Now that the question of United Microelectronics Corp's (UMC) involvement with China-based He Jian Technology Co (Suzhou) has entered judicial proceedings, the furor over the case has gradually died down.
But surprisingly, certain major newspapers on March 21 ran an advertisement placed by UMC chairman Robert Tsao (
Reading carefully through the content of the advertisement, it is not difficult to see the anxiety with which the principals in the case are trying to defend themselves and escape from their current predicament.
Their contorted reasoning, contempt of the law and attempt to shirk responsibility for their actions have only served to substantiate public accusations and suspicions.
While we can respect both the dignity and interests of UMC, there are some matters of right and wrong regarding the way the UMC management has responded to this case that still deserve our attention.
First, regarding the issue of "breach of trust" and violating the "Security Exchange Law" (
Or should it be left unresolved? Since the case involves judicial credibility and the rights and interests of the public, we believe that the judicial authority will need to pass judgement.
Second, UMC admitted that it brushed over its investment in and technical assistance to He Jian as part of its operational strategy, so it has clearly violated the Statue Governing Relations between the People of the Taiwan Area and the Mainland Area (
If this action was taken as a result of an individual's decision, that person should compensate UMC for any financial loss. If it was a corporate decision by UMC, the firm should now be considered a "deviant corporation."
Third, if UMC violated the government's statutes as a result of management negligence or lack of supervision, harming the public and national interests as a result, and if there has been negligence on the part of the Mainland Affairs Council, the Investment Commission of the Ministry of Economic Affairs, the Securities and Futures Bureau under the Financial Supervisory Commission, or other governmental agencies which contributed to the situation, then UMC and these agencies should all be investigated.
Fourth, as to the lifting of the order forbidding He Jian's Taiwanese management personnel from leaving Taiwan, since the order may encroach on He Jian's interests and the human rights of the individuals concerned, the judicial authority is required to investigate the matter to obtain a legal basis to restrict their freedom of movement.
Fifth, UMC wants to be admired by the public. But UMC has not made clear which technologies and patents it has transferred to China, nor their value or the process by which they will be transferred. UMC must clearly explain all of this in detail.
Otherwise, how is the public supposed to understand whether UMC has violated the laws that control international technology transfers?
We hope that UMC's announcements in the media were made to explain the truth, admit its wrongdoings and express its intention to improve. If UMC's announcements were intended to mislead the public by using the media to conceal illegal and unreasonable acquisitions, or even shape public opinion to influence the courts, it would not be acting wisely.
Karl J.C. Chang is the secretary-general of the Taiwan Association of University Professors.
TRANSLATED BY LIN YA-TI
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II. The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan. It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not
RSS