The tainted cooking oil scandal caused by Ting Hsin International Group (頂新集團) is perhaps the timeliest “National Day gift” Taiwanese could have given the Republic of China (ROC), this nation that does not seem to quite be a nation.
Newspaper editorials have condemned the Wei (魏) family who run the group as “rich, but cruel.” However, are they the only rich, but cruel family in Taiwan?
Business tycoons have manipulated the nation’s political and business circles in recent years, dominating national policies to profit from the hardworking public. Many of the tycoons belong to cross-strait political and business groups and believe that “merchants have no country,” treating Taiwan as a Chinese province instead of a nation. They usually behave themselves in China, while trying to profit from Taiwan.
Do these businesspeople really have no country? Israeli businesspeople love their nation deeply and businesspeople from the leading sovereign states all have a strong “motherland awareness.” Only Taiwanese businesspeople insist on claiming that “merchants have no country.” Since these businesspeople have no country, they care only about their own interests and attach no importance to Taiwan or Taiwanese.
The Wei family dared to sell cooking oil products made with animal feed oil to Taiwanese because they did not have the nation’s best interests at heart. On Oct. 9, renowned chef Cheng Yen-chi (鄭衍基), known as A-chi Shih (阿基師), angrily questioned whether senior Ting Hsin executive Wei Ying-chun (魏應充) sleeps well at night. Unfortunately, the answer is likely “yes.”
The government is partially responsible for encouraging the view that “merchants have no country.” It has belittled Taiwan to the status of a Chinese province and dares not directly tell Beijing that Taiwan is an independent and sovereign state. Economically, the government provides preferential treatment to conglomerates that invest in China, encouraging them to make a “salmon run” as the Ministry of Economic Affairs has called it — to return to Taiwan to be listed on the nation’s stock market or to establish operations centers here.
It also proposes policies concerned only with the interests of cross-strait political and business groups, while disregarding the life-and-death struggles of Taiwanese. Every economic policy in recent years has been like this, including the cross-strait service trade agreement, the cross-strait trade in goods agreement and the establishment of free economic pilot zones. They have served only to nurture special interest groups.
Last month, President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九), Vice President Wu Den-yih (吳敦義) and Premier Jiang Yi-huah (江宜樺) attended a Mid-Autumn Festival celebration hosted by Taiwanese businesspeople with investments in China. Their group seems large enough to intervene in Taiwanese politics. It harms the nation’s democracy and the fairness of elections and it will be difficult to remedy. Eventually, such influences could lead to the nation’s ruin, as freedom and democracy collapse. This is a much greater threat than tainted oil.
This is why Taiwanese must not overlook the cultural background of businesspeople’s misbehavior: Taiwan has not been able to normalize its national status and thus remains a country that does not quite seem to be a country, which has resulted in the public’s weak national identity.
Taiwanese must also be more cautious with the potential damage to the nation caused by businesspeople who travel back and forth across the Taiwan Strait, claiming that “merchants have no country.”
Huang Tien-lin is a former presidential adviser.
Translated by Eddy Chang
In the US’ National Security Strategy (NSS) report released last month, US President Donald Trump offered his interpretation of the Monroe Doctrine. The “Trump Corollary,” presented on page 15, is a distinctly aggressive rebranding of the more than 200-year-old foreign policy position. Beyond reasserting the sovereignty of the western hemisphere against foreign intervention, the document centers on energy and strategic assets, and attempts to redraw the map of the geopolitical landscape more broadly. It is clear that Trump no longer sees the western hemisphere as a peaceful backyard, but rather as the frontier of a new Cold War. In particular,
As the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) races toward its 2027 modernization goals, most analysts fixate on ship counts, missile ranges and artificial intelligence. Those metrics matter — but they obscure a deeper vulnerability. The true future of the PLA, and by extension Taiwan’s security, might hinge less on hardware than on whether the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) can preserve ideological loyalty inside its own armed forces. Iran’s 1979 revolution demonstrated how even a technologically advanced military can collapse when the social environment surrounding it shifts. That lesson has renewed relevance as fresh unrest shakes Iran today — and it should
The last foreign delegation Nicolas Maduro met before he went to bed Friday night (January 2) was led by China’s top Latin America diplomat. “I had a pleasant meeting with Qiu Xiaoqi (邱小琪), Special Envoy of President Xi Jinping (習近平),” Venezuela’s soon-to-be ex-president tweeted on Telegram, “and we reaffirmed our commitment to the strategic relationship that is progressing and strengthening in various areas for building a multipolar world of development and peace.” Judging by how minutely the Central Intelligence Agency was monitoring Maduro’s every move on Friday, President Trump himself was certainly aware of Maduro’s felicitations to his Chinese guest. Just
On today’s page, Masahiro Matsumura, a professor of international politics and national security at St Andrew’s University in Osaka, questions the viability and advisability of the government’s proposed “T-Dome” missile defense system. Matsumura writes that Taiwan’s military budget would be better allocated elsewhere, and cautions against the temptation to allow politics to trump strategic sense. What he does not do is question whether Taiwan needs to increase its defense capabilities. “Given the accelerating pace of Beijing’s military buildup and political coercion ... [Taiwan] cannot afford inaction,” he writes. A rational, robust debate over the specifics, not the scale or the necessity,
RSS