Taiwan’s “talent crisis” has become a hot topic lately, on which everyone seems to have their own view. National Science Council Minister Cyrus Chu (朱敬一) said Taiwan is suffering from a talent gap, while Minister without Portfolio Kuan Chung-ming (管中閔) said Taiwan is “driving the fish away to deep waters,” and could deteriorate to a third-world country within the next three to five years. A high-tech business owner even said his business is unable to recruit skilled staff here, and that Taiwan is likely to export “Taiwanese migrant laborers” in future.
Meanwhile, some have started to point fingers at others. Political commentator Nan Fang Shuo (南方朔) said early last month that it is the lack of talent among Taiwan’s political leaders that has caused the country problems.
Others blame the problem on education reform, while high-paid professionals blame it on low unattractive salaries.
Does Taiwan really lack talented people? Take the following example:
In late 2009, Chen Li-yi (陳立宜), then-head director of Chi Mei Optoelectronics Corp, and 200 staff resigned and moved to China where they established CSOT Corp, China’s highest-generation panel manufacturer in just 17-and-a-half months. This shows that Taiwan has talented people and that they are first-rate professionals.
There are innumerable examples of China’s policy to recruit Taiwanese high-tech talent. Some Chinese companies even pay Taiwanese professionals generously, offering a “one-to-one” ratio — they offer the same figures as in their original salaries, but in Chinese yuan rather than New Taiwan dollars. Who can resist this? No wonder the chairman of a high-tech business recently said with a sigh that China has lured more than 200 managers away from Taiwan’s machinery industry.
Oddly, while academics discuss Taiwan’s “talent crisis” with such passion, no one mentions the absence of a “technology protection law” for controlling the outflow of technological talent.
In more technologically developed US, Japan and South Korea, technology and talent have always been more strictly controlled. Had the Chi Mei case occurred in South Korea, those who moved to China could have been charged with industrial espionage, and the South Korean government could have arrested them at the airport for taking confidential commercial information out of the country.
To ensure economic security, the US passed the Trading with the Enemy Act, Atomic Energy Act, Export Administration Act and Economic Espionage Act in 1917, 1954, 1979 and 1996 respectively to protect sensitive advanced technology and talent, and prevent them from leaving the country.
The Taiwanese government is not so stupid that it does not know how important a technology protection law is.
In March 2002, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) government lifted a ban that prohibited Taiwanese chipmakers from building eight-inch wafer fabs in China based on three conditions: the adoption of a technology protection law, only allowing chipmakers that had operated advanced 12-inch wafer fabs at mass production for at least six months in Taiwan to set up in China and limiting the number of Taiwanese wafer fabs that could be established in China. Because of this, the government drafted a national science and technology protection act and regulations for high-tech talent working in the mainland area.
Unfortunately, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) repeatedly challenged and blocked the drafts after they were submitted to the legislature in October of the same year. This gave China sufficient time to absorb Taiwan’s advanced technology.
After President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) came to power in 2008, the Cabinet submitted a letter to the legislature withdrawing certain draft bills proposed by the DPP government, including the science and technology protection act, thus allowing China to attract both Taiwanese technology and talent without any limitations. That being so, the Chi Mei case was not very surprising.
It is not a matter of Taiwan lacking sufficient talent, it is a case of enterprises complaining that there is none.
That is the fault of the KMT and the KMT government, because they blocked the science and technology protection act and intentionally drove the nation’s talent away.
Huang Tien-lin is a former presidential adviser.
Translated by Eddy Chang
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers