Not much has happened of late in the world of business news that could be considered amusing. Yesterday, however, the bizarre and the grimly comical combined in the story of Taiwanese travel agency ezTravel, whose president had just “discovered” that his company had been taken over by Chinese online travel agency Ctrip.com after the latter acquired a majority of shares through a coalition of investors after years of gradual acquisition.
“While we were aware that Ctrip had been buying our shares in bulk, we did not know the magnitude of Ctrip’s actual holdings until Wednesday,” ezTravel president Jack Yu (游金章) told the Central News Agency on Thursday.
It beggars belief that a company president would not be aware of the component holdings of his company, let alone be taken by surprise by a foreign takeover. Of genuine concern — and worthy of investigation — is the possibility that Yu and his aides deliberately deprived their shareholders of the details of the “actual holdings” — particularly individuals and groups masking their affiliation to Ctrip.com.
This takeover offers a sobering precedent in the ongoing tango between Chinese and Taiwanese investors and the dangers that result from a lack of transparency and accountability on the Taiwanese bourse.
It is a charade that offers real ammunition to the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) and other voices that are demanding the administration of President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) exercise greater caution in formulating cross-strait economic policy.
But before caution, there must be a semblance of competence.
Yesterday, Premier Liu Chao-shiuan (劉兆玄) gave an example of just how incompetent Ma’s economic dream team can be. Speaking to Dow Jones Newswires on Thursday, Liu said that the government would consider including the Chinese currency in Taiwan’s foreign exchange (forex) reserves.
The main problem was not that Liu appeared ignorant of the convertibility limitations of the yuan (though that is problem enough), nor that subsequent merging of economic and political risk factors might make this a process fraught with uncertainty.
The main problem, instead, was that Liu spoke on the matter without due care or teamwork, disorientating his staff and sending commentators into a flurry of speculation on whether he was testing the waters or simply proving that chemistry professors-turned-premiers need better economics briefings.
It was especially embarrassing for the government to see the central bank forced to issue a rejoinder on the matter, playing down any hint that the bank was involved in negotiations to include the yuan in its forex reserve line-up.
The impression Liu leaves is one of a government in which ideology and political banalities trump sound, carefully considered policy initiatives that meet the needs of the real world.
Liu has been premier long enough: He ought to know when to sidestep questions from journalists looking to nail the next big policy development. But if he wishes to open up a new topic for consideration in the politics of practical rapprochement, he is going to have to spend a lot more time crafting strategy and learning how to deliver it.
The alternative is leaving Taiwanese vulnerable to people and companies, local and foreign, who know how to exploit incompetent policy and policymakers.
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
RSS