"At the end of November 2011, an unusual show was held at an exhibition hall at Taipei’s World Trade Center. The two-day event was dubbed the Taiwan Stock Exchange (TWSE) Listed Companies Expo and was one of a series of activities marking the bourse’s 50th anniversary. A visit to the exhibition gave attendees an opportunity to check out the booths of more than 80 large TWSE-listed companies and attend lectures by experts about the local stock market. The main point of the show, however, was visible in the panels with text and old photos that celebrated the TWSE’s role in Taiwan’s economic development. “The stock market is a window on the economy of a nation,” says Chi Schive (薛琦), the exchange’s chairman. “That’s why the TWSE’s transformations and expansions fully reflect those of the ROC [Republic of China] economy as a whole.”
http://taiwanindepth.tw/ct.asp?xItem=189254&CtNode=1916

Foreign Affairs

"Washington, May 8 (CNA) Three U.S. congressmen have called on the government to recognize Taiwan as an independent and sovereign nation and to resume diplomatic ties with the country, a Taiwanese lobbyist group said Tuesday. House members Michael McCaul, Robert Andrews and Sam Johnson called for an end to Washington's "One China" policy in a concurrent resolution, and urged the Obama administration to re-establish diplomatic relations with Taiwan, the Washington-headquartered Formosan Association for Public Affairs (FAPA), a pro-independence overseas Taiwanese group, said in a press release. Instead of continuing with the current policy, under which the U.S. considers Taiwan to be part of China, a "One China, One Taiwan" concept was proposed by McCaul. "The people of Taiwan have never been under the jurisdiction of the People's Republic of China, which continues to illegitimately claim sovereignty over Taiwan. President Obama should recognize this and support a `one China, one Taiwan' policy that gives legitimacy to our Taiwanese friends and partners," he said. The legislation also calls U.S. policy "obsolete," saying that it "does not reflect the obvious reality that Taiwan has functioned as an independent and sovereign country for over half a century." Taiwan, which the congressmen described as a long-time trusted ally, "does not deserve to be associated with bad actors such as Bhutan, Cuba, Iran and North Korea," which are the only nations with which the U.S. does not have formal diplomatic ties besides Taiwan. They also urged the White House to support Taiwan's full participation in the United Nations as well as other international organizations. The resolution reiterates that the Taiwan Relations Act and the "six U.S. assurances to Taiwan" are the bedrock for Taiwan-U.S. relations. Similar resolutions were proposed in 2005, 2007 and 2009, all of which failed to clear the House committee. FAPA President Mark Kao said that if the U.S. can adopt what he described as a more realistic "one China, one Taiwan" policy that better reflects the cross-Taiwan Strait status quo and normalize its relations with Taiwan, it would set a good example for other countries" (Chou & Lin, 2012).

http://www.taiwannews.com.tw/etn/news_content.php?id=1915701&lang=eng

"The Obama administration came to power in step with this theory. First, the administration initially viewed the biggest obstacle to Sino-U.S. stability as Washington's misreading of Chinese intentions which they thought were actually quite limited. The greatest risk to peace, they argued, was that the United States would overreact to China's rise. The Obama administration called its new policy "strategic reassurance": we would reassure China that we would not contain it. Second, the United States has basically abandoned its commitment to Taiwan under the Taiwan Relations Act. The only action the Obama administration has taken consistent with the TRA was the sale of half an arms package left over from the Bush years. There has been no serious effort on the part of the Obama administration to enhance Taiwan's security. The Obama administration has arguably taken the most minimalist interpretation of the TRA since the law's passage. The third policy change occurred in Taiwan. Taipei has followed a policy of reconciliation and removed any conceivable "threat" of "independence" (always a red herring; according to Taiwan's democratic procedures it is practically impossible to vote for independence). Every time we try and abandon it -- in the 50s, in the 70s, in the 90s -- we find it too important to be left to China's tender mercies.First, almost no Taiwanese want to live under the rule of the Chinese Communist Party. Many Taiwanese would leave the island, meaning that Asia would lose a critical part of its economic engine. Those who would not leave would likely start to build nuclear weapons and their delivery systems-- a process that began, and which we stopped, the last time we tried to abandon Taiwan.
Second, if Taiwan were to fall into China's hands, China could militarize it in such a way as to remove any strategic depth from Japan, to control the South China Sea, and to push farther forward into the Pacific. For the first time since Pearl Harbor, we face threats to our command of the Pacific Ocean. China's control of Taiwan would hasten that process. The United States and China would then find many new reasons for conflict -- the protection of Japan, access to the Pacific Ocean and the South China Sea, and so on.
Third, there is the matter of U.S. politics, always a significant factor -- much to the consternation of so called realists -- in U.S. foreign policy. While most Congressmen today do not focus intensely on Taiwan, a debate about the repeal of the Taiwan Relations Act would focus the mind. In all likelihood, all the latent frustrations the American public and their representatives feel toward China -- from unfair trade practices, to constant cyber attacks, to human rights abuses -- would find expression in a debate about whether or not to repeal a law that has kept the peace and allowed Taiwan to prosper. In short, a debate about abandoning a democratic friend in the face of Chinese pressure would probably bring about the exact opposite of what Glaser intends" (Blumenthal, 2012).

http://shadow.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2011/03/02/rethinking_us_foreign_policy_towards_taiwan
What I find significant about this information is that the way that Taiwan is viewing themselves is also becoming the way other countries view them. Most of the foreign affairs that Taiwan has is between China and the U.S. While Taiwan is striving for their independence, the U.S. is also beginning to recognize their emerging into their own nation yet again. Some U.S. congressmen are  now considering changing the policies of the relations between Taiwan and China. Instead of viewing them as one package, the U.S. is now considering of recognizing the country as its own. Unfortunately this will never be made possible unless the president agrees with the notion. During his term, President Obama considered the notion of abandoning its alliance with Taiwan. In return Taiwan has been in a bit of an uproar and possibly turning against the U.S. 

My concern is that if we do choose to ignore Taiwan as its own country or possibly abandon it, could we be at risk of starting a war. Now it seems that China wouldn't be much of a threat if this was to happen do to there being more nuclear weapons in Taiwan vs. Beijing. Both China and the U.S. would rise into problems if both parties don't find a way to create a peaceful balance that will keep all moderately happy.

If we do or do not agrees to this new proposal, how will it effect out country and others? Could be be plunged into a nuclear war? 

Economics

"In interviews with Taiwan Business TOPICs that preceded Premier Chen’s remarks about fostering consolidation, some financial industry leaders spoke about the importance of having fewer, larger banks and how the process could be facilitated. “The financial services industry needs a lot of scale, and Taiwan doesn’t have it,” said Victor Kung, president of Fubon Financial Holding Co. “Within Taiwan, we are a very fragmented industry, so our banks are very small. Even the largest, the Bank of Taiwan, is ranked number 100 in the world. While all the other economies in East and Southeast Asia have consolidated their banking industry during the Asian financial crisis, Taiwan has never really developed a giant or a national champion. We do need such a national champion, but in my view it shouldn’t be a government-controlled bank, because as we know, the vitality of the Taiwan economy is in the private sector.

With increasing cross-Strait economic integration, what are the challenges and opportunities for Taiwan’s financial institutions?

The question of cross-Strait investment involves not only banking, but also insurance and securities. China has permitted six Taiwanese securities companies to enter its stock market as RQFII [RMB qualified foreign institutional investors], and five of the six have been granted investment quotas, which means they can truly buy and sell in the market.
The Chinese government is trying to introduce more financial products to the market and more innovations in financial services, which presents a good business opportunity for Taiwanese companies.
As to the risks, they are under effective control, such as the cap on total exposure. The FSC continues to carefully supervise all related activities." (SHAPIRO, 2012)

http://www.amcham.com.tw/content/view/3547/519/


I find this information significant because once again, the information provided shows the progress and setbacks of the country trying to stand on its own two feet. Unfortunately Taiwan's  economic status is weekend due the Asian financial crisis. Because their banking system is controlled by the government (ROC) they sadly have little to no control over their economic status. Though its seams that China is slowly trying to help bring Taiwan's banking system back up, Taiwan (wanting to break from China) is conflicted on excepting their help.

My concerns would be by excepting China's help yet again, they will further lose their ability to break away and become a democracy.

Due to this financial help, will China use this as a hold over Taiwan? Will it be another way for them to keep a tighter grasp on them? Thus showing them (Taiwan) that they could not survive financially without them?