The Cross Strait Times

A few short things about Nanjing:

1. Closer economic integration will help prevent war. This is good.

2. Increased dependency on the Mainland will decrease our leverage in discussions in case Beijing brings something to the table which we would consider unacceptable. This is bad.*

3. A few things about the airlines and direct routes need to be fixed. Namely:

a) Mainlanders should be allowed to fly Taiwan-based carriers. Give people the choice of who to fly with and competition can lead to better services for all.

b) Both Taiwan-based carriers really, really need to have connecting flights beyond the cross-strait area, something that Mainland-based carriers can already do. For instance, Taipei-Beijing-Amsterdam or Taipei-Shanghai-Frankfurt would be lucrative routes. Furthermore;

b2) denying these routes to make Taipei just a spoke of any Mainland-based flight and relegating Taiwan to the frontiers does not take advantage of Taiwan’s already developed capital. Therefore, it is not good for the integrated Chinese economy that the KMT-CCP wants of having Taipei, Shanghai, and Hong Kong working together. For Beijing to hollow out Taiwan — a place that by comparison is 2% of the Mainland by population and 30% by economic size, would be Beijing shooting itself in the foot. Taiwan is a money-maker. Let’s keep Taiwan that way.

c) My personal opinion is to allow ships and planes of any flag to able to use the cross-strait routes. I think freer trade in general is good, and that protectionist measures that prevent “outsiders” from using these routes only denies ourselves more money-making opportunities. I also think that similar laws in other countries (that exclude outsiders from trading inside their borders) are silly.

WHA news:

Exciting that Taiwan will have some international space, although the name Chinese Taipei was to be expected, as was the renewal. It would be unlike Beijing to allow Taipei its own international space, knowing that the DPP could be elected and suddenly the space Beijing gave Taipei would be used against them. I would like to see something more meaningful in the future. Perhaps a formal end to military hostilities across the strait?

* Why have the negotiations between the Dalai Lama and the CCP not been going well? Because the Dalai Lama doesn’t have enough material leverage to make Beijing pay attention to him. He can rally peoples’ sympathies, but until he has something to show to make Beijing pay attention, they won’t. Let this be a lesson to Taiwan. Keep a good cards to play while dealing with Beijing to ensure a sweeter resolution to this situation.

In light of the recent attacks in the Middle East, B@Taiwan makes and interesting comparison between Gaza and Taiwan and proposes a worthwhile solution: develop Gaza’s economy to end violence.

Gaza has a geographical advantage as it’s at the crossroads of Asia, Europe, and Africa, with easy access to the Suez Canal, and could easily export to all these places if the infrastructure and economy were built.

Could a developed Gaza be at peace with Israel? Well, let’s look at PRC and ROC for a rough analogy:

Despite the fact that the Mainland Chinese and Taiwanese governments don’t see eye-to-eye, and that Beijing reiterates anti-secession rhetoric every now and then, economic development and interdependence has prevented outright war across the strait. Both sides have invested too much in each others’ economies, and the middle class too used to the resultant stable and affluent living, that war has become almost (but not quite) unthinkable. Strangely enough, the modern version of mutually assured destruction is mutually assured prosperity.

Can the same economic development end — or at least, dramatically reduce — conflict between Israel and Palestine? I can’t presume to know the answer to this, as I cannot speak for cultures different from mine. But I do know that money, and lots of it, can cover and heal a surprising number of wounds, no matter how extreme the differences are. Developing Gaza would be a worthwhile experiment in peace.

As I write this, the PRC is sending its navy to the coast of Somalia, to do its part in contributing to the stability of the global community. I think it’s refreshing that Beijing, usually isolationist, is stepping up to take on more of the world’s responsibilities. Surely, part of the PRC’s motivation must come from self-interest. The Red Sea is a valuable trade link connecting East Asia with Europe, and rerouting ships around Africa means using more fuel and reaping fewer profits. But it is from knowing one’s self-interest can one be aware of the interests of others. As the PRC wants to be a regional power, by contributing to the anti-piracy fight it is starting to use its power responsibly. A small step, but at least it’s been taken.

Charter 08 by now is probably old news to anyone reading this blog. I admire their outspokenness and agree that democracy must come to China. Interestingly, only one arrest so far has happened as a result of 300 intellectuals signing this document. Perhaps Beijing has learned that withholding the iron fist prevents PR disasters, but it’s also led to a lot more people being unafraid to come out in support of the controversial document.

The other side: a leftist argument calling for the maintenance of a Communist “tutelage” (quotes mine) until Chinese civil society is ready for democracy. The link brings up real problems with civil society in Taiwan, but I don’t think it really should stop democracy from being implemented. The idea that young democracy and an inexperienced electorate could be hijacked by fascists, however, is a legitimate concern.

Is democracy in the Mainland inevitable? I will say some form of “freer government” definitely is. That is, if the current regime intends to continue trade further its ambitions of making the PRC a global player. Naysayers who think that China will remain authoritarian “forever” while becoming a major economic and trading world power tend to forget their history and geography.

• Island and peninsular countries with long coastlines and busy, open ports are susceptible to new ideas with people freely going in and out, relying on businesses and a multitude of institutions that keep government in check. As a result, these countries become progressive and free thinking due to economic competition and the free flow of ideas (e.g., Western Europe).
• Landlocked countries (or countries with frozen coastlines) are less likely to have people move freely and exchange ideas because transportation limitations don’t allow it. Government becomes the main authority of reliance because trade and wealth generation is harder without trade ports. As a result, the country trends towards authoritarianism (e.g., Russia).

What does this say about China? China has a long eastern coastline and the rest is bound by land, mostly mountains and desert. This results in what tdaxp calls a “red-blue divide” that people in the US are probably familiar with [1]. New ideas are constantly coming into China through trade, making democracy, or something like it, pretty much inevitable. The only way the Communist Party can prevent the spread of democratic ideals is by shutting off China from the rest of the world in an imitation of North Korea. Doing so will destroy China’s and the world’s economy, plummeting the Chinese people into poverty and obviating the Communists’ source of governmental legitimacy. Of course, such a scenario will never happen. The Communists may want to hold onto their power, but they are not stupid. China must engage the world through trade and politics to become the great power that its leaders want China to be. Geography is destiny, and the Communist Party will have to manage a democratic transition.

How to manage the transition?

I propose that the CCP actually groom an opposition party into existence to ensure a stable back-and-forth handover between parties. There are two ways to go about this. One is to turn the factions within the CCP into de facto parties with separate names that people can vote for. The other is to build up the KMT as an alternative party by making the Revolutionary Committee of the KMT the mainland branch of Taiwan’s KMT. As evidenced by the forums between the CCP and KMT, the two parties are capitalistic and bureaucratic enough (and arguably, corrupt enough) to understand each other. The two can then set up a framework that passes the power between the two sides, easing China into a two-party system while preventing state collapse as seen in the former USSR and Qing Dynasty. Hopefully the eventual competition between the parties will grind the corruption out of both sides, but hey, a political party without corruption ain’t a party, right?

[1] http://www.tdaxp.com/archive/2008/08/14/russia-is-bad.html

The legitimacy of the Communist Party’s rule over mainland has always been its ability to deliver economic growth. As this global economic crisis is engulfing mainland china as well, how will the Communist Party respond? In many ways, aircow believes that the ceremonial talks between Taipei and Beijing was more benefitial for the Communist Party. Direct links, and mainland china has shown to have not much of a real economic impact. With the current turmoil, and strikes going on in mainland china, KMT must position itself as the democratic party for all of China.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/2827365/

At long last, no more circuitous trips to Hong Kong or Okinawa just to get to the mainland!  Need to make a day trip to Shanghai from Taipei (or vice versa) and be home the same night?  No problem!  Well, it won’t be a problem once the flights become more regular.  The opening of the three direct links — something both the Blues and Greens have been clamoring for years — is certainly a cause for celebration.

The good news is that at least the infrastructure is in place for better seaport and airport facilities all over Taiwan.  With Taipei - Shanghai day trips soon to be a reality, Taoyuan Airport City may finally, pardon the pun, take off.  Under normal economic conditions, this would be great.  Hundreds of thousands of new jobs could be created with these new cargo, flight, and shipping hubs now opening to the land across the strait.  But in the global economic slowdown, how much will opening Taiwan’s market to Mainland China actually help Taiwan?

Business, finance, and shipping do stand to profit from these liberalized links.  As for tourism, the fact that Beijing authorities screen who can and cannot go to Taiwan, and that Taipei makes it harder for Continentals to enter Taiwan than the US, really doesn’t help.  Espionage paranoia, anyone?