March 2, 2009: China Post"President Ma Ying-jeou wants to reap an “early harvest” from economic cooperation between Taiwan and China, his spokesman Wang Yu-chi said yesterday."July 9, 2009: CENS
"The Ministry of Economic Affairs (MOEA) has decided to put flat panel display (FPD) and FPD glass on the list of early harvest for the cross-Taiwan Strait Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA), so that local manufacturers can expand their market share in China, capitalizing on the edge of free tariff over Japanese and Korean rivals."September 15, 2009: CENS
President Ma Hopes ECFA to Be Inked by Early 2010October 1, 2009: China Daily
The government will try its best to sign the cross-Taiwan Strait Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA) by the end of this year or early next year, said President Ma Ying-jeou yesterday (Sept. 14).
"The government has completed a tentative early-harvest list to be included in the proposed cross-Straits economic cooperation framework agreement (ECFA). A spokesman says Taiwan is ready to negotiate details of the list with the mainland."October 27, 2009: CENS
"Delegations from Taiwan and China will meet in Beijing next week for an unofficial discussion on Cross-Taiwan Strait Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA), when both sides will exchange lists for early harvests for the first time."November 12, 2009: CENS
Gov`t Confident to Sign ECFA With China Early Next YearMay 11, 2010: Commercial Times
"The signing of the ECFA during the fifth Chiang-Chen meeting is our reasonable expectation," said Wu yesterday (Nov. 11).
"The third round of economic cooperation framework agreement negotiations between Taiwan and mainland China has been postponed due to disagreements over early harvest lists."May 20, 2010: Commercial Times
"The early harvest list in the pending cross-strait economic cooperation framework agreement is likely to include over 300 items, Premier Wu Den-yih said May 19."June 2010: International Business Consulting
"There have been conflicting reports in recent days on the state of the negotiations between China and Taiwan on the proposed economic cooperation framework agreement (ECFA)."June 1, 2010: China Post
"Whether the cross-strait Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA) can be smoothly inked or not will hinge mainly on whether both sides can reach a consensus on the early-harvest list, or priority items for tariff cuts or market opening, in the pact, according to informed sources."June 4, 2010: Taiwan Economic News
"Mainland China may make major concession in the talk for cross-Taiwan Strait Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA) by expanding the early-harvest list, or priority items for tariff cut or market opening, to 500 items, rather than the expectation of 300, according to the Chinese-language Economic Daily News (EDN), sister publication of Taiwan Economic News (TEN)."June 10, 2010: Taiwan News
"Taiwan's chief negotiator for a trade pact with China is visiting Beijing to discuss inclusion of several key industries in an "early harvest" program for concessionary tariff treatment, sources said Thursday."June 11, 2010: China Times
"The third round of formal negotiations on the economic cooperation framework agreement between Taiwan and mainland China is scheduled to begin June 13 in Beijing, government officials announced."June 10, 2010: Taiwan News
"The two sides of the Taiwan Strait will not exchange "early harvest" lists for a proposed cross-strait trade pact during a third round of talks on the deal, Minister of Economic Affairs Shih Yen-shiang said Thursday.Related Links: Taiwan Today reports that the government is trying to entice Taiwan firms to return home. Labor unrest in China hits many Taiwanese firms. Taiwan News editorial argues that ECFA has no legitimacy without a referendum.
The cross-strait economic cooperation framework agreement's (ECFA's) early harvest lists of each side, which form the backbone of the pact, include items that will be subject to immediate tariff reductions or exemptions, or improved market access, upon the signing of the pact.
Shih also said he did not know whether there will be a fourth round of ECFA talks."
_______________________
[Taiwan] Don't miss the comments below! And check out my blog and its sidebars for events, links to previous posts and picture posts, and scores of links to other Taiwan blogs and forums!
15 comments:
Timed once again perfectly to the elections. The KMT can now say that they earnestly negotiated with China on tariff reductions, even though it failed (and I'll bet they knew it would fail all along.
Yeah I raised that as a possibility earlier this year, that the KMT wanted to sabotage them negotiations and blame China, but I think China simply kept raising the ante until at last even the KMT couldn't stomach it, especially with their electoral prospects fading into dimness.
Curious to see how things play out in China with the labor issues, etc.
Kinda kills the argument that the KMT were simply doing what Beijing told them to.
Anonymous said...
Kinda kills the argument that the KMT were simply doing what Beijing told them to.
Either you are a propagandist for the KMT/CCP or you have difficulty understanding processes in historical progressions. If you ever took historiography I assume your grades could not have been high.
It does not logically follow that if now the KMT has trouble stomaching CCP demands that they did not willingly acquiesce to CCP demands in the past.
historiography ...
Yeah, we ALL took that course!
I hate the sound of elitism, anon.
Anonymous (1) said...
Kinda kills the argument that the KMT were simply doing what Beijing told them to.
Anonymous (2) said...
Either you are a propagandist for the KMT/CCP or you have difficulty understanding processes in historical progressions. If you ever took historiography I assume your grades could not have been high.
Anonymous 2, I am with you. KMT/CCP zombie or just plain zombie!
Anonymous 1, you are not much of a student or observer of human dynamics, I take it. What seems to have happened is that some over-eager KMT chippies (I will explain why they were over-eager later) went on their giant ECFA hunt. Well, the CCP ChiComs smelled them coming very quickly. You know the old P. T. Barnum saw, "There is a sucker born every minute!" So the CCP spider invited the KMT fly into her parlor. And slowly, but surely, the CCP spider trapped the KMT fly into a rather untenable, suicidal corner.
Now to motivation: What I have watched happen is some over-eager KMT chippies trying to do the bidding of their masters, the Taiwanese super-rich and the Taiwanese Multi-National Corporations (Taiwanese in name only). As Michael pointed out in his post, "ECFA as a status quo economic policy", these plutocrats are stuck in the "old business model" mode. Thus, since the plutocrats are inertial, uncreative beasts, they are always in some kind of semi-panic, always looking to lower their costs. This is the zero-sum game, the race to the bottom, the inevitable financial death spiral. And once the plutocrats have gained their power and wealth, they want more and more! Think of power and money as some of the most powerful drugs around; they are highly addictive. The threat of losing that money and power is unbearable. Thus the plutocrats pushed the KMT unmercifully.
What is snapping the KMT out of their CCP-induced bliss? Try electoral suicide. For all of the KMT "happy self-talk", it can't mask the on-rushing election tsunami forever. And they realized that they have been painted into a very sticky, very tight corner from which they might not recover.
As far as "I'll bet they knew it would fail all along", I don't think so. The KMT has spent a lot of political capital because of this ECFA morass.
This is all just IMHO!
The thing that is pulling the KMT back is not the electoral tsunami as much as the fear of losing power. The KMT has ALWAYS put its power as the paramount concern. That is how Lee manipulated the old bastards in the 90's. He promised them power in exchange for liberalization. They made the deal with the devil and it almost cost them... power. That is where Ma comes in. He is trying to shore up the KMT's power base, but has squandered most of the party's domestic power and thus must seek it from mega-rich Chinese/Taiwanese/Organized Crime industrialists and CCP bigs. These groups represent the KMT's new farmer's and fishermen's unions and patronage networks.
First, apologies to Michael for these sidetracks.
Anonymous said...
historiography ...
Yeah, we ALL took that course!
I hate the sound of elitism, anon.
You have an interesting debating technique. Each time you cannot defend your original statement you simply change the topic, and in some way attempt to disparage the responder to your post. This is a common technique of mainland Chinese who spam various blogs and forums. I am used to your writing style and thoughts, so your posts are easy to spot from a mile away.
Michael is offering us a thoughtful commentary on Taiwan. Hopefully your posts can be more thoughtful. If you do disagree with the gist of a post, it would be more helpful if you did not write blanket claims that most often are obviously fallacious and are apparently written only for propaganda purposes.
Now, to get back on subject, is it possible for you to actually support your original statement by giving some historical facts or at least a plausible theory?
I believe to that elections and the strong voice, as of late, of the people in general has caused the KMT to say ... whoa, let's back up a second.
And ... it would not be at all a surprise if the CCP are in total agreement and cooperation with backing off, going slowly and rethinking the process that has brought so much unrest among voters on the island.
Better to live to fight another day than to lose elections and the framework that allows for secret deals and gaining the ultimate prize.
"The thing that is pulling the KMT back is not the electoral tsunami as much as the fear of losing power."
I heartily agree. Fear of losing power and money is terrifying, especially for the super-rich and super-powerful. And electoral power is part of their power base.
I think we need to differentiate between the KMT party and those members of the KMT party who are super-rich and super-powerful. The party is a vehicle for aiding them in acquiring and holding onto money and wealth. And the KMT party does not want to lose both the Presidency and the Legislature! That would definitely make the KMT royals rather queasy and more than uncomfortable.
I agree that Ma is trying to shore up KMT power.
I have been here in Taiwan for 2 ½ years. I am not familiar with all the major constituent groups here.
Nonetheless, I do know that in the US, the big MNCs were the major forces behind WTO, NAFTA, CAFTA and other trade agreements. In fact, many if not most of the provisions in international trade agreements are written by the MNC's trade lawyers. I would assume that the same thing is occurring with ECFA here in Taiwan. One major difference: the US has more clout than Taiwan.
In the US, we have the finest government that money can buy. Boy, has it been bought! Just go out to opensecrets.org and check out how much was spent on the Presidential and Congressional elections in the 2008 cycle. Then check out the lobbying expenditures. We are now talking billions of dollars. The power constituencies and MNCs in the US are not doing this because they are so generous, philanthropic and patriotic. They want a return on their investments, which is how they see campaign contributions and lobbying.
Many of the people who populate the White House and Congress know that the power constituencies and MNCs are their future employers. And they are more than willing to sell their influence and knowledge to those employers when they leave office. For a pretty penny and then some!
I believe that Taiwan has similar structures, with appropriate cultural modifications, based on what I have observed.
according to the latest news, it seems to be a "success", no? :
http://www.etaiwannews.com/etn/news_content.php?id=1286807&lang=eng_news&cate_img=logo_taiwan.jpg&cate_rss=TAIWAN_eng
I do not understand :-(
according to the latest news, it seems to be a "success", no? :
http://www.etaiwannews.com/etn/news_content.php?id=1286807&lang=eng_news&cate_img=logo_taiwan.jpg&cate_rss=TAIWAN_eng
I do not understand :-(
It is not really so hard to understand if you understand the concepts in the above posts. Of course, the news article also indicates that the statement "Kinda kills the argument that the KMT were simply doing what Beijing told them to" is indefensible, doesn't it?
The intriguing question here is by whose standards is this a "success".
You have an interesting debating technique. Each time you cannot defend your original statement you simply change the topic, and in some way attempt to disparage the responder to your post. This is a common technique of mainland Chinese who spam various blogs and forums. I am used to your writing style and thoughts, so your posts are easy to spot from a mile away.
I am the Anon from 12.45pm that you replied to. I'm not the Anon at 7.15 who said historiography ...
Yeah, we ALL took that course!
I hate the sound of elitism, anon.
You know what they say about assumptions.
Hi Anonymouses, or maybe that should by Anonymi or Anonymice. Whatever!
Sometimes it is difficult to determine to which Anon I am talking or reading. It can be confusing, and sometimes a tad annoying. I feel like I am in some variation of the TV game, "Concentration" which has been ruthlessly melded with Abbot and Costello's "Who's on First?" :D
I might suggest that you log on to blogspot/blogger with some account. Then we at least get to see a somewhat unique pseudonym or name. Unless, of course, your pseudonym is Anonymous. And if you don't want to log on, you might end each of your comments with your name or pseudonym.
I think a constant pseudonym or name would allow some continuity of thought from post to post and within each post's comment thread. Just a suggestion!
...You have an interesting debating technique. Each time you cannot defend your original statement you simply change the topic, and in some way attempt to disparage the responder to your post...
Since the nom de plume 'anonymous' is widely used in this blog, anon, how the hell do you know who you're addressing? I'm fascinated that you think I'm the same anonymous as other anonymi. I'm also amazed you think I a mainland Chinese!! What kind of clairvoyance do you possess? ROFL!
You poor sap - you don't realize that you're being criticized by more than one person!
Post a Comment