(本文翻譯自 陳冲 如果梅克爾2005年沒勝選 2021.10.14.)
It’s a hypothetical question with no correct answer. Asking this is to highlight that things are not as simple as they seem, and afford Taiwan a chance to think again, at least in terms of finance and economics.
The German election in post-Merkel era just ended and international public opinion all admires this chancellor whose tenure is second only to Bismarck and Kohl, although The Economist has reserved judgement, writing “The mess Merkel leaves behind”. Generally speaking, Merkel has indeed performed great feats, especially as she addressed on the 31st anniversary of reunification (2021/10/3), encouraging Germans to “tell each other your stories, and tolerate differences”. The benevolent intent and the generous spirit deserve our applause.
The demeanor of statesman is the key to why Germany can stay strong for the past two decades. Sixteen years ago (2005/11/30), in her first speech as chancellor, Merkel said she wanted to “personally thank Chancellor Schroeder for the fact that he decisively and courageously pushed opened a door to reforms with his Agenda 2010”.
Schroeder was Merkel's former Social Democratic Party (SPD) chancellor. In 2000, he showed worried as he saw Germany’s economic stagnation, weak domestic demand, sluggish investment, and aging population. As the leader of the SPD, he surprisingly shouted “Umbau des Sozialstaates und seiner Erneuerung”, calling for reducing state’s burden, urged people to be responsible for themselves, and passed Agenda 2010 with a “not-so-socialist” attitude, laying foundation for economic upgrade. But doing this hurt the base of SPD, thus paved the way for Merkel’s victory in 2005. The gratitude Merkel conveyed in her inaugural speech is not taking advantage of or deriding Schroeder because the CDU did continue to promote Agenda 2010, which became the main reason why Germany could outshine others after financial crisis.
At present, Germany is wrestling with the various combination of the future cabinet. We don’t make political guesses, but we might adjust the title of this article and think about it in a different way. If Schroeder hadn’t proposed Agenda 2010, he might not have lost base supports and lost the election, but on the other hand Germany might not have weathered the 2008 financial tsunami. And if Merkel hadn’t continued with Agenda 2010 because of the different ideology, would Germany have sufficient national strength to lead the EU on the world stage? A true stateman would hold the future of the state above self-interest of parties or individuals.
There may be disagreements on political issues between parties in Taiwan, but there should not be too many differences on financial and economic policy, as Merkel smoothly succeeded Schroeder. Pity that in the past 20 years, there seems no consistent financial and economic policy. The two parties take turns governing. The handling of cross-strait relations may differ, but there is no need to change the goal of regional economic integration for the sake of votes. Taiwan, around 2012, made continuous efforts and achievements for FTA, but all ceased abruptly due to self-limitation afterwards. Now, although the government seeks to join CPTPP, the macro-environment has changed and favorable opportunity lost. More serious is that talents with negotiation skills in trade have long lacked practical experiences and created opportunities to practice, therefore there seems a gap for the younger talents to take over from older ones. It will of course be a misfortune if Taiwan is not allowed to join CPTPP, but on the other hand, if we are fortunately having opportunities to engaged in early consultations and discussions, where to find those talents able to negotiate hundreds of issues with those other eleven experienced member states?
If Merkel hadn’t won the election in 2005, Germany would still have been the leader in Europe because there’s little disagreements on economic policy between the CDU and the SPD. How about Taiwan?