China tightened its restrictions on the Internet recently, blocking access to the search engines Google and Alta Vista. Fortu-nately, these Web sites did not cave in to China's pressure. Google even said it would provide a different, moving portal site every day to break China's blockade. This means tackling China's "battlefield warfare" with "guerilla warfare." Faced with a tough opponent, China has turned to other strategies, one of which is to redirect users to other Web sites. The other is to allow access to the search engines in question but block Web pages that contain sensitive content, such as Falun Gong or President Jiang Zemin (
In the latest development, e-mail users who applied for Yahoo and Hotmail addresses from within China are prevented from opening their mail boxes whenever they receive an e-mail containing "sensitive" words. Netizens are complaining about this on the Web but they can do nothing about it. This indicates that China has improved its Internet blockade technology. Sending information from overseas to people in China has now become much more difficult. An online magazine run by overseas Chinese pro-democracy activists (www.bignews.org) has also received letters from readers asking for a moving Web site.
Foreign media have reported that it was US high-tech companies that provided China with the blocking technologies. Major companies including Cisco Systems, Nokia, Microsoft and Israel's CheckPoint Software Technologies are all vying to get a slice of the China market and are therefore willing to provide security services to China's dictators. A report said Cisco has made a killing out of cooperation with the Ministry of State Security and the People's Liberation Army.
Seeing only short-term gain, some business people lose sight of the big picture and ignore the interests of their countries. This seems to be the case in all countries. With straight faces, they give all kinds of justifications for their behavior. But their gains are temporary.
If foreign companies really want to make money in China, they should take heed of China's democratization and economic liberalization. Only when they do so will foreign firms develop their business in a fair environment and in compliance with fair legal regulations. Only by so doing will they minimize their trading costs -- especially invisible costs, such as those incurred because of loopholes in the legal system, flip-flopping policies, the impact of personnel changes on the guanxi network and the impact of social instability on the general business environment.
Christian Murck, chairman of the American Chamber of Commerce in China, complained recently that China has not made good on many of the pledges it made to gain WTO entry, including lifting restrictions on meat imports and on foreign banks. Capitol Hill's US-China Commission held a public hearing in June on whether China would be able to implement its WTO entry pledges. Neither the government nor the private sector was optimistic about the prospects.
In the face of China's best efforts to keep them down, China's resource-poor dissidents are trying their best to break the Internet blockade. For the sake of its own security, Taiwan needs to maintain its guard and establish countermeasures against a possible Chinese high-tech war.
Taiwan is in the middle of an economic transformation and needs to raise the quality of its high-tech products by a large margin. This will not only be good for economic development, but will also strengthen the nation's electronic warfare capabilities. If Taiwan can develop new technologies to breach China's information blockade, that will also be a contribution to China's democratization.
Paul Lin is a political commentator based in New York.
Translated by Francis Huang
US President Donald Trump has gotten off to a head-spinning start in his foreign policy. He has pressured Denmark to cede Greenland to the United States, threatened to take over the Panama Canal, urged Canada to become the 51st US state, unilaterally renamed the Gulf of Mexico to “the Gulf of America” and announced plans for the United States to annex and administer Gaza. He has imposed and then suspended 25 percent tariffs on Canada and Mexico for their roles in the flow of fentanyl into the United States, while at the same time increasing tariffs on China by 10
As an American living in Taiwan, I have to confess how impressed I have been over the years by the Chinese Communist Party’s wholehearted embrace of high-speed rail and electric vehicles, and this at a time when my own democratic country has chosen a leader openly committed to doing everything in his power to put obstacles in the way of sustainable energy across the board — and democracy to boot. It really does make me wonder: “Are those of us right who hold that democracy is the right way to go?” Has Taiwan made the wrong choice? Many in China obviously
US President Donald Trump last week announced plans to impose reciprocal tariffs on eight countries. As Taiwan, a key hub for semiconductor manufacturing, is among them, the policy would significantly affect the country. In response, Minister of Economic Affairs J.W. Kuo (郭智輝) dispatched two officials to the US for negotiations, and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co’s (TSMC) board of directors convened its first-ever meeting in the US. Those developments highlight how the US’ unstable trade policies are posing a growing threat to Taiwan. Can the US truly gain an advantage in chip manufacturing by reversing trade liberalization? Is it realistic to
Last week, 24 Republican representatives in the US Congress proposed a resolution calling for US President Donald Trump’s administration to abandon the US’ “one China” policy, calling it outdated, counterproductive and not reflective of reality, and to restore official diplomatic relations with Taiwan, enter bilateral free-trade agreement negotiations and support its entry into international organizations. That is an exciting and inspiring development. To help the US government and other nations further understand that Taiwan is not a part of China, that those “one China” policies are contrary to the fact that the two countries across the Taiwan Strait are independent and
RSS