Since Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) took office in late 2012, the nature of China’s political and economic system, in which the one-party state monopolizes the country’s resources, has not only continued, but intensified. While the centralized power of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the state’s control over the private sector bolster the system, they stifle the vigor and economic vitality of China’s business community.
Over the past few decades, the CCP’s authoritarian control has helped the country to tide over many difficulties and achieve economic success, but at the core of its political model are state-owned enterprises that allow the party to manage strategic industries, such as energy, raw materials, transportation, finance and telecommunications. By keeping a tight grip on pricing, resource allocation, information and logistics, the CCP controls the country’s entire economy.
While the CCP has encouraged innovation in China’s private sector, sometimes even encouraging companies to develop and experiment without restriction, the party has retaken control and withdrawn the freedom to innovate in markets where companies have grown to a size that could threaten its authority. This has happened in the financial technology and e-commerce sectors — to Ant Group last year, and Alibaba Group Holding and Didi Global this year.
The CCP’s campaign to impose tougher controls on the country’s tech firms started in November last year when it suspended Ant’s US$35 billion dual listing on the Hong Kong and Shanghai exchanges.
In March, Chinese regulators fined companies — including Tencent Holdings, ByteDance and Baidu — for not seeking prior government approval for acquisitions and investments. In April, they hit Alibaba with a record 18.2 billion yuan (US$2.81 billion) fine over what they claimed was abuse due to the e-commerce firm’s dominant market position.
Early this month, just days after Didi’s US$4.4 billion initial public offering in New York, Chinese Internet regulators told the ride-hailing company that it was being investigated for posing cybersecurity risks.
Such moves have shown that Chinese authorities have not only cracked down on the country’s tech giants over anti-trust concerns — especially those that dominate their markets and control big data — but also continued its agenda of expanding the government’s influence over the private sector. The CCP’s aim is to maintain power in politics, the economy and society, while facilitating a rapid resurgence of the state sector at the cost of weakening the private sector.
Since the late 1970s, when China launched its “reform and opening up” policy, the export industry in Guangdong Province has grown, and, since the 1980s, small businesses have flourished in Zhejiang Province. More recently, the Internet and artificial intelligence sectors have rapidly expanded. However, a series of innovations in the private sector, not the CCP, was behind most of China’s new and vital industries.
Unfortunately, at a time when China needs to stimulate innovation to upgrade its economy, its model of authoritarian capitalism might be the greatest obstacle.
Centralized power is a double-edged sword. While Xi and his CCP elites might believe that a top-down, authoritarian model — rather than a bottom-up, liberalized approach — is needed to purge the party of corruption and conflicts of interest, which have the country’s economy and society increasingly spinning out of control, the model is likely to smother innovation and the vitality of the private sector.
While no one knows how long this situation might last, it is clear that change is unlikely to happen as long as Xi remains in power.
President William Lai (賴清德) attended a dinner held by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) when representatives from the group visited Taiwan in October. In a speech at the event, Lai highlighted similarities in the geopolitical challenges faced by Israel and Taiwan, saying that the two countries “stand on the front line against authoritarianism.” Lai noted how Taiwan had “immediately condemned” the Oct. 7, 2023, attack on Israel by Hamas and had provided humanitarian aid. Lai was heavily criticized from some quarters for standing with AIPAC and Israel. On Nov. 4, the Taipei Times published an opinion article (“Speak out on the
Eighty-seven percent of Taiwan’s energy supply this year came from burning fossil fuels, with more than 47 percent of that from gas-fired power generation. The figures attracted international attention since they were in October published in a Reuters report, which highlighted the fragility and structural challenges of Taiwan’s energy sector, accumulated through long-standing policy choices. The nation’s overreliance on natural gas is proving unstable and inadequate. The rising use of natural gas does not project an image of a Taiwan committed to a green energy transition; rather, it seems that Taiwan is attempting to patch up structural gaps in lieu of
News about expanding security cooperation between Israel and Taiwan, including the visits of Deputy Minister of National Defense Po Horng-huei (柏鴻輝) in September and Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs Francois Wu (吳志中) this month, as well as growing ties in areas such as missile defense and cybersecurity, should not be viewed as isolated events. The emphasis on missile defense, including Taiwan’s newly introduced T-Dome project, is simply the most visible sign of a deeper trend that has been taking shape quietly over the past two to three years. Taipei is seeking to expand security and defense cooperation with Israel, something officials
“Can you tell me where the time and motivation will come from to get students to improve their English proficiency in four years of university?” The teacher’s question — not accusatory, just slightly exasperated — was directed at the panelists at the end of a recent conference on English language learning at Taiwanese universities. Perhaps thankfully for the professors on stage, her question was too big for the five minutes remaining. However, it hung over the venue like an ominous cloud on an otherwise sunny-skies day of research into English as a medium of instruction and the government’s Bilingual Nation 2030
RSS