From: Ben Goren
Sent: 03 January 2011 04:59
To: Enquiries, WTO
Subject: Economic Framework Cooperation Agreement (ECFA) submission to WTO
Dear WTO,
Please could you advise me whether the WTO member nations and custom territories the Peoples Republic of China (PRC) and the Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu (Taiwan, ROC) have submitted, or have announced intent to submit, a full English language version of their 2010 Economic Framework Cooperation Agreement (ECFA) Agreement to the WTO?
Yours sincerely
Ben Goren, Taichung City, Taiwan (ROC)It wasn't just me keeping a eye out for whether ECFA would be submitted:
The US government has expressed serious concern over the fact that the Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA) documents signed by Taiwan and China in June have yet to be submitted to the WTO as promised, Taiwan’s envoy to Washington said yesterday.
“Sending a notification about the ECFA to the WTO is the right thing to do,” Taiwan’s Representative to the US Jason Yuan (袁健生) told Democratic Progressive Party Legislator Huang Wei-cher (黃偉哲) at the legislature’s Foreign and National Defense Committee.
Huang had asked Yuan how he had explained to the US government that Taiwan had yet to notify the WTO of the EFCA, as promised by President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九). Ma made the promise during a July 1 press conference at the Presidential Office.Tonight I received this email from the WTO explaining that the ECFA agreement has NOT been submitted to the WTO as per President Ma's promise to do so. The WTO email response today reads as follows:
From: Enquiries, WTO
Subject: RE: Economic Framework Cooperation Agreement (ECFA) submission to WTO
Date: 5 January 2011 23:45:10 GMT+08:00
To: Ben Goren Hello,
Thank you for your recent enquiry.
This agreement has not been notified yet. See the regional trade agreements database: http://rtais.wto.org.
Members would normally be expected to notify their agreements under a 2006 General Council decision, once they have details: http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/region_e/trans_mecha_e.htm
We hope you find this information helpful
WTO Enquiries
ECFA entered info force on January 1st 2011. Today is January 6th. No notification of the agreement has yet been sent to the WTO. A number of academics and commentators provided ample analysis of the process of notification and how doing so, or not, might impact economic and political conditions between Taiwan and China. Key points are below:
June 1st 2009
Cho Hui-wan is an associate professor in the Graduate Institute of International Politics at National Chung Hsing University.
Recent remarks made by an academic close to the Ma administration seem to reveal why the government has kept the nature of ECFA ambiguous.
This academic maintains that an ECFA ought not to be an FTA. He says that Taiwan’s import prohibition on some Chinese goods violates FTA rules, and China is concerned that other WTO members may invoke the most favored nation clause and request similar preferential treatment to what Beijing would offer Taipei. Because of this, an ECFA should not be an FTA and the WTO in this case, would not need to be notified. He further says that none of the Republic of China’s FTA agreements with its Central American diplomatic allies have been reported to the WTO; nor does the WTO require notification for regional trade agreements.
The argument that an ECFA is irrelevant to the WTO is false. Taiwan’s import restriction on some Chinese products is a violation of the most favored nation clause. On the other hand, provided that the agreement covers substantially all trade, an FTA agreement is precisely the legal cover needed for preferential treatment among specified members. Other WTO members have no right to such preferential treatment. So if China is to offer Taiwan preferential treatment in some areas, an FTA provides the legal cover. Even though it is true that Taiwan has not reported its four FTA agreements to the WTO, the fact has no bearing on the WTO rule on notification for all regional trade agreements
If the ECFA were not reported to the WTO, one genuine reason would be that Beijing wanted it this way. The Ma administration understands Chinese President Hu Jintao’s (胡錦濤) statement of “an economic cooperation mechanism with cross-strait characteristics” to mean “between the two sides of the Taiwan Strait, and not between WTO members.” Signing an ECFA and not reporting it to the WTO would be to internalize a WTO-related agreement.
An ECFA should be an FTA interim agreement and has to be reported to the WTO. If the government is not planning to do so, then the ECFA needs to include a clause stipulating that China is glad to see Taiwan, as a WTO member, signing FTAs with other members. The clause’s potential in bringing further internationalization for Taiwan may mitigate the negative impact brought by internalization of the ECFA.
Dec 21st 2010
Michael J Cole
What is more immediately apparent is that the individuals behind this hasty achievement have been far less efficient in submitting the ECFA documents to the WTO, which two entities signing trade pacts are expected to do — and which Ma promised would be done. The ECFA came into effect on Sept. 12, while the “early harvest” list of items that will receive preferential tariff treatment is set to come into force on Jan. 1. In other words, more time has elapsed since the ECFA was signed than it took to negotiate the pact and still the WTO has not been notified.
Taipei and Beijing still have a little more than two weeks to make good on their promise to notify the global trade body on the content of the ECFA.
Dec 16th 2010
Shih Hsiu-chuan / Staff Reporter
The US government has expressed serious concern over the fact that the Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA) documents signed by Taiwan and China in June have yet to be submitted to the WTO as promised, Taiwan’s envoy to Washington said yesterday.
“Sending a notification about the ECFA to the WTO is the right thing to do,” Taiwan’s Representative to the US Jason Yuan (袁健生) told Democratic Progressive Party Legislator Huang Wei-cher (黃偉哲) at the legislature’s Foreign and National Defense Committee.
Huang had asked Yuan how he had explained to the US government that Taiwan had yet to notify the WTO of the EFCA, as promised by President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九). Ma made the promise during a July 1 press conference at the Presidential Office.
A Ministry of Economic Affairs official said in August that the ministry would handle the translation into English of the ECFA documents to be submitted to the WTO. Taipei would then notify Beijing of its English version to ensure there are no discrepancies between the translations before each side submitted its English version to the WTO, the official said.
Honigmann Hong (洪財隆), an adjunct assistant professor of economics at National Tsing Hua University’s Center for Contemporary China, said the WTO Secretariat must be notified of the ECFA before Jan. 1, the date on which the “early harvest” program on tariff cuts contained in the deal comes into force.
WTO regulations require that members entering regional or bilateral trade agreements fulfill the “obligation of transparency” before commencement of the deals, Hong said.
To ensure compliance with WTO standards, once the WTO is notified of such agreements, signatories are required to take questions on the agreement from other WTO members, while the WTO Secretariat will present a detailed analysis of the agreement or factual presentation within a year, he said.
If the WTO were not notified of the ECFA, it would give substance to the fears held by some that trade between Taiwan and China is regarded as an “internal Chinese affair,” Hong said.
July 22nd 2010
Lai I-chung 賴怡忠
First of all, in its current incarnation, it is unlikely to get past the WTO, which has the power to veto the agreement, as both signatories are member states.
The free-trade agreements (FTA) Taiwan has signed with Panama and Nicaragua, and the Framework Agreement on Comprehensive Economic Cooperation between ASEAN countries and China, all specified from the outset which countries or regions were the signatories.
The individuals signing the agreements, too, were officials authorized by the governments of these signatory nations.
This was also the case for the Closer Economic Partnership Arrangement (CEPA) signed by China and Hong Kong.
The ECFA, on the other hand, was signed by representatives of the Straits Exchange Foundation (SEF) and the Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Strait (ARATS), two semi-official organizations not recognized, obviously, as WTO members in their own right.
As a result, the ECFA is little more than a signed agreement between two private organizations from two different countries and as such does not comply with WTO regulations.
The same applies to the individuals who signed it. The ECFA was signed by the respective chairmen of the SEF and the ARATS, but it fails to specify who exactly the individuals signing it represent, or which government authorized them to do so.
Compare this with the FTAs signed by Taiwan. The agreement with Panama was signed by former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) and the one with Nicaragua by former minister of economic affairs Morgan Hwang (黃營杉).
It was specified at the time that they represented the Republic of China on Taiwan.
However, on the ECFA documentation there is absolutely no mention of the fact that SEF Chairman Chiang Pin-kung (江丙坤) represents Taiwan.
Consequently, in the eyes of the law, the ECFA is an agreement that solely exists between the SEF and ARATS, and is applicable only to the members and staff of those specific institutions.
It makes it easier for Taiwan to bypass the WTO when signing future agreements and for agreements to be made by other institutions without the government’s involvement — effectively bypassing the government itself.
July 6th 2010
Vincent Y. Chao
Vice Minister of Economic Affairs Francis Liang (梁國新) yesterday said that the Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA) signed last week would be reported to the WTO as per the world trade body’s regulations.
Liang’s remarks came in the wake of WTO Director-General Pascal Lamy’s comments in a recent interview that regional trade agreements must be reported to the WTO according to WTO regulations and standards.
However, Liang said the WTO did not have specific regulations on whether the ECFA should be reported to it under the name Taiwan, used when it joined the WTO, or under the name of the Straits Exchange Foundation (SEF), adding that the government would handle the matter in an appropriate manner.
Taiwan joined the WTO in 2002 under the name of “Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen, and Matsu.”
Sun, Jul 11, 2010
Shih Hsiu-chuan / STAFF REPORTER
Pessimistic about the chance of China sending a notification about the ECFA to the WTO, Chou Hui-wan (卓慧菀), an associate professor at the Graduate Institute of International Politics at National Chung Hsing University, said the government “must deliver on its promise to notify the WTO.”
“The move at least showed that we [Taiwan] viewed the ECFA as a deal signed by [Taiwan and China as] WTO members, and not as two sides of the [Taiwan] Strait, even though it is not for [Taiwan] to say the ECFA is under the WTO framework,” Chou said.
Citing the Closer Economic Partnership Arrangement (CEPA) signed in 2003 between China and Hong Kong, both WTO members, Chou said the CEPA was never considered a treaty between two countries, even if it met the WTO notification requirement.
On July 1st 2010, President Ma Ying-jeou made a public and noted promise, at a press conference at the Presidential Office, to submit the ECFA to the WTO. Five days past the deadline, Ma's promise has turned to ashes. I will be kind and rational here. At the very minimum, Ma did not lie, he just failed to deliver, again. ECFA is now for all intents and purposes an 'internal agreement' between ARATS and SEF and their personel. By association, it also means it is a personal agreement between the KMT and the CCP. It is not an agreement between the PRC and the Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu. It will not be subject to the oversight of any international trade body and all trade disputes will not be able to be resolved through the WTO's DSM.Taiwan's ECFA trade agreement thus leaves it now entirely exposed to the 'goodwill' of the PRC in settling disputes fairly or avoiding the use of economic leverage to gain concessions from Taiwan, economic first and then political. DPP looking like they might win in 2012? - PRC will pull a 'Rare Earth' move threatening to cut off investment / tourists thereby blackmailing Taiwanese into voting Ma and the KMT back into the Presidential Office. This impacts Taiwan's economic and political sovereignty directly.
As MT pointed out, "It is also worth noting that ECFA was unable to obtain majority support in Taiwan despite the propaganda barrage and the self-censorship."
Now the third and probably final ECFA Referendum request has fallen at the hands of the KMT dominated Referendum Review Committee (“In the end, they put it to a vote and the proposal was turned down by a 10-to-four vote,” Central Election Commission secretary-general Teng Tien-yu (鄧天祐) (who doubles as executive secretary of the Referendum Review Committee) said. According to the Referendum Act, a referendum proposal cannot be made again within three years after it is rejected."), and with Ma proclaiming the beginning of the ECFA Era, Taiwan has been shoved rudely through the ECFA door by patriarchs claiming that it will be in Taiwan's interest like a quack doctor applying leeches to a cold sufferer claiming that they will ease nasal congestion, sore throats, tight chests and even improve the recipient's IQ.
The Taiwanese must now demand that ECFA is submitted to the WTO asap ... but wait ... both the PRC and Taiwan (Or ARATS and SEF) must do so and all signs indicate that the PRC has no intention of doing so thus scuppering the whole process at the first step. Taiwan has been bamboozled, by President Ma and his KMT administration on behalf of President Hu and his authoritarian regime.
That many of us saw this coming as predictably as cold weather in winter doesn't make the outcome any less palatable. It makes us sad frustrated, angry, disenfranchised, and a little wiser still to the utter disingenuousness and mendacity of Ma and his KMT administration and their far from transparent dealings with the PRC.
Time for Taiwanese to open their windows and shout in unison, "We're mad as hell and we're not going to take it any longer!".
Anyone up for a million person pink shirt rally / sit in around the Presidential Office until they submit ECFA to the WTO as an agreement between the PRC and the Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu?
Taiwanese: who of you will stand up to this Government you elected of false promises, operating in blithe disregard of their broken pledges and guided by a pathway to unification that President Ma himself claims will not happen on his watch?.
This 100 year ROC celebration and 10 Golden Years is fast revealing itself to very possibly become a 1000 Years of Subservience and Capitulation. Well done Ma voters. I hope you lose your money and freedoms first.
