The fines levied against Far Eastern Group in China continue, with China’s Taiwan Affairs Office saying that the total has reached NT$2 billion (US$71.85 million).
There are two officially sanctioned reasons coming out of Beijing to explain the fines. The first is that the group contravened environmental and fire safety laws. The second is that Taiwanese independence supporters operating in China are guilty of “biting the hand that feeds them.”
Clearly, this is no longer simply a question of how the company has been operating. Beijing is telling Taiwanese firms in China that it is no longer willing to accommodate political transgressions.
With such a presumptuous attack — untethered from a rules-based market — on Taiwanese companies investing in China, political parties in Taiwan should stand as one in the face of this affront from a foreign government.
Unfortunately, in even this most fundamental of tests, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) has been found wanting.
Chu’s “no comment” is more fitting for someone with no skin in the game. His “hope” that companies abide by local laws and regulations is blind to the objective truth of what has happened, and places expectations on Taiwanese companies operating in China far higher than those he places on the Chinese government itself.
His behavior is akin to hitting wayward children for the sake of appeasing unimpressed onlookers.
His stance betrays a lack of courage, political commitment, economic plan, trade policy and cross-strait strategy, not to mention a lack of an ethical command.
China has already said that the Far Eastern case is just an appetizer, so if the KMT cannot get a grip on its chairman, its central command might as well call it a day.
After all, China is now using information about political contributions that are perfectly legal and transparent in Taiwan to settle scores with businesses investing there.
There are few political candidates or parties in Taiwan that are not beneficiaries of political donations. Is the KMT really willing to countenance the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) attempt to exploit Taiwan’s democratic and open system, and lecture Taiwanese enterprises and donors over how they should behave?
The manner in which Chu has addressed this issue — which has already caused a public outcry and incited strong debate within the KMT itself — has brought to light information showing that Chu’s team is in close consultation with China to hold a KMT-CCP forum next month, and that Chu is pushing for a virtual dialogue with Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference Chairman Wang Yang (汪洋) on Dec. 12 or thenabouts.
That Chu is unable or unwilling to speak up for Taiwanese businesses in China to avoid scuppering his own agenda, exposing his own inability to respond to changes, does not bode well for his chances in the 2024 presidential election.
Next month will be busy for China regarding its plans for Taiwan. There is the planned forum, and on Wednesday next week is the annual Taipei-Shanghai forum, followed by the Cross-Strait CEO Summit on Saturday.
These three “united front” programs are part of a series of post-COVID-19-pandemic events China is planning to sow divisions in Taiwan, starting with attacking independence advocates and companies that support them.
Beijing’s intentions are clear.
The Taipei-Shanghai forum, the Cross-Strait CEO Summit and the KMT-CCP forum have become rituals for the CCP to find “old friends” and for Taiwanese to become “fellow travelers.”
Taiwanese will not forget which side of the fence people choose. When the CCP comes down on Taiwanese businesses operating in China using baseless excuses, those who stand up to it will be seen, and those who toady up to the regime will be obvious.
And all eyes are on Chu.
Tzou Jiing-wen is editor-in-chief of the Liberty Times (the Taipei Times’ sister paper).
Translated by Paul Cooper
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
The past few months have seen tremendous strides in India’s journey to develop a vibrant semiconductor and electronics ecosystem. The nation’s established prowess in information technology (IT) has earned it much-needed revenue and prestige across the globe. Now, through the convergence of engineering talent, supportive government policies, an expanding market and technologically adaptive entrepreneurship, India is striving to become part of global electronics and semiconductor supply chains. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Vision of “Make in India” and “Design in India” has been the guiding force behind the government’s incentive schemes that span skilling, design, fabrication, assembly, testing and packaging, and
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
As former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) wrapped up his visit to the People’s Republic of China, he received his share of attention. Certainly, the trip must be seen within the full context of Ma’s life, that is, his eight-year presidency, the Sunflower movement and his failed Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement, as well as his eight years as Taipei mayor with its posturing, accusations of money laundering, and ups and downs. Through all that, basic questions stand out: “What drives Ma? What is his end game?” Having observed and commented on Ma for decades, it is all ironically reminiscent of former US president Harry