China recently introduced 31 incentives aimed at attracting Taiwanese. Fourteen of these are nothing but old wine in new bottles, but the other 17 are quite new.
Beijing has two reasons for this major move.
First, the incentives are an extension of the two policies aimed at residents in central and southern Taiwan, middle and low-income families, small and medium-sized enterprises, and young people (the “three middles and the youth” policy, 三中一青), as well as the young generation and the grassroots level (the “one generation and one stratum” policy, 一代一線). They are aimed at attracting the younger generation who support Taiwanese independence, because that is all they have ever known, and turning them into a pro-unification vanguard.
Second, the incentives are designed to draw a second wave of investment from Taiwan.
Between 1990 and 2016, China’s attempt to attract Taiwanese focused on businesspeople and capital investment. It succeeded in drawing in capital worth about US$900 billion, along with new technologies, making China the largest trading country and the second-largest economy in the world.
However, after Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) began to reveal his despotic ambitions, most attempts by Chinese companies to acquire foreign businesses or to bring high-end technologies into China have been prohibited by other countries.
Most recently, Singapore-based Broadcom’s attempt to acquire smartphone chipmaker Qualcomm was blocked by US President Donald Trump, because of Broadcom’s close relations with China.
Under these circumstances, the only way China would be able to achieve its goal of becoming a technology giant by 2025 would be to recruit high-tech talent from Taiwan and encourage Taiwanese students and researchers to share trade secrets.
Taiwan would then become key to the outcome of the US-China power struggle and their economic war.
The Taiwanese government must therefore make responding to China’s 31 incentives a priority and stand firmly with the West to secure an economic advantage.
I have previously argued (“Taiwan in need of US-like security clearances,” March 21, page 8) that the government should raise the national security level by establishing a security clearance system similar to that in the US as soon as possible.
Anyone who has worked, studied or conducted research or business in China should have to undergo a rigorous security clearance review if they return to work in a government institution or sensitive high-tech company.
This would not constitute an infringement on personal freedom. Rather, a review should be regarded as an expression of loyalty to the nation.
By setting up a proper national security clearance system, the government could avoid being accused of “punishing people without first instructing them,” as Confucius said, and the public would also learn the importance of national identity.
If the US can do it, there is no reason Taiwan should not be able to.
Such a system should be the first line of defense against China’s 31 incentives. If such a security clearance system was already in place, the controversy over the National Taiwan University presidential election would have been resolved long ago.
The second line of defense should be the eight strategies for strengthening Taiwan proposed by the Executive Yuan on March 16.
This would be the second line of defense, and not the first, because the eight strategies would be reactive rather than proactive.
To make up for this shortcoming, the government should consider restoring the stock bonus mechanism, which levied taxes on the face value of shares. This would be far more effective than the implementation of sporadic bonus policies. As long as it resulted in the creation of a few unicorn companies, it would result in increased tax revenue.
The third line of defense would be an exercise of state power: amending the Trade Secrets Act (營業秘密法) and having the different ministries impose prohibitive measures, such as the Ministry of Education’s plan to bar Taiwanese academics with crucial expertise from participating in Chinese state-funded research programs.
It is important to understand that Taiwan is facing an economic war waged by a country ruled by authoritarian nationalism and which has an economy that is 20 to 30 times bigger than Taiwan’s. The ultimate goal of this country is to annex Taiwan.
This is a war far removed from issues of liberalization and internationalization, and without a leader with a vision of national sovereignty, Taiwan will not succeed.
Huang Tien-lin is a national policy adviser and former managing director and chairman of First Commercial Bank.
Translated by Chang Ho-ming
Congratulations to China’s working class — they have officially entered the “Livestock Feed 2.0” era. While others are still researching how to achieve healthy and balanced diets, China has already evolved to the point where it does not matter whether you are actually eating food, as long as you can swallow it. There is no need for cooking, chewing or making decisions — just tear open a package, add some hot water and in a short three minutes you have something that can keep you alive for at least another six hours. This is not science fiction — it is reality.
In a world increasingly defined by unpredictability, two actors stand out as islands of stability: Europe and Taiwan. One, a sprawling union of democracies, but under immense pressure, grappling with a geopolitical reality it was not originally designed for. The other, a vibrant, resilient democracy thriving as a technological global leader, but living under a growing existential threat. In response to rising uncertainties, they are both seeking resilience and learning to better position themselves. It is now time they recognize each other not just as partners of convenience, but as strategic and indispensable lifelines. The US, long seen as the anchor
Kinmen County’s political geography is provocative in and of itself. A pair of islets running up abreast the Chinese mainland, just 20 minutes by ferry from the Chinese city of Xiamen, Kinmen remains under the Taiwanese government’s control, after China’s failed invasion attempt in 1949. The provocative nature of Kinmen’s existence, along with the Matsu Islands off the coast of China’s Fuzhou City, has led to no shortage of outrageous takes and analyses in foreign media either fearmongering of a Chinese invasion or using these accidents of history to somehow understand Taiwan. Every few months a foreign reporter goes to
The war between Israel and Iran offers far-reaching strategic lessons, not only for the Middle East, but also for East Asia, particularly Taiwan. As tensions rise across both regions, the behavior of global powers, especially the US under the US President Donald Trump, signals how alliances, deterrence and rapid military mobilization could shape the outcomes of future conflicts. For Taiwan, facing increasing pressure and aggression from China, these lessons are both urgent and actionable. One of the most notable features of the Israel-Iran war was the prompt and decisive intervention of the US. Although the Trump administration is often portrayed as