Taiwan's Economic Future Can Hardly be built on Pipe Dreams

Taiwan's Economic Future Can Hardly be built on Pipe Dreams
China Times editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
January 5, 2011

Summary: Tsai Ing-wen boasts that "We will set the agenda within multilateral organizations. We will increase Taipei's space on the international stage." Is the ignorant? Is she naive? Or is she merely attempting to deceive outsiders and the general public? Tsai Ing-wen may have a dream. But Taiwan's economic future cannot be built on her personal, impracticable, unrealizable pipe dreams. She wants multilateral negotiations to replace bilateral and regional negotiations. In the end however, she will merely increase Taiwan's economic marginalization and isolation.

Full Text Below:

DPP presidential candidate Tsai Ing-wen has issued numerous public statements during the recent presidential debates and policy presentations. Her ideas for Taiwan's economic future all call for organizing a negotiating team to "set the agenda" during negotiations within multilateral organizations. Is this a realistic solution? Is it practicable? Can it actually be implemented? Or is it all flash and no substance? Is it mere self-aggrandizement and self-deception? Will it put Taiwan's economy in grave danger?

Tsai Ing-wen has repeatedly stressed the importance of multilateral organizations. Her goal is to get rid of the KMT created bilateral framework known as ECFA. When Ma and Tsai debated ECFA last year. Tsai Ing-wen harped on the importance of negotiations within multilateral organizations. She sternly rebuked Ma Ying-jeou. She said her scenario could be achieved during the WTO Doha Development Round negotiations. Her boast was of course nonsense. During the recent policy presentations, she once again vowed, "We will organize a strong negotiating team. The government will take the lead. It will work together with industry. We will strike in the international arena. We will set the agenda with multilateral organizations. We will increase Taiwan's international breathing space." She unquestionably has thing for negotiations within multilateral organizations.

Unfortunately, the global trend is running counter to Tsai Ing-wen's Goldilocks scenario. A number of multilateral economic and trade organizations have relations with us. The most important of course are the WTO (World Trade Organization) and APEC (Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation). We have yet to become members. The United States is promoting the TPP (Trans-Pacific Economic Partnership Agreement). APEC remains a loose networking organization, irrelevant to our current discussion. The United States is promoting the TPP. Both Ma and Tsai say they intend to seek membership. But the TPP is an economic tool of Washington, designed to contain Beijing's influence in Asia. Its prospects remain uncertain. It is bound to become an arena in which the two giants, Beijing and Washington, jockey with each other for economic influence. Taipei cannot possibly hope to "set the agenda" here.

The WTO Doha Development Round of multilateral negotiations are still ongoing. They began in November 2001. Progress over the past decade has been slow. Results have been inconclusive. Over the past decade, negotiations were suspended twice. Negotiations were originally supposed to conclude in January 2005. But the deadline has been extended several times. No one knows when the talks will adjourn. In June this year, the Doha Development Round was changed. A compromise was reached. The rounds would be completed in phases. But WTO Secretary General Pascal Lamy says that only when agreement is reached on all issues will the talks be considered a success.

Compared this against the successful completion of the Uruguay Round negotiations. The Doha Development Round negotiations have encountered difficulties caused by external factors. The Uruguay Round negotiations were led by a small number of developed nations. The rest were mere followers. The Doha Development Round negotiations meanwhile, are subject to the growing strength of emerging countries. This has made already complex decision-making processes even more difficult. Agricultural and non agricultural market access are among the most divisive issues. The problems appear insoluble. Lamy described the impasse in negotiations as a Gordian Knot. An agreement was originally expected by the end of 2011. But this has once again been postponed.

The inescapable fact is that the Doha Development Round negotiations have stalled. Governments have switched to bilateral and regional trade agreements, and to various free-trade agreements (FTAs). As of this year, over 300 FTAs have been signed the world over, and the number continues to increase. South Korea and the European Union, India, the United States and other important countries have all signed FTAs. The Chinese Mainland and ASEAN's "East Asia Free Trade Area" has taken shape. It is being followed by Japan and South Korea's "ASEAN plus three." Tsai Ing-wen is enamored with negotiations within multilateral organizations. But such negotiations have made no progress. They have stalled across the board. Tsai Ing-wen's economic prescription reveals her utter ignorance of the strategic picture. If implemented, her economic prescription would leave Taiwan in dire straits.

Tsai Ing-wen is not merely ignorant about bilateral and regional negotiations around the globe. She is oblivious to the harsh international reality. Negotiations in multilateral organizations, as we all know, are conducted by the Big Guns. The major items on the agenda are always set by the major players. During such talks, the smaller countries can only nod in agreement. In future negotiations within multilateral organizations, the advanced nations of Europe and America will inevitably take the lead, along with the emerging BRIC economies and other countries with international influence. They will be the stars of the show. These countries have at least a trillion dollars or more in assets. The Taiwan Region of the ROC has an economy valued at $400 billion. By what stretch of the imagination can it "set the agenda" during negotiations within multilateral organizations? When has Taipei ever set the agenda during negotiations within multilateral organizations over the past several decades?

The DPP was in power for eight years. Tsai Ing-wen was vice premier for a year and a half. During that time, Taipei participated in negotiations within multilateral organizations. When did it ever "set the agenda?" Are we to understand that Taiwan's economic strength and international influence has suddenly grown by leaps and bounds over the past few years. Are we to understand that Taipei is now one of the Big Guns in the international arena, one able to "set the agenda?" Tsai Ing-wen boasts that "We will set the agenda within multilateral organizations. We will increase Taiwan's space on the international stage." Is the ignorant? Is she naive? Or is she merely attempting to deceive outsiders and the general public? Tsai Ing-wen may have a dream. But Taiwan's economic future cannot be built on her personal, impracticable, unrealizable pipe dreams. She wants multilateral negotiations to replace bilateral and regional negotiations. In the end however, she will merely increase Taiwan's economic marginalization and isolation.

台灣經濟前景不能建立在夢想上
2012-01-05中國時報

民進黨總統候選人蔡英文在多次公開發言中─包括辯論會與政見發表會上，對其未來的經濟主張，都曾提出要組織談判團，在多邊組織中「主導議題」。這到底是一個好藥方、可務實推動執行；還是一個華而不實、甚至自我膨脹、自我欺騙，反而置台灣經濟於險地的政策？

蔡英文所以再三強調多邊組織的重要，目的是破除國民黨主導的雙邊架構的ＥＣＦＡ。馬、蔡前年在ＥＣＦＡ辯論時，蔡英文就不斷強調多邊談判的重要，當時她更很權威的提醒馬英九，說當年ＷＴＯ的杜哈回合談判就可望成功─當然事實非如此。這次政見發表會時，她也再次提出「我們將會組織強而有力的談判團隊，由政府帶頭，跟企業一起打拚，在國際上衝鋒陷陣；我們會在多邊組織裡主導議題，創造台灣的空間。」她對多邊組織談判的確是情有獨鍾。

遺憾的是世界的趨勢顯然不是蔡英文腦中的圖像。在與我國有關的多邊經貿組織中，最重要的當然是ＷＴＯ（世界貿易組織）與ＡＰＥＣ（亞太經合會），勉強加一個我國尚未加入、美國力推中的ＴＰＰ（跨太平洋經濟夥伴協定）。ＡＰＥＣ猶是鬆散的對話聯誼組織，在此可略而不談。ＴＰＰ則雖然有美國力推，馬、蔡兩位候選人也都說要爭取加入，但實際情況則是ＴＰＰ是美國用以牽制大陸在亞洲經濟影響力的利器，前景未定，且註定是中、美兩大經濟體角力的場合，台灣要在其中「主導議題」，幾無可能。在此，我們還是看看ＷＴＯ的情況吧。

ＷＴＯ進行中的多邊談判─杜哈回合，從二○○一年十一月開始，至今冉冉十年過去，仍無結果。這十年間，曾有兩次談判中止，原訂二○○五年一月完成談判的最後期限也一延再延、終而不知何年可終止。今年六月，杜哈回合只好改以選擇分階段完成的妥協方案；但ＷＴＯ祕書長拉米也說，只有全部議題達成協議才算成功。

相較於烏拉圭回合談判順利完成，杜哈回合談判有其外在環境變化產生的困難。烏拉圭回合談判時，主要由少數幾個發達國家成員主導談判，其餘國家都是追隨者。但杜哈回合中，新興國家的力量日益壯大，讓決策過程變更複雜、更困難。其中農業與非農產品市場准入更是成員分歧最大之處，幾乎陷入無解困境。拉米就以「三角死結」形容談判僵局。原訂要在二○一一年底達成協議，結果還是要再延期。

擺在眼前的事實是，由於杜哈回合談判停滯難前，各國紛紛改採雙邊與區域性的貿易協定談判─即各類型的自由貿易協定（ＦＴＡ）為主。到今年為止，全球的ＦＴＡ已經有三百個之多了，而且還在持續增加中。看看南韓與歐盟、印度、美國等重要國家的ＦＴＡ紛紛上路，還有大陸與東協之間的「東亞自由貿易區」成型，隨後又啟動加上日本、韓國的「東協加三」，蔡英文獨鍾的多邊組織談判，卻毫無進展、全面停滯。蔡英文開出這帖昧於時勢的經濟藥方，豈不陷台灣於絕境？

蔡英文不僅昧於全球雙邊與區域談判的時勢，更完全昧於國際現實。坦白說，即使在多邊組織談判中，大家都知道，只有「大咖」才有下場玩的資格，永遠是主要大國在主導議題、談判角力，其它小國只有追隨附和的份。未來多邊組織中的要角，必然是歐美先進國家、及新興的金磚四國與其它經濟規模與國際影響力較大的國家，才是上場表演的主力。這些國家的經濟規模至少在一兆美元以上，經濟規模四千多億的台灣何德何能、能在多邊組織談判中主導議題？過去幾十年，台灣何時曾在多邊組織中主導議題過？

民進黨執政八年中、或是蔡英文任行政院副院長的一年半中，台灣在多邊組織談判中，發揮過什麼「主導議題」的角色？台灣的經濟實力與國際影響力，難道在這幾年中突飛猛進，有資格成為國際合縱連橫場上的「大咖」，所以能「主導議題」了？蔡英文承諾的「我們會在多邊組織裡主導議題，創造台灣的空間。」到底是不明世事、過於天真，還是說說用來騙外行人與一般民眾？蔡英文或許有此夢想，但台灣的經濟前景不能建立在她個人不切實際、完全不可能達到的夢想上。想以多邊組織談判取代雙邊與區域談判，最後可能讓台灣經濟更形邊緣、孤立化。