒有立即衝擊，但台韓出口產品同質性很高，會產生一定的影響。他呼籲民進黨不要杯葛《服貿協議》和《貨貿協議》，若有需要立院應召開臨時會，通過《兩岸協議監督條例》，以利審查前兩項協議。

蔡英文被民進黨正式提名參選總統之後，於4月20日民進黨召開重大議題協調會報，以黨主席身分指示民進黨全力推動完成《兩岸協議監督條例》的立法。當時我們就呼籲蔡英文要劍及履及說到做到，展現魄力擺脫獨派的挾持，在立法院本會期完成《兩岸協議監督條例》的立法，以利下會期審查《服貿協議》和《貨貿協議》。

但是蔡英文還是經不起獨派媒體的抨擊，也無力化解台聯立委的杯葛，一句「民進黨全力推動完成《兩岸協議監督條例》的立法」豪語，遇到阻力後全吞了回去，《兩岸協議監督條例》草案又被放回冷凍庫，全力推動變成了消極被動，任憑擺爛，立院本會期是不可能通過了。總統馬英九也一再宣示要推動完成《兩岸協議監督條例》立法，朝野兩大領袖雙英都宣示要完成立法，但立法工作卻原地踏步，顯見蔡英文和馬英九一樣，都缺乏執行力，有人比喻蔡英文是馬英九2.0，果然不是無的放矢。

有人認為，中韓FTA的衝擊沒有原本想像的立即，也沒有原本預估來的大，可以等明年選後再說。但正如總統府發言人陳以信所言，朝野應嚴肅面對，不能「故作輕鬆、若無其事」，必須正視對台灣經濟的負面衝擊；去年美國國務院經濟暨商務首席副助卿唐偉康訪台時直言，「台灣已經正式落後南韓」，如果台灣再踱步不前，將因亞洲區域整合而被邊緣化。

行政院發言人孫立群也說，南韓與台灣很多產業替代性高，供應鏈一旦斷掉，要再銜接有難度，中韓FTA對台灣衝擊很大，盼加速與中國大陸及所有國家的雙邊貿易談判，也希望立法院盡速審查《兩岸協議監督條例》。

太陽花學運之後，「先立法後審查」已成了一道緊箍咒，只要《兩岸協議監督條例》一日未通過立法，包括已完成簽署的服貿等協議，以及商談中的《貨貿協議》，即使簽署了也全部都會被堵住，無法排入審查，也就不可能付諸實施，一切終歸是空談。在此情況下，我們有何立場催促大陸趕快談成《貨貿協議》。況且，《監督條例》未出爐，情況未明，大陸有必要認真和我們談《貨貿協議》嗎？

中韓FTA衝擊大不大？何時開始衝擊？此時已無須浪費口舌再去爭辯。如果能夠為台灣產業競爭力注入活水，為台灣經濟添加生機，避免被南韓大步超前，為什麼現在不馬上做？而要自甘墮落，把商機市場拱手讓人？因此我們同意洪奇昌的看法，立院應該加開臨時會，通過《服貿協議》和《兩岸協議監督條例》。

事實上，去年6月立院召開3周的臨時會，國民黨團就希望能夠通過《服貿協議》、《兩岸協議監督條例》以及《自由經濟示範區條例》，但在綠營強力杯葛下，最後只處理考監兩院的人事同意權，綠營的仇中心態不惜一再扼殺台灣經貿生機，難道要把台灣推向邊緣化？

蔡英文一再強調，她處理兩岸關係的基本原則是「維持現狀」，那麼現在《監督條例》空轉、《服貿協議》卡關、《貨貿協議》堵住的現狀，是不是要一直維持下去？如果要維持現狀下去，那她指示民進黨全力推動完成《兩岸協議監督條例》的立法，豈不是自打嘴巴，說一套做一套？

我們寧願相信蔡英文指示民進黨全力推動完成《兩岸協議監督條例》的立法，是玩真的。為了展現和證明具有做為國家領導人的條件和執行能力，我們呼籲蔡英文訪美回台後，立即發起立院召開臨時會，擺脫獨派的挾持，亡羊補牢盡快和國民黨合作通過《兩岸協議監督條例》、《服貿協議》和《自由經濟示範區條例》。立院下會期是預算會期和選舉季，法案折衝協調起來萬箭攢心，本會期加開臨時會專心處理《監督條例》和《服貿》等議題比較可行。

蔡英文如果要證明自己不是馬英九，就好好領導民進黨黨團，在立法院院會通過兩法案吧！

US Goodwill Toward Mainland China Waning

US Goodwill Toward Mainland China Waning
China Times Editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
June 3, 2015

Executive Summary: Over the past decade the US strategic relationship with Mainland China has been a mixture of competition, struggle, cooperation, and friction. In 2005, during George W. Bush's second term, the US championed "constructive and frank relations with China". US Undersecretary of State Robert Zoellick delivered a speech entitled "Whither China", in which he said China must become a responsible stakeholder in the international community. This concept was written into the United States 2006 National Security Strategy Report. Mainland China and the US, having established goodwill, began a relationship in which cooperation trumped conflict. Obama strengthened that relationship upon taking office.

Full Text Below:

Over the past decade the US strategic relationship with Mainland China has been a mixture of competition, struggle, cooperation, and friction. In 2005, during George W. Bush's second term, the US championed "constructive and frank relations with China". US Undersecretary of State Robert Zoellick delivered a speech entitled "Whither China", in which he said China must become a responsible stakeholder in the international community. This concept was written into the United States 2006 National Security Strategy Report. Mainland China and the US, having established goodwill, began a relationship in which cooperation trumped conflict. Obama strengthened that relationship upon taking office.

Cooperation between the two countries has yielded many rewards. They include social, economic, environmental, and regional security. They include Obama's significant relaxation of visa requirements for Chinese citizens, These increased Sino-US economic interdependence and social interaction. Last year, Mainland Chinese investment in the US grew by more than 40%, and provided important momentum for US economic recovery. In November 2014, Beijing and Washington signed an Agreement on Environmental Cooperation and Emissions Reduction. They pledged to reduce carbon emissions 25% by 2020. Nuclear weapons in Iran and North Korea are a major headache for the US. The Mainland strongly supports the US on this.

Alas, these positive developments have been followed by two or three years of increased friction between the two countries. The China Threat Theory has made waves, and cast a shadow over bilateral relations. The US is suspicious about the One Belt, One Road and the AIIB. These plans signal Mainland China's rise, and provoke US anxiety. The US is unhappy about Mainland China's reclamation of islands and reefs in the South China Sea. The two sides frequently threaten each other. Some in the US even want to "punish China". They want President Obama to cancel the invitation to attend the 2016 Pacific Rim exercises. Chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee and former Republican presidential candidate John McCain said that if it were up to him, he would not invite them to participate.

Such threats have even led to action. On May 20, a P8A military reconnaissance plane overflew the South China Sea. For the first time the Pentagon allowed reporters aboard a reconnaissance flight. It apparently seeks to wage a media war. The overseas edition of the Peoples Daily, the Chinese Communist Party's official newspaper, concluded that this "new generation escalation in China Threat Theory reveals a US determination to make trouble in the South China Sea."

These disputes have not yet led to serious regional military conflict. Nor have they amounted to what some commentators warn is a "Thucydides Trap". Nevertheless, the deterioration in the atmosphere is something the two sides should be alarmed about.

The South China Sea is a fuse that could ignited Sino-US conflict. But it is merely a superficial cause. A more fundamental cause is that those wihtin the US who know Mainland China and were friendly towards Mainland China are now less so. This has unnecessarily increased the risk of misunderstanding, misjudgment, and confrontation.

First, we must understand the big picture. In 2014, a Pew Research Center survey of the world's attitude toward Mainland China showed that only 35% of Americans viewed Mainland China favorably, whereas 55% viewed Mainland China negatively. In 2011, the center's survey showed 51% of Americans viewing Mainland China positively, and only 36% viewing it negatively. Within three short years however, private sector sentiment in the US underwent a major reversal. A similar phenomenon appeared in a 2015 survey commissioned by the American Chamber of Commerce. As many as 60% of the CEOs of global corporations said they did not feel as welcome in China as before.

Orville Schell is Director of the Center on US-China Relations at the Asia Society. In a special report published by the UK Financial Times, Schell said that not since former US president Richard Nixon and National Security Adviser Henry Kissinger set foot in China in 1972 to break the ice, have trust and optimism between the two countries fallen this low. Schell quoted the lament of a leading China expert, who said that oddly enough it is those closest to China who now feel the most alienated. Schell said that groups within the United States friendly toward China have ceased to exist, yet the Chinese side seems indifferent to this.

These signs suggest that within the United States, private individuals, business people, and academic have all begun to think less well of Mainland China.

Exchanges between the two countries include positive interactions. From the US perspective, the basic problem is that US political-military and economic strength have deteriorated. The US sees problems with Russia and Ukraine. It sees problems with the Islamic State in the Middle East. In such troubled times, how much energy does the United States have to engage in unnecessary wrestling and confrontation with Mainland China? From the Mainland Chinese perspective, the internationalization of the RMB and One Belt, One Road construction projects are essential. In which case, why would it casually indulge in muscle flexing?

Given such adverse conditions, the US and Mainland China must be wise. Regional security requires controlling and elminating this negative atmosphere. Only then can the US and Mainland China reduce the chance of accidental conflict on regional issues, including the South China Sea. Even more importantly they must cooperate on global governance. Mankind faces more and more economic, military, food, environment, climate, and energy challenges. Mainland China, the United States, and other major powers may not be able to overcome these problems. But if they squander their energy fighting each other, they will only make them worse.

Mainland China and the US must take this waning friendship as a warning. An adverse atmosphere is infectious. It will affect attitudes within China towards the United States. That is something both countries must avoid.

美國友中力量消弱的警訊

2015-6-3 中國時報

近十年來美國對中的戰略觀，一直是有競爭、有鬥爭、有合作、有摩擦。特別是在2005年，小布希總統的第二任期主張「以建設性和坦誠的方式與中國接觸」，美國副國務卿佐利克並在「中國向何處去」演講中提出「中國應成為國際社會中負責任的『利益相關者』」。此一概念被寫入美國2006年《國家安全戰略報告》，此後，中美在善意的基調上，開啟了合作大於鬥爭的關係。歐巴馬上任後更強化這個趨勢。

兩國在這樣的合作態勢下交出了不少的成績單，成果遍及社會、經濟、環境與區域安全。包括歐巴馬宣布大幅放寬中國公民赴美簽證，以強化中美的社會交往與經濟互賴；去年，中國對美投資的成長超過了40%，提供美國經濟復甦的重要動能；2014年11月兩國簽署《環保與減排合作協定》，承諾到2020年彼此努力降低碳排放25%；此外，在伊朗核武與北韓核武這二大令美國頭痛萬分的問題上，大陸也強力支持美國的立場。

然而，這些正向的發展，隨著這二、三年中美兩國磨擦增加，並在中國威脅論的推波下，蒙上了陰影。除了對一帶一路、亞投行等標示中國崛起的大計畫，美國存有疑慮外，美國對中國在南海島礁填海造地不滿，雙方頻頻叫陣，美國內部更出現「懲罰中國」的論調，呼籲歐巴馬總統取消邀請中國參加2016年的環太平洋軍演，參議院軍事委員會主席，也是前共和黨總統候選人約翰‧麥肯即表示：「如果是我，我不會邀請他們參加演習。」

這樣的叫陣，也延展到行動層次。5月20日，美軍P8A偵察機飛越南海，五角大廈第一次讓媒體記者隨行偵察，顯然是想藉以打媒體戰，對此，中共黨委機關報《人民日報》海外版撰文認為這是「中國威脅論的手法升級換代」、「鐵了心想在南海鬧事」。

雖然這些爭議，沒有白熱化到發生嚴重的區域軍事衝突，更還不至於走到有論者擔心「修昔底德陷阱」的大國戰爭的危險，但氛圍轉下的警訊，卻是中美雙方應共同關注的。

我們認為，南海問題固然是這一波中美衝突的導火線，但這只是表層的原因，更深層原因之一則是，美國內部知中、和中與友中力量消弱，增加雙方因誤會誤判而不必要地升高對立的風險，值得注意。

首先，要先從大氛圍理解起，2014年皮尤研究中心（Pew Research Center）有一項關於全世界對中國態度的調查顯示，只有35%的美國人對中國持正面看法，負面高達55%。然而，在2011年，該中心的調查中，美國人對中國持正面看法的高達51%，負面只有36%。短短三年，美國民間氛圍即有極大的反轉。類似的現象，也顯示在2014年美國商會的調查中，60%的全球企業CEO表示，他們在中國感覺不像過去那樣受到歡迎了。

美國亞洲協會美中關係中心主任夏偉，即在英國《金融時報》中文網的專題報導上撰稿表示：「自從美國前總統尼克森和國家安全顧問季辛吉于1972年踏上對華破冰之旅以來，兩國間的互信和樂觀情緒鮮有降到如此低谷之時。」他並引述一家知名的研究中國的學術機構負責人的感嘆：「很奇怪的是，正是那些對中國最親近的人，現在感到最受疏遠。」夏偉的文章直指美國國內「對中國持友善態度的核心利益群體」已經不復存在，而中方對此卻似乎無動於衷。

以上種種跡象，顯示美國從民間、商界到知識菁英，一種負循環的氛圍正在隱隱形成。

從兩國交往面，這牽制了中美兩國的良性互動，從美國的角度來說，一個最簡單的問題是，美國不管政治軍事和經濟國力均大不如前，俄羅斯與烏克蘭問題、中東有伊斯蘭國問題，在此多事之秋，美國有多少力氣與中國進行不必要的角力對抗？從中國角度看，人民幣國際化與一帶一路大建設是必走的道路，既然如此，豈可輕易對外展現肌肉？

面對此一不利情勢，美中雙方智者都應思考，從區域安全面，如何控管與消弭這樣的負氛圍，才能減少在包括南海在內的區域問題上擦搶走火的機會。更重要的是如何共同全球治理的挑戰。人類集體不管在經濟、軍事、糧食、環境、氣候、能源，都面臨著愈來愈嚴峻的挑戰，中美等大國攜手都不一定能解決，還把力量放在內耗上，不啻是讓各方齊至的總體危機雪上加霜。

中美雙方都應嚴肅體認友中力量消退的警訊，不利的氛圍是有傳染性的，也會感染到中國內部對美國的判斷氛圍，這是兩國都要極力避免的。

Tsai Ing-wen Talks, But Says Nothing

Tsai Ing-wen Talks, But Says Nothing
China Times Editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
June 2, 2015

Executive Summary: The 2016 presidential election is not just about choosing a particular candidate or a particular party. It is about choosing a perspective, choosing a path, and choosing a policy. These choices are critical. They will determined whether Taiwan lives or dies. Political leaders must be honest about the major issues confronting Taiwan. Tsai Ing-wen purports to uphold democracy and peace. She has said so, clearly and loudly. But she has said nothing about how to achieve them. She has said nothing about which policy programs people must choose. She has limited herself to empty slogans and pretty words, none of which will help the people make a rational choice.

Full Text Below:

Tsai Ing-wen's first speech during her visit to the US stressed two important points, "democracy" and "peace". She vowed that if she comes to power, she will defend Taiwan's democracy, and do her best to communicate and remain at peace with neighboring countries, including China [sic]. Tsai Ing-wen is apparently aware of Washington's two primary concerns. How to defend democracy and maintain peace are the questions voters most need to consider before making their choice.

Since 1996, the ROC has held five presidential elections. In 2016 it will hold its sixth. During previous elections, the people focused on Taiwan's democratization. Democracy is important to Taiwan. It must be strengthened. Taiwan faces a problem different from what it faced during the past five elections. Taiwan's current problems must be viewed from a larger perspective, namely, how they pertain to Taiwan's status within the international community. Tsai Ing-wen grasps this fact. That is why she emphasized both "democracy" and "peace".

Since the 2012 election, the international political and economic situation has undergone major change. The entire world is seriously impacted. The results will have a profound effect on Taiwan. But neither the government nor ruling and opposition party leaders are willing to be honest with the people. Even worse, they refuse to unite the people in order to resolve the problems together.

First consider the Chinese mainland's "strategic rise".  Over the past seven or eight years, the rise of Mainland China has remained a hot topic. People sometimes view the rise of Mainland China in terms of political and military influence. But mainly people view the rise of Mainland China from an economic perspective. This situation is gradually changing. In September 2013, Mainland China set forth its One Belt, One Road and Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) initiatives. These failed to attract much attention at the time. But as the situation changed, more and more people realized that the Mainland's strategic decisions were the most important geo-economic, geo-political and geo-strategies of the century. They then began to attract worldwide attention.

Strategically, Mainland China hopes to establish a strong community of shared interests and shared destinies within the Asian-Pacific region. Scholars have noted that the One Belt, One Road strategy will consume excess capacity within Mainland China. It will also create new demand overseas, enabling the Mainland to escape deflation and stagnation, and create new and stable economic growth in the medium to long term. The AIIB will enable the Mainland to lead investment banks and other international multilateral financial organizations, which will provide regional construction financing. It will also promote the internationalization of the renminbi. The strategic rise of the Mainland, the shift of power on the two sides of the Strait, are not something Taiwan can sum up with outdated "China threat theories" or "China opportunity theories". 

Secondly, Sino-US rivalry has entered a new phase. The advent of the AIIB, in particular the massive participation of European nations, shows that Sino-US rivalry has entered a new phase. The initiative has changed hands. Mainland China is no longer a passive adherent to US rules of the game for the region. It is beginning to challenge the rules of the game. United States dominance has already been shaken. Mainland China is no longer merely a regional power. It is a rising world power. The rivalry between the two will become increasingly fierce. In fact, the Mainland's One Belt, One Road, the AIIB, the East China Sea, and the South China Sea, are all regarded as potential threats to the US. Hence its "Pivot to Asia". How will the chess game between Mainland China and the US impact the region and the world, especially Taiwan? That is a question that cannot be avoided.

Thirdly, how will the world's major economies adopt and survive? Last year, Xi Jinping used the term "new normal" to describe the Mainland economy. Past emphasis on economic growth will be changed to moderately high-speed growth. The economic structure will be optimized and upgraded . Growth momentum will no longer be driven by resources and investments, but rather innovation. Neighboring South Korea and Japan under Abe are committed to reform. They hope to create new growth engines. Taiwan's economic growth rate has been declining for years. From 2008 to 2013 it fell an average of 3.0 percent per annum. The crux of the problem is a development model that has not undergone change for some time, and an over-reliance on exports and manufacturing. The vacuum created by Inadequate investments and industrial relocation have not been filled by emerging industries able to provide new economic growth. The red supply chain is rapidly maturing. Taiwan faces ever greater economic challenges.

Its economy was once Taiwan's advantage. The United States was once a force for stability in the Taiwan Strait. Taiwan's economic advantage has disappeared. Changes in the international situation have impacted the Sino-US balance of power. Taiwan has been increasingly relegated to the role of passive observer. The blue camp advocates "peace with the Mainland, closeness to the US, and friendship with Japan". The green camp advocates "adhereing to the US definition of the cross-Strait status quo". Both approaches are increasingly passive. In particular, Tsai Ing-wen's "maintaining the status quo" is a deluded policy that will eventually land Taiwan in a trap of its own making. The transformation of Taiwan's economic structure remains obscured by blue vs. green opposition. The problem has been neglected. The ruling and opposition parties and the public have never given it the attention it deserves.

Such is our dilemma. The 2016 presidential election is not just about choosing a particular candidate or a particular party. It is about choosing a perspective, choosing a path, and choosing a policy. These choices are critical. They will determined whether Taiwan lives or dies. Political leaders must be honest about the major issues confronting Taiwan. Tsai Ing-wen purports to uphold democracy and peace. She has said so, clearly and loudly. But she has said nothing about how to achieve them. She has said nothing about which policy programs people must choose. She has limited herself to empty slogans and pretty words, none of which will help the people make a rational choice.

蔡英文說的，和沒有說的

2015年06月02日 中國時報

蔡英文訪美首場演講傳達了兩個重要訊息：「民主」與「和平」，她宣示未來執政將堅持台灣民主，並盡力與周邊國家，包括中國，保持溝通以維護和平。蔡英文確實掌握了對美國溝通的兩個最重要元素，如何維繫「民主」與「和平」，也是這次選舉選民做出選擇前最需要考慮的問題。

台灣從1996年起，先後進行了5次總統直選，2016年即將進行第6次，先前幾次大選人們多聚焦在台灣民主化的意義上，民主的確是台灣重要的價值，需要不斷深化。但台灣當前所面對的國家問題可能已經與過去5次選舉不同，眼前的台灣，恐怕更要從台灣在國際格局中的位置及其變化這個宏觀的大角度、大視野來掌握。蔡英文其實已經掌握了這個大趨勢，她既強調「民主」，也注意到「和平」。

自從2012年大選以來，國際政治與經濟局勢已產生重大變化，全球都面臨了幾個方面嚴重衝擊，也將深刻影響台灣發展。但政府及朝野政黨領袖卻從來不曾跟民眾講清楚、說明白，更談不上凝聚民心共識，共同面對解決。

首先，是中國大陸的「戰略性崛起」。過去7、8年來，「中國崛起」一直是人們關注的焦點話題，雖然人們會附帶提及中國崛起在政治上、軍事上的影響，但人們主要還是從「經濟崛起」的角度來認識大陸發展動態。然而，局勢悄悄地發生變化。2013年9月大陸提出「一帶一路」與「亞投行」等構想，但並未引起太多的關注。可是隨著形勢的發展，這個大陸的「戰略性決策」越來越被人們認識到是大陸地緣經濟、地緣政治和地緣安全的世紀大戰略，才開始引起舉世關注。

大陸的戰略構想，首先就是希望在亞太區域、甚至更廣泛的範圍內構築強固的「利益共同體」和「命運共同體」。學者已經指出，一路一帶戰略不但能消化中國國內的過剩產能，而且通過在海外創造的新需求，能使大陸跳脫通縮停滯的困局，在中長期內創造新而穩定的經濟增長點，而通過亞投行等大陸主導的國際多邊金融組織提供區域建設的融資，還能大幅促進人民幣的國際化。大陸的戰略性崛起，兩岸力量的此消彼長，已經不是台灣用「中國威脅論」、「中國機會論」等傳統視野所能認識掌握的了。

其次，是中美博弈進入新階段。亞投行等議題的演進，尤其是歐洲國家的大舉參加，象徵著中美的博弈進入了新階段，出現了某種程度的「攻守易位」，大陸不再是美國主導的區域經濟遊戲規則被動的順應者，開始成為遊戲規則的挑戰者、制定者，美國在話語權上的「獨霸」已經出現鬆動。未來大陸之於美國，將越來越擺脫「局部力量」角色，而為「崛起中的世界大國」，兩者間博弈會日益激烈，事實上，在美國「重返亞洲」戰略框架下，從一帶一路、亞投行到東海、南海，大陸種種舉動都會被視為對美國戰略的潛在威脅。中美之間的棋局如何影響區域與世界，尤其台灣，這是不容迴避的課題。

第三，是全球主要經濟體的變革與求存。去年，習近平首次以「新常態」描述大陸經濟，強調經濟增長將轉為中高速，經濟結構要不斷優化升級，成長動力要從要素、投資邁向創新驅動。鄰近的韓國、日本安倍政權都致力改革，希望打造成長新引擎。台灣的經濟成長率已經持續下降多年，2008年到2013年以平均降至3.0%，其主要問題關鍵就在於發展模式的長久不變，過度依賴出口與製造業，另一方面則是投資不足、產業外移後缺乏新興主力產業填補真空，帶動經濟新成長。紅色供應鏈正在快速成熟，台灣經濟未來的挑戰更艱鉅。

經濟曾經是台灣的優勢，美國是維護台海安定的主要力量，現在台灣經濟優勢已經消失，在中美力量對比起伏所牽動的國際格局變化中，台灣也愈來愈陷入被動地位。不管是藍營的「和中親美友日」，還是綠營的「追隨美國定義的兩岸現狀維持」，都越來越顯消極，尤其是蔡英文的「維持現狀論」終將成為自陷台灣於被動窘境中的錯誤政策。至於台灣經濟的結構改造，更在藍綠對立的硝煙中被模糊、被忽視，始終無法成為朝野兩黨以至於全民共同思考面對的課題。

面對這樣的局面，2016年的這場選戰，不僅僅是選人選黨選顏色的選舉，而是選視野、選路線、選政策的、攸關台灣生死存亡的關鍵時刻。政治領袖們有責任也有義務，向民眾誠實說明台灣所面臨的重大課題。蔡英文要堅持民主與和平，她說得很清楚，也很大聲，但她對如何達成「民主」與「和平」目標，卻沒有說出來，更沒有提出任何政策綱領供人民選擇，只停留於空洞的口號、美麗的詞藻，這無助人民的理性選擇。