"Everything can become a weapon." This is the essence of the concept of unlimited war. Consequently, economic warfare has become a link in China's unlimited war. It has also been the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) regime's most successful weapon, in particular against Taiwan.
With economic advantages consisting of a huge market and cheap labor, China has praised the internationalization and liberalization of the US and Europe and attracted about NT$10 trillion (US$300 billion) in productive capital from Taiwan, along with connected technologies, markets and manpower.
However, China's economic warfare against Taiwan over the past dozen years has not been plain sailing. Both Taiwan's "no haste, be patient" policy of 1996 and the battle over eight-inch wafer foundries in 2002 frustrated China's ongoing attempt to annex Taiwan through economic means. The Cabinet's Conference on Sustaining Taiwan's Economic Development in July -- dominated by those favoring investment in China -- also failed after being strongly opposed by pro-independence forces.
Beijing will not give up. The proposal to lift the 40 percent ceiling on Taiwanese companies investing in China was an important part of China's plan to dry up Taiwanese capital. When the proposal was blocked, China's unlimited war turned to attempting to push Taipei into disregarding the consensus reached at the conference and implement the proposal. Its first task is to weaken the legitimacy of the pro-independence forces' efforts at the conference by attacking their credibility.
Beijing's first target was foreign businesses in Taiwan. Six days after the conference, former American Institute in Taiwan director Douglas Paal condemned Taipei's "isolationist policies" during a speech in the US. He said that eliminating restrictions on cross-strait trade and transportation were a condition for a Taiwan-US Free Trade Agreement; this opened an attack on the 40 percent investment limit. We all understand that businesspeople have interests to uphold, so it's not very strange that foreign businesspeople think like Taiwanese businesspeople.
On Sept. 4, newspapers published the American Chamber of Commerce in Taipei's critique of former president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) and the Taiwan Solidarity Union (TSU) for blocking the removal of the ceiling.
Two days later, the Commercial Times ran a front page story on the Wantwant Group's drastic reduction in Taiwanese investment, reporting that the group's Taiwanese headquarters would switch roles with its Chinese branch to embrace the Chinese market. It also attacked the decision on the investment ceiling.
The next day, pro-China media ran extensive reports warning the government that many Taiwanese companies had investigated the possibility of delisting from Taiwan's stock exchange next year in order to be listed in China.
The conclusion was that if the 40 percent ceiling is not lifted, Taiwan's stock market would continue to decline and the economy would become marginalized.
Meanwhile, one media outlet conducted a survey on investment by Taiwanese operating in China. It showed that only 1.97 percent of respondents were willing to return to Taiwan. This was linked to the 40 percent ceiling -- the reason for expanding Taiwanese investments in China. It is evident that these attacks were planned, well organized, and intensive.
The Cabinet will apparently order the Ministry of Economic Affairs to investigate how many firms are affected by the ceiling. If so, it will become yet another laughable piece of evidence of how the Democratic Progressive Party rules the country based on newspaper reports.
Huang Tien-lin is a former national policy adviser to the president. Translated by Eddy Chang
What began on Feb. 28 as a military campaign against Iran quickly became the largest energy-supply disruption in modern times. Unlike the oil crises of the 1970s, which stemmed from producer-led embargoes, US President Donald Trump is the first leader in modern history to trigger a cascading global energy crisis through direct military action. In the process, Trump has also laid bare Taiwan’s strategic and economic fragilities, offering Beijing a real-time tutorial in how to exploit them. Repairing the damage to Persian Gulf oil and gas infrastructure could take years, suggesting that elevated energy prices are likely to persist. But the most
Taiwan should reject two flawed answers to the Eswatini controversy: that diplomatic allies no longer matter, or that they must be preserved at any cost. The sustainable answer is to maintain formal diplomatic relations while redesigning development relationships around transparency, local ownership and democratic accountability. President William Lai’s (賴清德) canceled trip to Eswatini has elicited two predictable reactions in Taiwan. One camp has argued that the episode proves Taiwan must double down on support for every remaining diplomatic ally, because Beijing is tightening the screws, and formal recognition is too scarce to risk. The other says the opposite: If maintaining
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文), during an interview for the podcast Lanshuan Time (蘭萱時間) released on Monday, said that a US professor had said that she deserved to be nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize following her meeting earlier this month with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平). Cheng’s “journey of peace” has garnered attention from overseas and from within Taiwan. The latest My Formosa poll, conducted last week after the Cheng-Xi meeting, shows that Cheng’s approval rating is 31.5 percent, up 7.6 percentage points compared with the month before. The same poll showed that 44.5 percent of respondents
India’s semiconductor strategy is undergoing a quiet, but significant, recalibration. With the rollout of India Semiconductor Mission (ISM) 2.0, New Delhi is signaling a shift away from ambition-driven leaps toward a more grounded, capability-led approach rooted in industrial realities and institutional learning. Rather than attempting to enter the most advanced nodes immediately, India has chosen to prioritize mature technologies in the 28-nanometer to 65-nanometer range. That would not be a retreat, but a strategic alignment with domestic capabilities, market demand and global supply chain gaps. The shift carries the imprimatur of Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, indicating that the recalibration is
RSS