While there is still no clear answer as to whether United Microelectronics Corp (UMC) was "assisting," conducting a transfer of technology to, or investing in He Jian Technology (Suzhou), a separate case of a large-scale investment project in China has been uncovered, this time by a state-run company.
On Feb. 26, Taiwan Fertilizer Company signed an agreement with Yangzhou Economic Development Zone, pledging an investment of US$180 million to establish a production and sales base. Taiwan Fertilizer has made it clear that the project is still in the planning stage, and that the signing of the agreement was simply to facilitate visits by Chinese personnel. The agreement states that the project will not be implemented until the authorities concerned approve the application.
Taiwan Fertilizer's investment proposal would not be barred under the government's list of industries banned from investing in China. The amount of the investment would not exceed 40 percent of Taiwan Fertilizer's corporate assets. Therefore, the Investment Commission has no legal basis for banning the project. But that doesn't mean the company should get a green light to move ahead with it. Regulations governing investment in China appear to be so lax that they failed to regulate such an investment. The project should be rejected by the government.
Given the relatively high unemployment rate in this country and concerns about the hollowing out of the industrial base, Taiwan Fertilizer should give priority to building the new compound fertilizer processing plant in Taiwan. How can it choose to set up a plant in China and create employment for the Chinese government?
There are several similarities between the this case and the UMC case. UMC has benefitted from the government's incentives to develop the high-tech industry. It enjoys preferential treatment financed by the Cabinet's Development Fund and capital for state-run businesses. As for Taiwan Fertilizer, more than half of its board of directors are government officials. The two companies rely to a large extent on the government, and this means they also have a social responsibility.
Regrettably, UMC's sneaking into China by "assisting" He Jian, and Taiwan Fertilizer's plan to invest NT$6 billion in China shows a serious lack of social responsibility and a neglect of national interests.
The dream of China as factory to the world, built on a formula that combines Taiwan's manufacturing power with cheap Chinese labor, land and preferential treatment has long attracted Taiwanese companies. Sustainable corporate management means moving on from contract manufacturing to concentrate on research and development, innovation and developing brand marketing. That is the only way for Taiwanese companies to compete in the world market. Investment in China runs counter to that goal, since it gives paramount importance to cheap labor and land while ignoring R&D, innovation and brand marketing. Relying only on price will lead to cut-throat competition and disappearing profits.
Taiwanese investment in China is a slow form of suicide for our industrial base and the economy as a whole. China's "Anti-Secession" Law is a visible threat, while investment in that country is a less tangible one. Unrestrained investment in China simply prepares us for the slaughter. Taiwan's current dependence on China in terms of investment and as an export market is seriously over the safety limit. Any change in the Chinese market will have a serious impact on this country.
If China decides to wage an economic war, we will be defenseless. UMC's and Taiwan Fertilizer's drive into China is bad for the nation. The government should use its authority and exercise the power of the law against these companies. Moreover, it should patch up the loopholes in laws related to investment in China. This is the only way to get to the root of the problem and save the nation's economy.
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
The past few months have seen tremendous strides in India’s journey to develop a vibrant semiconductor and electronics ecosystem. The nation’s established prowess in information technology (IT) has earned it much-needed revenue and prestige across the globe. Now, through the convergence of engineering talent, supportive government policies, an expanding market and technologically adaptive entrepreneurship, India is striving to become part of global electronics and semiconductor supply chains. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Vision of “Make in India” and “Design in India” has been the guiding force behind the government’s incentive schemes that span skilling, design, fabrication, assembly, testing and packaging, and
As former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) wrapped up his visit to the People’s Republic of China, he received his share of attention. Certainly, the trip must be seen within the full context of Ma’s life, that is, his eight-year presidency, the Sunflower movement and his failed Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement, as well as his eight years as Taipei mayor with its posturing, accusations of money laundering, and ups and downs. Through all that, basic questions stand out: “What drives Ma? What is his end game?” Having observed and commented on Ma for decades, it is all ironically reminiscent of former US president Harry