The massive financial scandal surrounding the Rebar Asia Pacific Group (
On the surface, the irregularities have highlighted the government's serious delinquency in its oversight and management role. But on a deeper level, it reflects the disorder caused by government policies aimed at boosting Taiwan's national telecommunications industry. The mess created by the opening up of the fixed network industry, which the government specially designated for deregulation in 1999, is yet another example of the ugly consequences of the entanglement between state and business interests, which has remained even after the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) took power in 2000.
At the end of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) era in 1999, in the name of market liberalization, the Ministry of Transportation and Communications (MOTC) formally announced that it would begin accepting applications for special licenses permitting companies to enter the fixed network market. This drew the interest of a number of large companies, which raced to group together to compete for the licenses.
Another main goal of liberalization was to speed up construction and modernization of the domestic broadband infrastructure, as well as the overall development of all telecommunications networks by allowing new companies into the market. The MOTC set a high threshold for applying, requiring groups to have NT$40 billion (US$1.22 billion) in capital. Several companies intending to apply competed to raise funds on capital markets. Banking on a rosy future and high profitability for the industry, they raised large amounts of capital by issuing shares. Taiwan Fixed Network (台灣固網), Eastern Broadband Telecom and New Century Infocomm Tech Co (新世紀資通), the three companies that won the licenses, raised NT$92.2 billion, NT$65.7 billion and NT$47.5 billion respectively.
However, the problems caused by this NT$200 billion in capital are just now about to emerge. Not long after they received their permits, word came out that the three private companies would not immediately invest the money in building infrastructure. Instead, they would inappropriately use it for other purposes. The media covered the story extensively and there were repeated reports that prosecutors would probe the matter. This all resulted from the government's serious inability to monitor and set standards for private fixed network companies. This amounted to a veiled incentive for companies to misuse their capital.
At the time that it began issuing the licenses, the MOTC declared the plan would help reach the goal of an "extensive Internet infrastructure, and broadband in 6 million households."
The three companies were contractually obligated to finish connecting 1 million subscribers and network loops within six years. However, after succeeding in raising such a large reserve of funds, for years they only built the most easily constructed Internet framework. For example, Taiwan Fixed Network had to rely on investment from the MOTC's Taiwan Railway Administration to provide for its nation-wide fiber optic network. Meanwhile the licensed companies were slow to construct a broadband network to connect consumer subscribers.
Most outrageous of all, when the DPP came to power after the licenses were issued, it proved unable to effectively encourage the companies to expand their broadband networks. The old slogan of "broadband in 6 million households" quickly vanished into thin air. At the end of 2003, the government's "Mobile Taiwan" plan to develop wireless regional networks included a plan to construct underground broadband pipes. Now taxpayers have had to foot the bill for the NT$37 billion budget, which was to carry on the task of laying 6,000km of underground broadband pipes across the country in the hope of achieving a complete fixed network for Internet, cable television and mobile phones.
It's been more than seven years since the fixed network market was opened up. As countries like South Korea and Japan have forged into the fiber optic network era, Taiwan has floundered, and its mission of creating a complete telecommunications network is back where it started. Now there are major doubts and suspicions about just where APBT's money went.
Look at the situation from the perspective of those outside companies that were denied licenses because they couldn't raise NT$40 billion to apply, or the previously state-run Chunghwa Telecom as it continues working to establish a broadband and fiber optic network, or the stock holders who invested enthusiastically in what looked like such promising companies.
All they can do is shake their heads.
Simon Chang is chairman of Chunghwa Telecom Workers' Union. Translated by Daniel Cheng and Marc Langer
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
On Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers