On Tuesday, a group of Taiwanese businessmen who have been defrauded, conned and swindled in China established an association to advocate their rights and rights of others who have shared similar fates. More than 50 businessmen attended the opening ceremony, but according to the new association, they were just a small fraction of the tens of thousands who have fallen prey to what is supposed to be the new land of fortune.
The plight of Taiwanese businesspeople in China is nothing new. The question is, what exactly is being done about it, or more precisely what is the government doing about it? It is the duty of any government to protect the properties, interests and rights of their overseas citizens. One prime example is the way the US government has been vigorously looking after the business and financial interests of US citizens and companies, from demanding the protection of American intellectual property rights (IPR), to expressions of concern about the possible termination of GE's contract should the government decide to cease construction of the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant.
Sadly, since this country is not formally recognized by most countries, many of which are more than willing to cave into China, the government is often subjected to discriminatory or downright demeaning treatment. Being weak is sad enough. But to be weak and rich is an open invitation to get ripped off.
Despite the linguistic and cultural similarities, China is perhaps the worst place for Taiwanese businesspeople, especially those with small and mid-size firms, to invest. The situation is somewhat better with respect to giant firms, which have more financial prowess as well as the connections to protect themselves.
First, in developed countries governed by the rule of law, Taiwanese businesses can seek redress and remedies via legal channels and mechanisms. Moreover, with transparent and consistent rules and regulations, there is much more predictability in doing businesses in such places. China, by contrast, is a country governed by lawless men. The field is completely cleared each time a new person comes to power, putting their cronies in key positions. Nothing that was agreed on previously counts for anything when there is a new leader.
Aggravating the problem is the cross-strait situation. China is not just any country. It is the country that continues to claim Taiwan as a province and one that might have to be forced or disciplined into accepting its place at some point in the future. Under the circumstances, China has ample incentive to trample Taiwanese business interests.
The most bizarre response to the launch of the new association was probably made by Chang Rong-Kung (
At the very least, the new association can raise the awareness of the potential risks and dangers of investing in China. This is much more useful than what is being proposed by Chang and the KMT.
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
RSS