Maximize opportunity
In fact, Taiwanese businesspeople are very pragmatic. They don't talk about ideology, they are very flexible, and they know what they want to do. For example, during the election campaign I visited the Changhua headquarters of one firm, Vogmate Hosiery, and the owner came out and asked, Mr. Ma, why is it that South Korea can sign an FTA with the US but we can't? He also said that if things kept up the way they were going traditional industries would be finished. At that time the Ministry of Economic Affairs said, don't worry, after South Korea signs Taiwan will lose only 21 traditional industries. But what would happen to Vogmate and all the firms like it? Officials talked as if it was all so easy, as if hi-tech industries wouldn't be affected, but what were traditional industries supposed to do? If they faced different tariffs than their competitors, then it would be hard going. This is a problem the government should solve for them. Our responsibility is to give them a good trading environment, so they can concentrate on bringing their creativity and competitiveness into play. So we are very pragmatic, we don't just look at ideology. If you worry all the time that signing an agreement with the mainland is a loss of sovereignty or a national shame, you won't get anything done, so you just sit at home waiting to die.
As for worries in the green camp that Taiwan's economy will be overly dependent on the mainland, in fact dependence is inevitably mutual. You buy and I sell-the two parties are both willing. So on one hand we depend on them, and on the other they depend on us. Under these circumstances, the most important thing is to find a foundation of items that are beneficial to both sides, and then build a systematized relationship based on this foundation. So I say that the mainland is a risk for Taiwan, but it is also an opportunity for Taiwan. The government's role is to minimize the risk and maximize the opportunity, and not to reject the opportunity because of fear of the risk.
Q: You just mentioned that there has to be benefit for both sides in order to sign an ECFA. Do you think that mainland China will raise some items that will create pressure for us?
A: Right now we don't know. At this point, we only know what we want, and of course the things they want could be different. For example, with regard to tariffs on petrochemical products, they are willing to give us what we want. Why? Because the number of Taiwanese firms that have invested in China is, at a low estimate, at least 70,000, and perhaps more than 100,000. I recall an estimate from the Institute for Information Industry that roughly 60-70% of the mainland's ICT industry is run by Taiwanese firms. These Taiwanese firms naturally import the raw materials and semi-finished goods they need from Taiwan, so if the mainland gives us what we want, that is the same as helping Taiwanese firms in the mainland. Currently after these semi-finished goods get to the mainland, they are generally processed and exported to the US. Of course in the future we want to build up a market in the mainland based on domestic demand there, and sell in the mainland.
Q: You earlier mentioned that the cross-strait common market has been mislabeled as a "one-China market." So what's the situation now?
A: Right now we merely want to sign a trade agreement with the mainland, that's all. That's still a long way from a common market. It's too early to be talking about that.
At present the most successful common market is of course the European Union. But the EU started out as just a coal and steel community with only six countries. It then turned into the European Economic Community with the signing of the Treaty of Rome in 1957. The EEC was a customs union, with no customs duties between member states, and adoption of a common customs policy towards non-members. That is to say, both internally and externally all the members had uniform positions. The single currency only came about with the Maastricht Treaty that took effect in 1993, and now they want to have a European constitution and move toward political union, but they haven't been successful yet. So just imagine, even European countries with their high level of similarity still haven't been able to complete integration after half a century, so this is not an easy task.
So when the green camp says that right off the bat we are going to have a one-China market, that's utterly wrong. And they say that all at once mainland labor will come to Taiwan-whereas in Europe, although the common market was launched in 1957, more than two decades later, in the 1980s, only a few countries allowed free mobility of labor. The labor issue remained very sensitive, so individual countries reserved the right not to open to foreign labor. This was based on the spirit of mutual agreement, that you cannot coerce the other party. This is just common knowledge, but in Taiwan you see distortions everywhere and you can't reason with some people.
Boosting Taiwan's popularity
Q: I would also like to ask about the upcoming World Health Assembly meeting in May. Both home and abroad, whether Taiwan can finally attend the WHA as an observer is being seen as an indicator of the success or failure of your cross-strait policy. What is your view?
A: As a multilateral organization, the WHO is of course an indicator for observers, but it is not the only one. For example, at the 2008 APEC meeting held in Peru, current KMT honorary chairman and former vice-president Lien Chan attended in his capacity as National Policy Foundation chairman. This was a major breakthrough, something that could never be done in the past.
Secondly, after six years of effort, in December of 2008 we finally got the agreement of the WTO to accede to the Agreement on Government Procurement (GPA). When the news came out, there wasn't much of a reaction in Taiwan, but the US and European chambers of commerce were very excited, because they felt that their firms would get fairer treatment here, so they would be willing to come here. As for Taiwan firms, should they be concerned that government projects will be taken away by foreign firms? In fact, with this kind of construction contract, foreign firms will generally seek a local partner, and through this we can upgrade the standards for public infrastructure. The most important thing is that the parties to the GPA are 20-plus wealthy countries, so with our accession we have opened up a pathway for Taiwanese firms to bid for contracts overseas. This is a major breakthrough.
Also, in early October of last year, US President Bush notified Congress of willingness to sell US$6.5 billion in weapons to Taiwan, indicating that Taiwan-US relations are also very stable. But on the same day a policy analyst from the green camp said in the newspaper that the Ma administration's policies were creating distrust between Taiwan and the US, and that weapons sales to Taiwan had been frozen. When you see ill-informed speculation like this, you don't know whether to laugh or cry. This is also why, after Raymond F. Burghardt, the chairman of the American Institute in Taiwan, came to Taiwan and met with me, he specifically kept the media for five extra minutes because he had something he wanted to say clearly. He said that the US has "warm feelings and high regards" for the improvement in cross-strait relations, and he certainly did not say that the US is worried that Taiwan will lean excessively toward mainland China.
Just think, right now there are troubles in the Korean Peninsula, but the Taiwan Strait is calm. Now which do you think the US and Japan prefer? Thinking back to the presidential election a year ago, because of the two referendums on "returning to" and on "joining" the UN, the mainland was really enraged, and the US was also very nervous, which of course was not good. Peace is, after all, the main axis of international society, so the path we are taking is to seize hold of mainstream world opinion, peace and prosperity. We hold fast to this axis, it is the foundation for everything. This development is beneficial for everyone. Right now not only is no one in the international community criticizing Taiwan, even faraway countries like those in Scandinavia are praising us. The methods we have adopted have already made us more popular in international society, which now even more sees Taiwan as a positive model.
Q: You have talked about a lot of policy achievements. In closing, please tell us whether there is anything you are dissatisfied about.
A: There is. Economically, we've run into the global financial storm, so it has become very difficult to fulfill our the "6-3-3" campaign promise. It is something that no one anticipated. But I think we will still go ahead with the 12 "i-Taiwan" infrastructure projects as planned, because these are for basic infrastructure, and they are especially important when the economy is in a downturn, so that you are ready to take advantage of the change in the wind when the economic situation turns around. This is what Chiang Ching-kuo did back then. When prices were skyrocketing, when gas had gone from NT$3 per liter to NT$13, he went full speed ahead with the Ten Major Projects. When the infrastructure was in place, national income immediately went up several times over. Projects like Taoyuan Air City promise huge commercial opportunities in the future, so right now you can't just look at the present, you have to look at the situation three to five years from now.
In this year alone we are investing NT$600 billion to stimulate the economy and help the unemployed. My only concern is efficiency of implementation. After all, the budget that a public official can administer is limited, so we have to plan carefully. If we can spend this NT$600 billion effectively, there should be quite good results.