Although it's not part of China, Taiwan has a vested interest in China's tainted toy troubles -- partly because Taiwan is one of the biggest investors in China, and China is Taiwan's biggest market. So "when China sneezes, Taiwan catches SARS."
But Taiwan is also an interested party because its own manufacturers have shown the same "Chinese" attitude toward labor laws and environmental laws: It's only wrong if you get caught. Or as a prominent Taipei lawyer once told me, "Rule of law is a foreign concept in Chinese society."
Taiwan has a history as a place for "outsourced" manufacturing of everything from microchips to Barbie dolls.
People in Taiwan know that big US companies such as Mattel were getting their products made in Taiwan long before they were sending their production lines to China.
The reasons were simple: In the 1980s and 1990s, cheap labor, few labor laws and even fewer environmental laws were the hallmarks of a third-world dictatorship hell-bent on economic development.
And when Taiwan's fledgling democracy started to implement even minimal labor and environmental protections, those same big companies moved their production elsewhere: places like Vietnam and China. Places where labor and environmental laws -- when they exist -- are hardly ever enforced.
Disposable labor and a disposable environment are the very reasons why manufacturers set up in China. And China, hell-bent on economic development, welcomes them with open arms.
That's why China is poisoning its own people even as it produces toxic products for "foreign" consumption.
The Chinese response to being caught out is the same as in Taiwan: Blame someone, then get back to business as usual.
Inside the country, the impulse is to find the scapegoat and blame him. Make him pay. And in a society where guanxi (relationships/connections) is everything, the pressure for "heads to roll" can take a very dark and perverse turn.
That's why Zhang Shuhong (
To the rest of the world, the reaction is to blame the outsiders: "Don't blame us. Blame the foreigners. It's not up to us to enforce foreign standards. It's up to the foreign companies."
In short, the whole thing is a foreign problem.
Neither of these responses is particularly sane. Neither will save the environment or save consumers from potentially lethal products.
But they will, in Chinese eyes, save face. So if manufacturers, consumers, environmentalists and governments really want to protect themselves, we have to make it a matter of honor. And we have to make it clear to China that it will no longer be "business as usual."
All of us have to make the Chinese understand that the only way to restore their reputation (and their profits) is to stop blaming and start taking responsibility; stop treating safety standards as something "foreign" and start treating them as something essential to the future of China and the Chinese.
And here is where Taiwan could show leadership.
Taiwan could show the world that it is possible to stand up to Beijing and yet still do business with China. In fact, it could show the world that standing up to Beijing is essential to doing business with China.
The question is: Will Taiwan do it, or will it back down because it doesn't want to be accused of throwing stones while living in a glass house?
Stephen Nelson
Toronto, Canada
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