The government's plan to privatize Chunghwa Telecom (中華電信) will take another step forward this week when the Ministry of Transportation and Communications sells a 17 percent stake in the company through a planned American Depositary Receipt (ADRs) offering in the US, and a public auction here in Taiwan.
This step doesn't come easily, however, as the sale has already been put off three times since 2003 following months of union opposition and political clashes. When the sale is completed, Chunghwa will gain a more flexible management structure and a larger investment base. And importantly, the government will earn funds needed to reduce its public debt.
The telecommunications liberalization is one of the biggest business issues facing governments worldwide, and countries such as China, France, Germany, Singapore and Finland each undertook privatization programs last year.
In Taiwan, the release of Chunghwa shares is crucial, because the issue will affect not only government revenue -- the sale is estimated to bring in nearly NT$100 billion (US$3.14 billion) to help the government plug its rising budget shortfall -- but also the development of the domestic telecom market, the rights of common investors and the benefits of Chunghwa employees.
As a state-run enterprise, Chunghwa is subject to extensive regulations in accordance with the nation's laws and rules. The company's autonomy is limited by government regulations and legislative oversight, which company executives contend has handicapped the firm's ability to compete with up-and-coming rivals.
Without these limitations, once the company is privatized, Chunghwa said it will increase its management and operational flexibility to more rapidly and efficiently develop its business amid fierce competition that is hurting profits. It is hoped the company can implement cost reduction initiatives in response to changing market conditions.
But this is exactly what the 28,000 workers at Chunghwa are worried about -- the possible losses of jobs and generous pension rights. Meanwhile, critics have also expressed deep reservations about how the government's bid to turn its majority stake into private hands will negatively affect telephone and Internet users in rural areas, where such services are generally deemed unprofitable for private telecom operators.
The legislature also feared privatization would take away its powers of control, and has passed four resolutions since May 2003 to ban the sale of Chunghwa shares, with some lawmakers even petitioning the New York Stock Exchange and the Securities and Exchange Commission in the US to stop it.
It is in this enviornment that Chunghwa has moved back and forth along its privatization course since the government started offloading its shares of the company in 2000. While signs of recovering equity markets have helped boost the government's enthusiasm for pressing on with privatization of Chunghwa -- it has announced it will complete this task by the end of the year -- political squabbling is always a hindrance.
Workers in the union are entitled to bargain for what they want with the management, because that is their right. Critics are justified to air their concerns over the future telecom development in this nation. Lawmakers also have good reasons to worry about possible unfair competition between Chunghwa Telecom -- which already enjoys unparalleled leadership in fixed-line, wireless and Internet services due to its state-run, dominant role -- and other telecom operators as a result of a lack of legislative supervision.
But these people should be reminded that any deal will work better than continued government control of Chunghwa. The company's union has, predictably, threatened strikes protesting the upcoming share sales.
These parties need to calm down. What Taiwan needs is to allow the sale to proceed as scheduled, and the government must work to monitor it to ensure that privatization turns out for the best.
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