How would the US and European countries react if the heads of the American and European business associations in this country were appointed by Taiwan's government? Incredulity, unhappiness, objection and utter condemnation would be the expected reactions. This is exactly Taiwan's response to the fact that many senior executives at Taiwanese business associations in China are appointed by the Taiwan Affairs Office of China's State Council.
According to intelligence obtained by the government, there are 74 Taiwanese business associations in China. Each has at least one official from the Taiwan Affairs Office doubling as a vice chairperson. The secretaries-general of more than 90 percent of the associations also hail from the same office -- an indication that the organizations are under close surveillance by the Beijing authorities. They are Beijing's tools for controlling Taiwanese businesses.
The associations should have been a channel through which Taiwanese businesses cooperate with and take care of each other. They should reflect the interests and needs of those businesses. When a conflict arises between a Taiwanese business and the local government, the association should defend the business interests by appropriate means.
This is exactly the same rationale behind the annual white papers published by the American and European chambers of commerce in Taipei to criticize some of Taiwan's policies. Both the ruling and opposition parties accept such criticism with a tolerant attitude.
Taiwanese business associations in China not only could never publish such white papers, they are losing what little independence they had. Not only are they unable to reflect the opinions of their members, but they are becoming institutions for controlling what the Taiwanese companies say and do in China. This is about the same as planting the People's Liberation Army's political warfare units inside the associations. This is a unique situation not seen in other foreign business groups in China, or anywhere else.
Interference by Chinese officials is not something Taiwanese businesses want to see. But what can they do except kowtow? Even if many Taiwanese businesses want to express goodwill toward this country's government, they will refrain from doing so after considering China's possible response.
By controlling the business associations, Beijing can influence the opinions of the groups' members and push them to vote for its favorite candidates in next year's presidential election. Recently, the Liberty Times, our sister paper, reported that Taiwanese businesspeople attending an official function in China were handed invitations to a banquet hosted by Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Lien Chan (
In the long run, Beijing may use the associations to pressure Taiwan to accept direct links under the "one China" principle. The next step will be to squeeze all capital and technology out of Taiwan, thereby weakening the economy and leaving the country powerless to resist unification with China.
Unhappy as it is to see its businesspeople invest in a hostile neighboring country, Taiwan at best can only use the "no haste, be patient" policy and try to warn the businesses about the risks of investing in China. Beijing has crossed the line separating politics from business and is controlling Taiwanese business associations. The political and economic threat posed to Taiwan should not be underestimated. The government needs to lodge a strong complaint via the WTO. If China refuses to take its hands off the associations, the government should consider halting the planned indirect cargo flights as well as measures allowing China-based Taiwanese businesses to get listed in this country.
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with