No. 1, August 15, 2019

Featured News: Critical! China suspends individual travel to Taiwan
Featured Editorial: When restraint is no longer considered as a virtue, then malice will come out in full strength
Featured Opinion: How Would Beijing Assess Taiwan's election of 2020?

Critical! China suspends individual travel to Taiwan

China Times, August 1, 2019

 

China’s Ministry of Culture and Tourism announced on July 31 that due to the current state of cross-strait relations, effective August 1, mainland Chinese tourists from 47 cities will no longer be granted individual travel permits to visit Taiwan. This is the first time China has put a full pause to individual visitors hoping to travel to Taiwan.  Although group visits have yet to be suspended, this move deals a tremendous blow to Taiwan’s tourism market for the second half of the year. It is estimated that there will be a reduction of 700,00 visitors, resulting in a decrease of $37.5 billion New Taiwan dollars (about $1.2 billion US dollars) in tourism revenue, equivalent to a reduction of 0.2 percent in gross domestic product (GDP) growth.

 

With the 2020 presidential election nearing, exchanges across the Taiwan Strait are expected to become gradually limited. Prior to the 2016 January presidential elections in Taiwan, China’s Ministry of Culture and Tourism had instructed local tourism departments to significantly reduce the number of mainland tourists visiting Taiwan from December 16, 2015 to January 15, 2016, with reductions as much as 95 percent and business group visits at a full stop as well. With the electoral victory of the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) in 2016, mainland Chinese tourist numbers also rapidly dropped, not gradually recovering until the recent two years, but now focused on individual travel, as opposed to group visits, which were the mainstay in the past.

 

According to the National Immigration Agency, the annual number of mainland Chinese individual visitors to Taiwan in recent years has surpassed 1 million, with 2017 at 1.05 million people, 2018 at 1.07 million people, and this year (2019) already exceeding 630,000 people from January to June, indicating an enduring interest among mainland tourists in visiting Taiwan.

 

Because China’s Ministry of Culture and Tourism’s announcement on July 31 was immediately put into effect the day after, the tourism industry on both sides of the strait scrambled to react. According to Beijing News citing China’s Ministry of Culture and Tourism, individual travel visas to Taiwan have been put on hold since August 1, but no changes have yet to be made regarding group travel. Zhejiang Everbrite International Travel Service notified tourists on July 31 that individual travel permits to Taiwan handling has already been stopped, but currently valid permits may still be used and individually purchasing plane tickets to Taiwan will not be affected but must follow group travel protocols when in Taiwan.

 

In its official response, Taiwan’s Mainland Affairs Council (MAC) stated that mainland Chinese tourists’ individual travel to Taiwan is handled according to The Revised Test I of The Agreement Between Taiwan Strait Regarding Mainland Residents’ Tourism to Taiwan and its related documents. MAC strongly protests and condemns mainland China’s one-sided breach of the agreement and will continue subsequent communication through the Association for Tourism Exchange across the Taiwan Strait and the Taiwan Travel Association.

 

Deputy Minister of the Interior CHEN, Chung-yen expressed regret regarding the situation, calling upon China to positively regard travel exchange between people on both sides and not impact the rights of mainland Chinese tourists to travel to Taiwan  due to political reasons.

 

Regarding the economic impact on Taiwan due to limiting individual travel of mainland Chinese tourists, Reuters cites the analysis of LIU, Chen-chi of KGI Investment Advisory, which estimates a reduction of 760,000 travelers. The estimate is based on 1.6 million mainland Chinese tourists visiting Taiwan in the first half of 2019 and the individual to group tourist ratio of 4 to 3.

 

If multiplied by days of travel and consumption, Taiwan is set to lose an estimated $37.5 billion New Taiwan dollars (about $1.2 billion U.S. dollars). Based on Taiwan’s annual gross domestic product (GDP) of $18 trillion New Taiwan dollars, it is equivalent to a decrease of roughly 0.2 percent in GDP.

From: https://www.chinatimes.com/newspapers/20190801000221-260202?chdtv

When restraint is no longer considered as a virtue, then malice will come out in full strength

United Daily News Editorial, August 9, 2019

 

After suspending individual travel by mainland Chinese tourists to Taiwan and reducing the number of group tours, China further announced that film industry professionals from the mainland would be banned from participating in the Golden Horse Awards, which is held annually in Taiwan. People seem to hear the successive sounds of the tearing of ties across the Taiwan Strait. This, however, is only the overture; the ripping of ties is bound to deepen further in the next six months. This ripping phenomenon exists not only in cross-strait relations, it is more so inside Taiwan. The rivalry between the Blue and Green camps has already been a daily routine, and the forming of a new political party by Mayor Ko Wen-je and his high-pitched criticism that “Everyone surrounding President Tsai Ying-wen is corrupt” further ignited the fireworks of a possible three-way race to the apex.

 

The deterioration of the political atmosphere in and out of Taiwan is not unexpected. After the Democratic Progressives Party’s (DPP) big losses in local elections at the end of last year, President Tsai had turned the tide around by using the strategy of “confronting China”. She had defeated the intra-DPP challenger William Lai and prompted the Su Tseng-chang cabinet to govern ferociously. Many people, however, had accepted her strategy. As such, the Tsai government is encouraged not to do solid things, on the contrary, it can reap the ”hate China” results by maximizing fiery verbal attacks. This strategy is far easier than thinking hard in order to achieve good governing results.

 

Beijing naturally understands the tactics and calculations of the Tsai government. They also know that if they make a move, they would provide ammunitions to the DPP. However, facing the self-conceited Tsai Ing-wen, China clearly cannot tolerate any longer and they also care less about the feelings of the Taiwanese people. The Beijing authorities have begun to implement indiscriminate and heavy-handed policies one after another. Consequently, a “vicious cycle” has been formed by back-and-forth actions across the Taiwan Strait and the severity has increased more and more.

 

When restraint is no longer considered as a virtue and when indulgence or capriciousness wins more approval instead, various kinds of interacted malice will be stimulated and come out in full strength. This exactly is the current situation of the Golden Horse Awards. Many professionals of the film industry in Taiwan and the Chinese mainland hope to maintain this platform so that competitions in movie arts like those in sports can be free from political interferences. However, when Ms. Fu Yu, the winner of last year’s documentary award spoke publicly on stage that “I hope our country can be treated as a genuine independent entity”, she ruined this tacit understanding of “restraint”. Mainland Chinese delegates were embarrassed and Chairman Ang Lee of the Awards was in a dilemma. Because of Ms. Fu’s impudence, China found the excuse to boycott this year’s Golden Horse Awards.

 

Ms. Fu’s father is ethnic Chinese from Malaysia, and her mother is a Chinese Indonesian. Strictly speaking, Ms. Fu’s statement should not be interpreted as a “declaration of Taiwan independence”; it was rather a projection of her emotional feelings towards the film. Nevertheless, this kind of political statement that involved identity issues was highly explosive, especially in that very sensitive situation. No matter innocently or unintentionally, Ms. Fu has tainted other participants in the Awards ceremony with flavor of explosives and changed the nature of communications of the Awards. The lack of restraint by certain people may arouse malice, and this serves as the clearest example.

 

Ms. Fu Yu is but a young director. Her disrespect for other people’s situation and feelings at most damaged the atmosphere and the vision of the Golden Horse Awards. On the other hand, people who determine the good or bad auspices of the cross-Strait relations are those high-level officials; what have they done? For example, President Tsai uses the anti-China strategy to accumulate her political capital. Does she care when the economic situations of tourism, homestay, or night markets are hurt badly? Every time when Taiwan lost a diplomatic ally, or when Taiwan was blocked in international activities, it was Tsai’s opportunity to pick up an anti-China weapon. Has she ever been remorseful for Taiwan? With respect to PRC’s boycott of the Golden Horse Awards, DPP legislator Yu Wan-ju said that “Finally, the Awards ceremony will not be a stage for Chinese movie industry people to act wildly”. Such a sharp tongue serves no purpose other than inviting more hostilities.

 

When persons who are in power and responsible for solving problems only try to find weapons everywhere to incite hatred but do not show restraint, it is only natural that our society is replete with animosity. When Tsai Ying-wen equated ‘1992 Consensus’ with ”One Country, Two Systems”, she not only tried to label the Pan-Blue coalition as pro-China but also closed the possible door of cross-strait reconciliation. By doing so, she further enticed the people to suspect and sow hatred upon one another. As a result, when baker Wu Pao-chun expressed his support for the ”1992 Consensus”, he was boycotted by Taiwanese netizens. After President Tsai purchased a cup of coffee at an 85C Bakery Café in the United States, the company’s market value evaporated some $3.6 billion New Taiwan dollars (about $114 million U.S. dollars) in a few days. Now, the Yi Fang Taiwan Fruit Tea Company is in a similar painful situation. If Taiwan’s companies can only vacillate between political struggles across the Taiwan Strait, how can they truly embrace the path of globalization? 

 

In response to China’s boycott of the Golden Horse Awards, the Office of the President commented that ‘It was not a wise decision’. Indeed, the decision was not a wise one. But should the Tsai administration count how many unwise decisions it has made during the past three years in office?

From: https://udn.com/news/story/7338/3978849

How Would Beijing Assess Taiwan's election of 2020?

By Su Chi
United Daily News, August 11, 2019

 

The presidential election of January 2020 is the seventh in Taiwan. It is fundamentally different from the past six: voters would not simply choose a “government,” but a “country” as well. For the past 20 years after Dr. Tsai Ing-wen’s “two-state” narrative was frustrated in 1999, she has patiently followed her then established roadmap, moving from small steps to big strides, covertly or overtly, and hopes to eventually realize her ideal of Taiwan independence. If she succeeds in re-election, Taiwan will become a “new country” based on a new type of “one-party rule.” Consequently, none of the competing parties can afford to lose. Washington and Beijing are understandably anxiously watching on the sidelines.

Of the two great powers, Beijing’s thinking is more directly relevant to and worthy of Taiwan’s attention. Beijing now has a strong leadership with many tools available and sufficient time to respond to Taiwan’s situation. If we still look at the upcoming election with old thinking as if business will be as usual, we may well be caught ill-prepared.

How would Beijing assess the election? First, whether and how the US intervenes is the key. A new book recently published in Hong Kong, “The Last Secret,” collected the speeches made by top officials at the time of the Tiananmen Square Incident. It revealed the key CCP thinking behind its hardline decision: “the collusion between internal and external hostile forces.” In 1996, the CCP’s verbal intimidation and saber rattling against Taiwan’s first presidential election was also piqued by the US-Taiwan connection. During the six months in the wake of President Tsai’s inauguration of May 2016, Beijing did not close the door on communication with Taipei. The cross-strait relations came to a deadlock only after the “Trump-Tsai” telephone call of December 2016. As the United States passed the Taiwan Travel Act in March 2018, the “deadlock” deteriorated into “confrontation” involving the military sea/air cruise surrounding Taiwan. Every above-mentioned turn was caused by the impact of the US factor.

Therefore, if Tsai gets re-elected, Beijing will first determine if it is due to the US factor or Taiwan’s internal factor (e.g., KMT’s split). If the former, and Beijing still swallows the consequences, it will lose not only on Taiwan but also on US-China relationship.

Second, Beijing will assess whether the new situation is irreversible. Since the Tsai administration has promoted “incremental Taiwan independence” and “one-party rule” inside Taiwan over the past three years, and externally carried out “pro-US, anti-China” policy, if President Tsai wins re-election and continues to hold majority seats in the Legislative Yuan, she may interpret the election as a “referendum” and join with the international community to demand that the CCP accept the “new normal.” Beijing, which had held no hope for Taiwan's “government,” may become desperate because Taiwan's “people” also choose to deviate. If so, cross-strait relations will plummet sharply.

Third is the impact on the internal political situation in the mainland. Taiwan is only an issue among many for policy elites in the United States, but it is a hot topic for the entire nation on the mainland – elites, households, and common folks. In recent years, many mainlanders feel deeply wounded by Taiwan’s callousness toward their sincere friendship. If the salt of “despair” is further sprinkled on their wounds, the pressure will surely surge toward the party and government. Xi Jinping will surely bear the brunt due to his 22 years of working and living just across the Taiwan Strait. His grand plan for the future China will definitely suffer a severe blow. At this point, is it more important to maintain the status quo in the Taiwan Strait, or to protect himself?

The fourth is power calculations. The mainland has faced Taiwan for decades. Its concern has never been the “small guy” at the front, but the “big guy” standing behind it. Now we are witnessing an overall change in the power relationship between the US and China and the apparent fading US influence in East Asia. Recently, the United States has exhibited neither intention nor capability to mediate disputes between its key allies Japan and South Korea. The Chinese and Russian warplanes openly challenged the traditional airspace of Japan and South Korea; North Korea repeatedly tested missiles, and President Trump simply turn a blind eye. To make matters worse, the US military is in an awkward period of transition. The aircraft carriers have long carried out the “counter-insurgency” missions, but neglected how to deal with near-peer rivals like the PLA. The political and military circles in the U.S. have been generally concerned that a new “fait accompli” would have emerged before the aircraft carrier could trek long distance to reach the Taiwan waters and found it hard to reverse. With this in mind, Beijing is less in a bind in decision-making than in the past.

The fifth concerns cost. When dealing with contradictions with Russia, the United States and Vietnam in the past, Beijing repeatedly demonstrated its penchant to downplay the cost. Perhaps the mainland is no longer “poor and blank” as it used to be and its cost considerations may have become more important than previously. However, because Taiwan is so highly valued, and Xi Jinping and his colleagues have all weathered through trials and tribulations of the Cultural Revolution, their cost consideration is mostly likely to be far lower than that of the United States and, certainly, President Trump, who has always enjoyed an affluent life and is proud of his acumen in business deals. It is expected that Beijing's cost considerations regarding Taiwan in the future will not be focused on “whether,” but on “what to do and with what tools” to minimize all potential costs.

If President Tsai wins the election, all of the above five points will likely be established. Taiwan can only struggle to sustain the policy tools chosen by Beijing, or accept the consequences of a US-China deal as Hong Kong did in 1997 as a colony. Unless the premise of Tsai’s victory does not exist at all.

(The author is the chairman of the Taipei Forum and the former secretary general of the National Security Council)

From: https://udn.com/news/story/7339/3981799