Abstract
This chapter analyzes both economic and political logics dictating cross-Strait relations over the past decade. Cross-Strait relations started in 2008 with both economic and political logics. Politically, both the CCP and the KMT agreed on the 1992 consensus on the one-China principle while setting aside their disagreement on the meaning of China. Economically, the openness of direct three links has ushered an era of “great exchange, great cooperation, and great development” between the two sides. Economic cooperation, however, has drawn more capitals and job opportunities to the mainland than the other way around, thus enhancing Taiwan’s domestic tension between business growth and social distribution. In addition, political dialogue has fallen far behind economic negotiation between the ARATS and the SEF. Instead, political atmosphere has turned sour after the Sunflower Movement and the following elections. During the interval, the 2015 Xi-Ma summit in Singapore served as a landmark indicating how far the two sides could move on politically while revealing a possible backfire once the opposition DPP came back to power. In brief, the state of cross-Strait relations is decided by the intertwined economic and political logics underneath party politics in Taiwan. In other words, civil exchange and political interaction are closely interconnected in the past decade.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
If compare cross-Strait trade figures in 2016 and 2017 based on the Chinese currency, the increasing rate is 14% because of the depreciation of Renminbi (RMB) during 2017.
- 2.
Bureau of Foreign Trade (Taiwan), “An Analysis of International Trade Situation in 2017,” pp. 6, 19–20, https://www.trade.gov.tw/Pages/Detail.aspx?nodeID=1590&pid=644950&dl_DateRange=all&txt_SD=&txt_ED=&txt_Keyword=&Pageid=0, accessed 2 August 2018.
- 3.
Su Chi, “Ma zhengfu shiqi liang’an guanxi de gaikuang he zhanwang” (The General Situation and Prospects of Cross-Strait Relation during the Ma Administration), in liang’an guanxi de jiyu yu tiaozhan (Opportunities and Challenges for Cross-Strait Relations), edited by Su Chi and Tung Chen-yuan (Taipei: Wunan Press, 2013), p. 8.
- 4.
Ministry of Commerce of the PRC, Department of Taiwan, Hong Kong and Macao Affairs, statistics data about Hong Kong, http://tga.mofcom.gov.cn/article/sjzl/taiwan/, accessed 2 August 2018.
- 5.
“Lingqi liang’an renyuan wanglai wending zengzhang: Dalu jumin futai jin 23 wan renci” (People to People Exchange Increased Stability in 2007: About 230 Thousand Mainlanders Visited Taiwan), Zhongguo Wang (China Net), 30 January 2008, http://www.china.com.cn/news/2008-01/30/content_9614040.htm.
- 6.
“Taiwan yezhe huanying dalu zengjia jumin futai lvyou quyu” (Taiwanese Businesspeople Welcome the Mainland to Allow Mainlanders to Visit More Tourist Attractions on the Island), Zhongguo Taiwan Wang (China Taiwan Net), 1 February 2009, www.chinataiwan.org.
- 7.
“China Focus: Taiwan’s Lackluster Mainland Tourism Market,” Xinhua Net, 26 June 2018, http://www.china.com.cn/news/2008-01/30/content_9614040.htm, accessed 4 August 2018.
- 8.
Currently, pure tourists account for about 70 percent of total visitors from different countries or regions to Taiwan, the percentage was about 40 percent or so ten years ago.
- 9.
Wei Yong, “Maixiang minzu nei gongtongti: Taihai liang’an hudong moshi zhi jiangou, fazhan yu jianyan” (Moving Toward Intra-Nation Community: Construction, Development and Verification of Interaction Model Across the Taiwan Strait), Zhongguo dalu yanjiu (Mainland China Studies), Vol. 45, No. 5 (September/October, 2002), pp. 1–55.
- 10.
Chuing Prudence Chou and Gregory Ching, Taiwan Education at the Crossroad (New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan, 2012), pp. 263–264.
- 11.
Zhao Xinying, “More Taiwan Students Studying in Mainland Universities,” China Daily, 6 November 2015, http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2015-11/06/content_22392239.htm, accessed 6 August 2018.
- 12.
Mimi Leung and Yojana Sharma, “China’s Equal Status Policy Causes Taiwan Brain Drain,” University World News (weekly), No. 495, 1 March 2018, http://www.universityworldnews.com/article.php?story=20180301165622684, accessed 6 August 2018.
- 13.
China Review Net, 24 November 2009, http://gb.chinareviewnews.com/doc/1011/1/8/6/101118696.html?coluid=0&kindid=0&docid=101118696.
- 14.
China Review Net, 4 August 2009, http://gb.chinareviewnews.com/crn-webapp/mag/docDetail.jsp?coluid=0&docid=101038571.
- 15.
Su Chi, “Ma zhengfu shiqi liang’an guanxi de gaikuang he zhanwang” (The General Situation and Prospects of Cross-Strait Relation during the Ma Administration), in liang’an guanxi de jiyu yu tiaozhan (Opportunities and Challenges for Cross-Strait Relations), edited by Su Chi and Tung Chen-yuan (Taipei: Wunan Press, 2013), p. 18.
- 16.
See China Times, 14 November 2009, p. A.19.
- 17.
The second one was planned to be in Taiwan in 2015 but did not come true.
- 18.
See conference summary of the first Forum of Cross-Strait Peace, China Review Net, 12 October 2013, http://www.zhgpl.com/doc/1027/9/3/1/102793177.html?coluid=1&kindid=0&docid=102793177.
- 19.
Kao Yu-jen, “liang’an heping fazhan dabu xiangqian, yingjie xinjiyuan” (Great Step Forward in the Development of Cross-Strait Peace and Welcome the New Times), China Reviews Net, 11 October 2013, http://www.zhgpl.com/doc/1027/8/9/1/102789166_2.html?coluid=7&kindid=0&docid=102789166&mdate=1011112340, accessed 15 August 2015.
- 20.
The usage of weak and strong principles here are in debt to Robert Dahl’s distinction between weak and strong principles of equality in his thoughtful book, Democracy and Its Critics (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1989). I used the concepts of weak and strong principle of one China idea earlier in my book Taiwan zhengzhi zhuanxing yu liang’an guanxi de yanbian (Taiwan’s Political Transition and the Evolution of Cross-Strait Relations) (Beijing: Jiuzhou Press, 2010).
- 21.
For example, see Xin Qi, “Catching the Opportunity and Promoting Peaceful Development of Cross-Strait Relations”; Zhu Weidong, “On the Basic Contents of Cross-Strait Peace Agreement.”
- 22.
Gabriel Almond et al., eds. Comparative Politics Today: A World View (New York, NY: Pearson Longman, 2006), p. 12.
- 23.
Stephen Krasner, Sovereignty: Organized Hypocrisy (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1999), p. 4 and pp. 11–25.
- 24.
Kenneth Lieberthal, “Preventing a War over Taiwan,” Foreign Affairs, Vol. 84, No. 2 (March/April, 2005), p. 59.
- 25.
Huang Jiashu, “A Common Desire for Cross-Straits Peace,” China Daily, 9 November 2007, p. 10. http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/opinion/2007-11/09/content_6242719.htm; see also Alan Romberg, Across the Taiwan Strait: From Confrontation to Cooperation (2006–2012) (Washington, DC: Stimson, 2012), Vol. 1, Chap. 6.
- 26.
Li Jiaquan, “Dacheng liang’an heping xieyi de kexingxing yanjiu” (A Study on the Feasibility of Reaching Peace Agreement between the Two Sides of the Taiwan Strait), Zhongyang shehui zhuyi xueyuan xuebao (Journal of Central Socialist College), No. 4 (2008), p. 120.
- 27.
Liu Guoshen and Rui Peng, “Liang’an guanxi heping fazhan zhong de heqing heli anpai wenti” (On the Issue of Reasonable and Law-Binding Arrangement in Peaceful Development of Cross-Strait Relation), China Review Monthly, Vol. 17, No. 2 (February 2014), p. 5.
- 28.
Phillip C. Saunders and Scott L. Kastner, “Bridge over Troubled Water?—Envisioning a China-Taiwan Peace Agreement,” International Security, Vol. 33, No. 4 (Spring 2009), pp. 91–98.
- 29.
For example, see Jiang Zemin’s talks with a Taiwanese delegation in March 1990 and Yang Shangkun’s talks with the delegation of China Times in September 1990. People’s Daily, 12 March 1990; China Times, 25 September 1990.
- 30.
Hu Jintao’s Report to the 17th National Party Congress does not touch upon the issue of military option against Taiwan.
- 31.
For example, the PRC premier Zhu Rongji quickly interpreted the “third if” as a reaction against Lee Teng-hui’s “two-states” remarks, see People’s Daily, 16 March 2000. To further soften the harsh tone of the “third if,” Qian Qichen remarked in September 2001 that as long as Taipei agreed to solve the Taiwan issue under the one-China principle, Beijing had the patience to wait. See China Times, 11 September 2001.
- 32.
Rao Geping. “Dui Taiwan ‘guoji kongjian’ wenti de sikao” (The Thoughts of Taiwan’s “International Space” Issue), Journal of Peking University (Philosophy and Social Sciences), Vol. 49, No. 5 (September 2012), p. 135.
- 33.
Huang Jiashu, “Weilai sinian liang’an guanxi mianlin de maodun yu tiaozhan” (The Contradictions and Challenges of Cross-Strait Relations in the Next Four Years), Journal of Peking University (Philosophy and Social Sciences), Vol. 49, No. 5 (September 2012), p. 133.
- 34.
Author’s meeting notes, 23 October 2005, Washington, DC.
- 35.
Jin Hongfan, Dong Yuhong and Lin Gang, Taiwan zhengzhi zhuanxing (Taiwan’s Political Transition) (Hong Kong Social Sciences Press, 1997), pp. 371–374.
- 36.
Richard Bush, Untying the Knot: Making Peace in the Taiwan Strait (Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press, 2005), p. 39.
- 37.
Karl Deutsch et al., Political Community and the North Atlantic Area: International Organization in the Light of Historical Experience (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1957).
- 38.
“Qitiaoshi fanying zhiguo haican Taiwan” (Reaction by Jumping on Knees Hurts Taiwan), China Times, 8 August 2018, http://www.chinatimes.com/newspapers/20180808000779-260109.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Lin, G. (2019). Political Economy of Cross-Strait Relations. In: Taiwan’s Party Politics and Cross-Strait Relations in Evolution (2008–2018). Palgrave Macmillan, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-5814-2_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-5814-2_6
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-13-5813-5
Online ISBN: 978-981-13-5814-2
eBook Packages: Political Science and International StudiesPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)