The Port of Kaohsiung is the nation’s most important container port. It would only be reasonable that a Chinese state-owned company should not be allowed to operate a container terminal there, as it would be a major threat to national security.
The government still has not paid attention to the purchase earlier this month of Hong Kong-based Orient Overseas Container Line’s (OOCL) Taiwanese subsidiary by Cosco Shipping Holdings Co (Cosco), China’s largest container shipping company.
The damage may have already been done, but officials must quickly take steps to remedy the situation.
That OOCL was allowed to lease berths at Kaohsiung Port and set up the OOCL Kaohsiung Container Terminal is part of the rotten legacy of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) time in government.
At the time, the majority shareholders of OOCL’s parent company Orient Overseas Ltd, the Tung (董) family, had close connections to the KMT. Since the early 1970s, they have leased berths at the Port of Kaohsiung.
This issue should have been dealt with after Tung Chee-hwa (董建華) threw his lot in with the People’s Republic of China, or at least after he was selected as Hong Kong’s first chief executive in 1997.
However, the can was kicked down the road until Tung unexpectedly sold the company to the Chinese state-owned enterprise, cashing in on his many years of political investment. China’s decision to buy the company outright was probably a result of the company’s lease of berths at the Port of Kaohsiung and at the strategically important Port of Long Beach in New York.
Now that OOCL is taking over the Kaohsiung berth, the government must ramp up inspections of the company’s operations at the port to prevent its parent company, Cosco, from shipping goods that could endanger national security to Taiwan — and from Taiwan back to China.
These inspections must include personnel checks and the company must be prevented from using its facilities to gather information on military activities in the port.
In the longer term, Taiwan International Ports Corp should consider all options at its disposal, including terminating Cosco’s lease agreement at the Port of Kaohsiung, forcing OOCL to sell the OOCL Kaohsiung Container Terminal to Taiwanese investors, as domestic laws could be applied to restrict and control a Taiwanese investor.
However, Cosco would probably do all it can to obstruct the return of the container terminal to Taiwanese ownership. In such a scenario, the government must put in place plans to deal with the situation forcefully. Unfortunately, that would not be easy, as Cosco’s berths can now be used as a chess piece by Beijing to manipulate Taiwan-China relations.
Chinese ownership of the strategically important container terminal is a reflection of the Taiwanese government’s lackadaisical approach and lack of vigilance toward foreign investment.
The measures in place are insufficient. KMT-friendly Taiwanese corporations that used to receive favors from past administrations are now throwing in their lots with China, and the government’s failure to address this situation has now led to this result.
In the past, the KMT gave excessive perks and preferential treatment to a plethora of companies across different industries. Both from the perspective of transitional justice and national security, the situation can no longer be ignored and the government must conduct a thorough review of the situation.
Martin Oei is a political commentator based in Germany.
Translated by Edward Jones
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath