In addition to being crowned emperor, Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) has announced 31 incentives for Taiwanese. Advocates of adventurism and defeatists alike rushed to praise Xi’s move and accuse the Taiwanese government of bringing down Taiwan, as if Taiwanese talent and capital would never return and annexation were just around the corner.
On the other hand, the UN’s Sustainable Development Solutions Network has published its World Happiness Report: Taiwan ranked 26th overall and No. 1 among Asian nations. China ranked 86th.
Regardless of whether the 31 incentives are beneficial to Taiwan, China’s capitalists and corrupt officials are moving their capital abroad, as is Hong Kong billionaire Lee Ka-hsing (李嘉誠), while Taiwanese, Japanese and South Korean businesspeople are moving to South Asia, India, Europe and the US.
China is rejecting the advantages offered by other nations in favor of bringing in technology, capital and talent from Taiwan. This helps China solve its economic problems.
Meanwhile, Beijing holds back Taipei politically, making it clear that it is targeting public sentiment in Taiwan.
Talent and capital know no borders in today’s world, and as long as conditions are good, people will move, and there is nothing anyone can do about it.
Furthermore, why would talent and capital move to China when, in addition to Taiwan, other options include the US, Southeast Asia and Europe?
If China is the only choice and the only place where they can survive, one cannot help but wonder if all that talent and capital investment is really so clever.
Apart from wages and capital investment, people must also consider other values if they want to live with respect and dignity — such as freedom, human rights and democracy, and smaller issues like safety, healthcare and education.
Giving up everything for a bit more money and a few more investment benefits in an unpredictable nation is a risky proposition.
To be clear: What Taiwan fears is not the people who want to try their luck in China, but the ones who do not go there and stay in Taiwan, where they enjoy the National Health Insurance, labor pensions and other advantages, while spending their days working with China and holding Taiwan back.
Lau Yi-te is chairman of the Taiwan Solidarity Union.
Translated by Perry Svensson
What began on Feb. 28 as a military campaign against Iran quickly became the largest energy-supply disruption in modern times. Unlike the oil crises of the 1970s, which stemmed from producer-led embargoes, US President Donald Trump is the first leader in modern history to trigger a cascading global energy crisis through direct military action. In the process, Trump has also laid bare Taiwan’s strategic and economic fragilities, offering Beijing a real-time tutorial in how to exploit them. Repairing the damage to Persian Gulf oil and gas infrastructure could take years, suggesting that elevated energy prices are likely to persist. But the most
Taiwan should reject two flawed answers to the Eswatini controversy: that diplomatic allies no longer matter, or that they must be preserved at any cost. The sustainable answer is to maintain formal diplomatic relations while redesigning development relationships around transparency, local ownership and democratic accountability. President William Lai’s (賴清德) canceled trip to Eswatini has elicited two predictable reactions in Taiwan. One camp has argued that the episode proves Taiwan must double down on support for every remaining diplomatic ally, because Beijing is tightening the screws, and formal recognition is too scarce to risk. The other says the opposite: If maintaining
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文), during an interview for the podcast Lanshuan Time (蘭萱時間) released on Monday, said that a US professor had said that she deserved to be nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize following her meeting earlier this month with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平). Cheng’s “journey of peace” has garnered attention from overseas and from within Taiwan. The latest My Formosa poll, conducted last week after the Cheng-Xi meeting, shows that Cheng’s approval rating is 31.5 percent, up 7.6 percentage points compared with the month before. The same poll showed that 44.5 percent of respondents
India’s semiconductor strategy is undergoing a quiet, but significant, recalibration. With the rollout of India Semiconductor Mission (ISM) 2.0, New Delhi is signaling a shift away from ambition-driven leaps toward a more grounded, capability-led approach rooted in industrial realities and institutional learning. Rather than attempting to enter the most advanced nodes immediately, India has chosen to prioritize mature technologies in the 28-nanometer to 65-nanometer range. That would not be a retreat, but a strategic alignment with domestic capabilities, market demand and global supply chain gaps. The shift carries the imprimatur of Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, indicating that the recalibration is
RSS