China has begun taking action over alleged antitrust violations in the auto industry, raiding or investigating many large foreign companies and applying pressure on them to lower prices or be fined. This is rattling foreign firms in China, and some experts and academics are calling on the international community to launch joint countermeasures. The smell of gunpowder is emanating from what could develop into a trade war between China and the rest of the world.
China’s National Development and Reform Commission is investigating a dozen automakers, such as Volkswagen AG-owned Audi, BMW, Daimler AG-owned Mercedes-Benz, Tata Motors-owned Jaguar Land Rover, Fiat-owned Chrysler, Toyota and Honda. Since last month, all these companies have announced car or component price cuts.
In addition, over the past month, the commission has raided the offices of Microsoft Corp, Qualcomm Inc, Caterpillar Inc, Mead Johnson Nutrition Co, and Abbott and Danone, all foreign companies targeted by anti-monopoly investigations.
Add to this the Chinese government’s decision to request that government institutions no longer purchase products from Apple and Cisco, that financial institutions should not purchase US information products, including IBM server solutions, electronic databases from Oracle and storage devices from EMC Corp, the world’s largest manufacturer of computer storage solutions.
The Chinese government is attacking foreign companies on a wide front, but the legal foundations and the reasons for doing so are general and unspecific, which leaves the impression that China is intentionally attacking foreign companies to create business opportunities for local companies and promote Chinese industry. Although many companies will accept price cuts or fines to be allowed to remain in the Chinese market, many of them are unhappy with the fuzzy laws and regulations, and the opaque and unpredictable business environment. It has even been suggested that international businesses join hands and take legal and political action to demand transparency and protect their rights in response to Beijing’s anti-monopoly push.
For international companies, the Chinese market is very important. China’s past double-digit growth made foreign businesses salivate, but they are also concerned over risk and uncertainty in the market. During its period of rapid economic growth, China was in great need of foreign capital, technology and marketing, but as local Chinese companies have expanded and grown, they are now competing directly with foreign firms. The result is that the relationship between Chinese industry and foreign business is changing from a welcoming and cooperative relationship into one of head-on competition.
The whole thing might just be a storm in a tea cup and once the two sides have made their positions clear and initiated talks to lay down the new rules of the game it might settle down. However, it could also develop into an international trade war with each side boycotting the other’s products and services. If the former comes to pass, then it would be a positive development, helping revitalize China’s economy. However, if the latter comes to pass, Taiwanese businesspeople in China who hold dual nationality might become the victims of the trade war due to their conflicting roles. However, if they correctly assess the situation and respond to it appropriately, they might be able to take advantage of the possible situation and come out as winners.
In the case of a trade war, the government and Taiwanese businesspeople in China must be alert to and aware of the risks of doing business in that nation and come up with ways to respond to a change in the situation as swiftly as possible.
In the event of a war with China, Taiwan has some surprisingly tough defenses that could make it as difficult to tackle as a porcupine: A shoreline dotted with swamps, rocks and concrete barriers; conscription for all adult men; highways and airports that are built to double as hardened combat facilities. This porcupine has a soft underbelly, though, and the war in Iran is exposing it: energy. About 39,000 ships dock at Taiwan’s ports each year, more than the 30,000 that transit the Strait of Hormuz. About one-fifth of their inbound tonnage is coal, oil, refined fuels and liquefied natural gas (LNG),
To counter the CCP’s escalating threats, Taiwan must build a national consensus and demonstrate the capability and the will to fight. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) often leans on a seductive mantra to soften its threats, such as “Chinese do not kill Chinese.” The slogan is designed to frame territorial conquest (annexation) as a domestic family matter. A look at the historical ledger reveals a different truth. For the CCP, being labeled “family” has never been a guarantee of safety; it has been the primary prerequisite for state-sanctioned slaughter. From the forced starvation of 150,000 civilians at the Siege of Changchun
The two major opposition parties, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), jointly announced on Tuesday last week that former TPP lawmaker Chang Chi-kai (張啟楷) would be their joint candidate for Chiayi mayor, following polling conducted earlier this month. It is the first case of blue-white (KMT-TPP) cooperation in selecting a joint candidate under an agreement signed by their chairpersons last month. KMT and TPP supporters have blamed their 2024 presidential election loss on failing to decide on a joint candidate, which ended in a dramatic breakdown with participants pointing fingers, calling polls unfair, sobbing and walking
In the opening remarks of her meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) in the Great Hall of the People in Beijing on Friday, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) framed her visit as a historic occasion. In his own remarks, Xi had also emphasized the history of the relationship between the KMT and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Where they differed was that Cheng’s account, while flawed by its omissions, at least partially corresponded to reality. The meeting was certainly historic, albeit not in the way that Cheng and Xi were signaling, and not from the perspective