Progress Through Communication: Resolving the Controversy over the Cross-Strait Agreement on Trade in Services

The Cross-Strait Agreement on Trade in Services (ATS) is an important link in the chain of follow-up negotiations that have proceeded apace since the signing in 2010 between Taiwan and mainland China of the Cross-Strait Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA), a chain that includes agreements on investment guarantees, trade in goods, trade in services, and dispute resolution. Because services account for 70% of Taiwan’s GDP, any agreement that would allow the opening of this sector to trade across the Taiwan Strait is bound to have a wide-ranging impact. Controversy over the agreement has been brewing in the media and amongst analysts ever since its signing in June of 2013, and the two major parties in the Legislative Yuan have been sharply divided over it.

In fact, even before the ATS was signed, the Ministry of Economic Affairs and other organizations acting on its behalf held 110 meetings with trade associations and groupings from 46 service industry sectors. After the signing there were 144 public hearings, with a total of over 7900 participants. There were also 20 public hearings in the Legislative Yuan, and relevant ministries made three reports to the legislature. The number of events held to discuss the ATS was unprecedented in ROC legislative history. The procedure met all legal requirements, was open and transparent, and was not, as protestors claimed, “a black box operation.”

Nonetheless, because the ATS will impact the future of a wide range of economic actors, when the head of the Legislative­ Yuan’s Internal Administration Committee announced on March 17 that committee hearings were terminated and that the bill would be sent to the floor, a powerful wave of opposition erupted.

The next night, opponents of the ATS held a protest outside the Legislative Yuan which they dubbed “a night for protecting democracy.” Later that night, taking advantage of the fact that there were few security guards on duty, hundreds of students flooded into the legislative chamber and occupied it.

As the story of the occupation quickly went viral on social media, more students congregated around the Legislative Yuan. Taking the sunflower as their symbol, they embarked on a large-scale sit-in. Although the government did its best to communicate with the students, the image of the legislature being occupied, ceaselessly broadcast by the media, shook society. Suddenly the ATS had become the topic du jour, the most widely and passionately discussed public policy issue in many years.

On March 23, the protests heated up rapidly, and protestors even forced their way into the Executive Yuan building. Public property was damaged and the normal operations of the government were disrupted. The whole country was in an uproar, and in the face of this illegal and disorderly behavior by the protestors, the police, after failing to persuade the protestors to leave peacefully, had to expel them forcibly.

On March 30, hundreds of thousands of opponents of the agreement staged a six-hour sit-in on Ketagalan Boulevard, not far from the Presidential Palace, while a small number of pro-ATS citizens gathered nearby at the Taipei Railway Station.

Premier Jiang Yi-huah talks to young people about the Cross-Strait Agreement on Trade in Services, national referenda, and the role of youth.

Global trade liberalization is moving so quickly that the government, as it actively engages in external negotiations, has found it difficult to fully explain to the public, in a timely manner, the importance of having a global economic strategy. Add to this that the public generally feels a sense of mistrust toward mainland China, and it is no surprise that anxieties over the ATS have spread in society.

On April 8, Executive Yuan spokesperson Sun Lih-­chyun hosted a meeting with foreign media to explain issues related to the ATS. He told them that although the government has invested a lot of resources and time in promoting the ATS since its signing last June, opposition to the bill has repeatedly delayed legislative review of the agreement. And although the government has continually expressed a sincere and well-intentioned desire for communication, it has proven impossible to dispel the distrust that ATS opponents feel toward mainland China.

It must be acknowledged that the core issue underlying opposition to the ATS is “anti-China” sentiment, but there was also a generational component to the protests.

An interesting editorial addressing generational anxieties appeared in the United Daily News on April 17. Entitled “Observations of Three Aspects of the ‘Generational Rebellion’ of the Student Movement,” it argues that the reason why the Sunflower Movement got such immediate support through social media, and why the unplanned protest took concrete shape so quickly, is that the younger generation is disaffected with the general current situation in Taiwan, in three ways: dissatisfaction with the status of cross-strait relations, dissatisfaction with political infighting in the major political parties, and a gap in knowledge about and judgment toward current conditions.

According to the analysis provided in the article, “anti-Chinese” sentiments that played such a major role in the protest derive from two factors: (a) insecurity about being “swallowed up” by mainland China; and (b) anger and resentment toward “hegemonic bullying.” The article says we should give strong consideration to the fact that the two sides have been under separate political systems for a long time, so that when young people make judgments there are often gaps in their knowledge about current conditions. Taiwan’s economy has a high degree of dependence on mainland China, the editorial continued, so the protestors should ask themselves whether it would really be wise to cut cross-strait links without first considering what the consequences would be.

As a response to demands from students for a “conference of the whole people on constitutional government,” and to proposals from the business community for a “national affairs conference,” the government has decided to convene a “national economic and trade affairs conference” to promote dialogue and build consensus.

The government has learned that in the process of formulating public policy, communication with the public is essential, and it understands more deeply than ever that in the process of forging consensus, it is necessary to tolerate different viewpoints and respect the rule of law. The foundations of our nation’s democratic politics will grow stronger and more mature as a result.