While there is still no clear answer as to whether United Microelectronics Corp (UMC) was "assisting," conducting a transfer of technology to, or investing in He Jian Technology (Suzhou), a separate case of a large-scale investment project in China has been uncovered, this time by a state-run company.
On Feb. 26, Taiwan Fertilizer Company signed an agreement with Yangzhou Economic Development Zone, pledging an investment of US$180 million to establish a production and sales base. Taiwan Fertilizer has made it clear that the project is still in the planning stage, and that the signing of the agreement was simply to facilitate visits by Chinese personnel. The agreement states that the project will not be implemented until the authorities concerned approve the application.
Taiwan Fertilizer's investment proposal would not be barred under the government's list of industries banned from investing in China. The amount of the investment would not exceed 40 percent of Taiwan Fertilizer's corporate assets. Therefore, the Investment Commission has no legal basis for banning the project. But that doesn't mean the company should get a green light to move ahead with it. Regulations governing investment in China appear to be so lax that they failed to regulate such an investment. The project should be rejected by the government.
Given the relatively high unemployment rate in this country and concerns about the hollowing out of the industrial base, Taiwan Fertilizer should give priority to building the new compound fertilizer processing plant in Taiwan. How can it choose to set up a plant in China and create employment for the Chinese government?
There are several similarities between the this case and the UMC case. UMC has benefitted from the government's incentives to develop the high-tech industry. It enjoys preferential treatment financed by the Cabinet's Development Fund and capital for state-run businesses. As for Taiwan Fertilizer, more than half of its board of directors are government officials. The two companies rely to a large extent on the government, and this means they also have a social responsibility.
Regrettably, UMC's sneaking into China by "assisting" He Jian, and Taiwan Fertilizer's plan to invest NT$6 billion in China shows a serious lack of social responsibility and a neglect of national interests.
The dream of China as factory to the world, built on a formula that combines Taiwan's manufacturing power with cheap Chinese labor, land and preferential treatment has long attracted Taiwanese companies. Sustainable corporate management means moving on from contract manufacturing to concentrate on research and development, innovation and developing brand marketing. That is the only way for Taiwanese companies to compete in the world market. Investment in China runs counter to that goal, since it gives paramount importance to cheap labor and land while ignoring R&D, innovation and brand marketing. Relying only on price will lead to cut-throat competition and disappearing profits.
Taiwanese investment in China is a slow form of suicide for our industrial base and the economy as a whole. China's "Anti-Secession" Law is a visible threat, while investment in that country is a less tangible one. Unrestrained investment in China simply prepares us for the slaughter. Taiwan's current dependence on China in terms of investment and as an export market is seriously over the safety limit. Any change in the Chinese market will have a serious impact on this country.
If China decides to wage an economic war, we will be defenseless. UMC's and Taiwan Fertilizer's drive into China is bad for the nation. The government should use its authority and exercise the power of the law against these companies. Moreover, it should patch up the loopholes in laws related to investment in China. This is the only way to get to the root of the problem and save the nation's economy.
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS