After hearing the arguments for and against, the grounds for our country's leading chipmaker, Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), to invest in wafer plants in China have waned with each passing day.
Is the investment in China for the sake of that country's cheap labor? No! In the wafer-fabrication process, the cost of labor is only a small part of the total cost and should not be a reason for moving westwards to China.
Is the investment for the sake of China's enormous market? It should not be so. Now a WTO member, China must comply with the principle of national treatment. That is to say, the chips manufactured in various countries can be sold in China's market and will not receive unfair treatment.
Basically, the purpose is to secure and expand the international market (including China's domestic market) by relying entirely upon the promotion of technology and quality. The need for setting up plants in China has apparently diminished; or else disappeared all together.
Is it then for the sake of getting closer to China's market? This is seems true but is actually false. If such a reason were tenable, Taiwan and Japan should stop thinking about selling their products in European and American markets. Europe and the US, for the same reason, should not expect their chips to dominate East Asian markets because of the distance problem.
It is thus clear that the arguments for investing in China can be easily refuted.
At their wits' end, those who advocate investment in China have recently come up with another ingenious argument. They say that allowing TSMC to invest in China is like "freeing a tiger from the cage in order to bite the rivals to death." In other words, allowing TSMC to invest in China is a way to tackle and even eliminate the Shanghai-based Semiconductor Manufacturing International Corporation (SMIC) and Grace Semiconductor Manufacturing Corp (GSMC). Such argument seems to be a brilliant strategy, but people with any brains will most likely ask, "Is it possible?"
As we all know, Beijing is trying very hard to foster the growth of the semiconductor industry in order to replace Taiwan and increase financial resources. The motive is to promote the military's technological innovation so as to attack Taiwan and create a united China. Will Beijing be foolish enough to allow Taiwanese manufacturers to bite its treasured industry to death?
Anyone with common sense should understand that the assets (plants, technologies, and personnel) transferred to an enemy country can be held hostage at any time. Beijing has greeted Taiwanese businesspeople with smiles and even given them incentives and convenience, because Taiwanese businesspeople are favorable to China's development and can serve China's purposes. Once there is any sign of adversity, China -- known for its authoritarian character -- ?will definitely doom the hostages and assets to death. Who will dare to utter a sound or a word then?
Therefore, "freeing a tiger from the cage" is synonymous with "transferring the cage to China." It puts the tiger in pawn. Whether they are tigers or rabbits, Taiwanese businesspeople must be obedient to China in order to save their skins and make profits.
Of course, the tiger in "the cage transferred to China" should not dream of biting the rivals to death. On the contrary, the imaginable outcome will be that the tiger, following the bad example of others, will share the market with the rivals. The tiger will recruit relevant suppliers to transfer to China and create a conglomerate of technology industries in China.
Such reality cannot be disputed. When the TSMC proposal received initial approval, the local integrated circuit designers made their voice heard by saying that "going forward to China is imperative under the circumstances." With a predestined tone, they also used words such as "necessary" and "must be carried out" to urge the government to let go. It is apparent the hollowing out of that Taiwan's industry is already taking place.
If the authorities aim to cope with those Taiwanese businesspeople (now at SMIC and GSMC) who secretly fled to China, allowing more of them to enter the enemy's fortress and become pawns is not a solution.
The a successful strategy would be to besiege the enemy with measures and actions taken outside China. Taiwan businesses must be free of restraints in order to meet Chinese competitors head-on. That is to say, we should spend our NT$310 billion on research and study in Taiwan, raising our technological standards and the quality of our products in order to win product orders and keep jobs here.
Huang Tien-lin is a national policy adviser to President Chen Shui-bian.
Translated by Grace Shaw
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS