Yahoo CEO Jerry Yang (
Yahoo is not the only foreign company that has been forced to comply with communist China's autocratic regime. In June of 2004, China forbade all Internet businesses from creating or disseminating any superstitious, pornographic, or "harmful" material to China and its people.
Accordingly, Google was forced to design a set of software that filters Web pages containing sensitive terms such as "Taiwanese independence," "democracy," "Tiananmen Square massacre," "Falun Gong" and others.
The example of Yahoo and Google should remind the Taiwanese public of the relationship between state autonomy, social security and the suggestion made by Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) presidential candidate Frank Hsieh (
On March 14, 2005, Beijing passed the "Anti-Secession" Law of which Article 8 states that China shall use non-peaceful and any other necessary means to deal with Taiwanese separatist forces. China will not allow Taiwan to declare itself an independent, sovereign state.
The DPP purports to be a pan-green, grassroots party seeking sovereignty and independence, and should thus realize the threat to national and economic security posed by the migration of industry to China.
Annexation through economic means is China's primary tactic against Taiwan. The purpose of forming the Association of Taiwan Investment Enterprise on the Mainland (台企聯) in April from numerous Taiwanese enterprises -- with officials from China's Taiwan Affairs Office (國台辦) as honorary chairman and vice president of the standing committee -- is to ensure that the association issues commands that are directed by the Chinese government.
Beijing has yet to deploy the ultimate weapon of unification through economic means because the time is not yet ripe: Taiwan's large corporations, limited by the 40 percent cap on China-bound investments, still retain 60 percent of their assets in Taiwan.
If China shows its cards too early, they will choose Taiwan in order to preserve the bulk of their assets. China has attempted to eliminate this problem by using Taiwanese businesses, pro-unification academics and media outlets and other external sources to argue for the removal of the cap. It appears that the government will buckle under pressure from businesses as China had hoped.
After the investment cap is lifted, Taiwan's large, publicly traded companies will quickly invest more than 50 percent of their assets in China, whereupon they will turn their backs on Taiwan, conform to China's unification goals, and the union of the motherland will "mature naturally."
This article will not even address the more serious repercussions for Taiwan's economy.
Thus, the 40 percent investment cap should be considered in the light of state sovereignty, economic security and risk management, rather than as a problem concerning individual corporations or businesses. The Financial Holding Company Act (金控法) stipulates that investment in non-financial enterprises by finance holding companies cannot exceed 15 percent of its paid-up capital, just as the Banking Act (銀行法) stipulates that a bank may not extend more than 15 percent of its net value in credit to a party or group of companies for the purpose of financial security and risk management. The rules do not vary according to industry and are not a matter of "assessment on individual basis."
If the financial holding company and banking acts are unfair and unreasonable, would implementing project assessment on an individual basis make things fair and reasonable? In reality, individual assessment is merely a smoke screen used by officials and businesses wishing to avoid the cap.
How can we not admire the US Congress for holding a hearing for Yahoo's "moral pygmies" and chastising their behavior. Hopefully, our politicians will be inspired by the incident.
Taiwan is already the most invested country in China, accounting for half of all of China's foreign direct investment. Is 40 percent too restrictive? Look at the world's other businesses: Samsung, Toyota, General Motors or the above-mentioned Yahoo and Google -- which one invests more than 20 percent of its net worth in China?
China is a country that seeks to annex Taiwan. Should we not be concerned with state and economic security? If the DPP is truly a grassroots movement, please put a stop to things before it is too late.
Huang Tien-lin is a former national policy adviser to the president.
Translated by Angela Hong
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (傅?萁) has caused havoc with his attempts to overturn the democratic and constitutional order in the legislature. If we look at this devolution from the context of a transition to democracy from authoritarianism in a culturally Chinese sense — that of zhonghua (中華) — then we are playing witness to a servile spirit from a millennia-old form of totalitarianism that is intent on damaging the nation’s hard-won democracy. This servile spirit is ingrained in Chinese culture. About a century ago, Chinese satirist and author Lu Xun (魯迅) saw through the servile nature of
Monday was the 37th anniversary of former president Chiang Ching-kuo’s (蔣經國) death. Chiang — a son of former president Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), who had implemented party-state rule and martial law in Taiwan — has a complicated legacy. Whether one looks at his time in power in a positive or negative light depends very much on who they are, and what their relationship with the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is. Although toward the end of his life Chiang Ching-kuo lifted martial law and steered Taiwan onto the path of democratization, these changes were forced upon him by internal and external pressures,
In their New York Times bestseller How Democracies Die, Harvard political scientists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt said that democracies today “may die at the hands not of generals but of elected leaders. Many government efforts to subvert democracy are ‘legal,’ in the sense that they are approved by the legislature or accepted by the courts. They may even be portrayed as efforts to improve democracy — making the judiciary more efficient, combating corruption, or cleaning up the electoral process.” Moreover, the two authors observe that those who denounce such legal threats to democracy are often “dismissed as exaggerating or
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus in the Legislative Yuan has made an internal decision to freeze NT$1.8 billion (US$54.7 million) of the indigenous submarine project’s NT$2 billion budget. This means that up to 90 percent of the budget cannot be utilized. It would only be accessible if the legislature agrees to lift the freeze sometime in the future. However, for Taiwan to construct its own submarines, it must rely on foreign support for several key pieces of equipment and technology. These foreign supporters would also be forced to endure significant pressure, infiltration and influence from Beijing. In other words,
RSS