During his trip to China, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) met with representatives of Taiwanese businesses in China at a forum in Shanghai on Sunday. One of these representatives, Susan Tung (董淑貞), president of a UK-registered company based in China, told the forum that it was time for the KMT to focus on cooperation with the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and that Taiwan would not stand a chance if Chu were to listen to “other voices in Taiwan.”
Tung added that there are more than 350,000 Taiwanese-Chinese couples and, if family members were included, that figure could easily reach more than 1 million people who could return to Taiwan to vote. With this army of voters, “how could the KMT not win?” Tung asked.
Tung heads Tung Global Financial Trading UK. She did not hold back in her speech, revealing how the interests of Taiwanese businesses in China are intimately tied to Beijing. She has become a vanguard for her peers, preoccupied with how politics could be brought to bear to protect China, with precious little regard for democratic principles or the interests of other Taiwanese. She has no problem exploiting cross-strait marriages as an intimidation tactic to influence the presidential election to maintain her economic interests in China. Her unambiguous comments were met with some alarm in Taiwan.
Even more alarming is that Tung is vice president of the worldwide Friends of Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) Association, a member of the Overseas Community Affairs Council and the World League for Freedom and Democracy. She is also an overseas executive member of the CCP’s United Front Work Department and the overseas representative of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference of Jiangxi Province. Her wide-ranging and complex roster of positions have been criticized by Taiwanese media, which have questioned where her loyalties ultimately lie: with China, Taiwan or the UK?
This form of shifting loyalties among overseas Taiwanese businesspeople was the subject of Scott Kastner’s book Political Conflict and Economic Interdependence Across the Taiwan Strait and Beyond. In the book, Kastner talks about how China, seeking unification, would need the support of Taiwanese “political allies,” and how China-based Taiwanese businesspeople are the best candidates for this role. While Beijing continues to reinforce its military intimidation, it is also strengthening its ties with the Taiwanese business community in China, in a pincer movement aimed at securing unification.
In previous elections, many major Taiwanese investors in China have put up money and resources to support the KMT. The triumvirate of the CCP, the KMT in Taiwan and Taiwanese businesspeople in China have become a prodigious pro-unification “united front” that not only has huge corporate capital at its disposal, but also controls large numbers of workers, and is intimately involved in providing basic essentials — including the mainstream media — in Taiwan. This has already been set into motion for the presidential election next year.
This whole affair has opened eyes in Taiwan to the problem of shifting loyalties. The public is more aware that, even though these individuals have their roots in Taiwan, they have also come under Beijing’s spell. When businesspeople become pro-unification, they do so to a degree even more extreme than the KMT government. They no longer recognize Taiwan, but have instead become “Chinese citizens.”
This incident has also drawn attention to the issue of absentee voting, together with extended voting rights for Chinese spouses. While many countries practice absentee voting, it carries with it potential political dangers that need to be looked into.
China has long sought shortcuts to developing semiconductor technologies and local supply chains by poaching engineers and experts from Taiwan and other nations. It is also suspected of stealing trade secrets from Taiwanese and US firms to fulfill its ambition of becoming a major player in the global semiconductor industry in the next decade. However, it takes more than just money and talent to build a semiconductor supply chain like the one which Taiwan and the US started to cultivate more than 30 years ago. Amid rising trade and technology tensions between the world’s two biggest economies, Beijing has become
With a new White House document in May — the “Strategic Approach to the People’s Republic of China” — the administration of US President Donald Trump has firmly set its hyper-competitive line to tackle geoeconomic and geostrategic rivalry, followed by several reinforcing speeches by Trump and other Cabinet-level officials. By identifying China as a near-equal rival, the strategy resonates well with the bipartisan consensus on China in today’s severely divided US. In the face of China’s rapidly growing aggression, the move is long overdue, yet relevant for the maintenance of the international “status quo.” The strategy seems to herald a new
To say that this year has been eventful for China and the rest of the world would be something of an understatement. First, the US-China trade dispute, already simmering for two years, reached a boiling point as Washington tightened the noose around China’s economy. Second, China unleashed the COVID-19 pandemic on the world, wreaking havoc on an unimaginable scale and turning the People’s Republic of China into a common target of international scorn. Faced with a mounting crisis at home, Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) rashly decided to ratchet up military tensions with neighboring countries in a misguided attempt to divert the
Toward the end of former president Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) final term in office, there was much talk about his legacy. Ma himself would likely prefer history books to enshrine his achievements in reducing cross-strait tensions. He might see his meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) in Singapore in 2015 as the high point. However, given his statements in the past few months, he might be remembered more for contributing to the breakup of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). We are still talking about Ma and his legacy because it is inextricably tied to the so-called “1992 consensus” as the bedrock of his