Hon Hai Group chairman Terry Gou (郭台銘) is no doubt one of the most successful businessmen in the world.
It would, however, be an overstatement to say that Gou built his entire fortune by exploiting cheap Chinese labor, as some academics have accused him of doing. In a bout of name-calling, these academics have called him “the disgrace of Taiwan” after a string of suicides at his Shenzhen factory.
It is in the nature of business to seek to maximize profits by minimizing overheads, including the cost of labor and land, and some internationally recognized Taiwanese businesses have relocated their assembly lines from China to Indonesia to take advantage of the even cheaper labor there, where wages are so low that factory owners are too embarrassed to disclose them.
However, this isn’t to say that Gou and his Hon Hai Group, although a big contributor to the local economy, are entitled to any preferential treatment in Taiwan.
In the case of the Dapu (大埔) farmland controversy, the Miaoli County Government has obviously sided with Innolux Display Corp — which Hon Hai has invested in — and seized five hectares of farmland in Jhunan Township (竹南) without the consent of the 24 families who own the land.
The county government’s move is aimed at speeding up the planned expansion of the Hsinchu Science Park, where Innolux Display originally planned to build its high-end, newer-generation fabs with an initial investment of NT$120 billion (US$3.73 billion).
The investment and expansion plan sound like good news for both the county’s and the nation’s economic development and employment.
However, it now seems that the county government’s drive to expropriate that land may have been in vain, as Hon Hai threatened on Wednesday to re-evaluate its investment in Taiwan.
All the blame should be on the Miaoli County Government, since Taiwan, unlike China, remains a country where the property rights of its nationals are enshrined in, and protected by, the Constitution.
Accordingly, the Control Yuan should involve itself in the controversy and launch investigations into alleged negligence by county government officials and its Commissioner Liu Cheng-hung (劉政鴻), who appears to have tried to skirt his responsibilities with excuses, including a plea that he “really didn’t know there were rice paddies there.”
That is an absurd excuse for a county magistrate, a person who is supposed to know the county he is in charge of better than anyone else.
As for Hon Hai, any threat to leave Taiwan because of the land controversy will not make its corporate image more liberal and democratic. Leaving would only inflict new wounds on the farmers, who have already suffered great losses and may now have to unfairly bear the brunt of the county government’s inability to attract business.
Hon Hai should remain neutral in the land controversy and keep its faith in Taiwan, a nation where wrongs can be righted, and which must ensure that businesses do not act immorally or exploit the less powerful.
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
The military is conducting its annual Han Kuang exercises in phases. The minister of national defense recently said that this year’s scenarios would simulate defending the nation against possible actions the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) might take in an invasion of Taiwan, making the threat of a speculated Chinese invasion in 2027 a heated agenda item again. That year, also referred to as the “Davidson window,” is named after then-US Indo-Pacific Command Admiral Philip Davidson, who in 2021 warned that Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) had instructed the PLA to be ready to invade Taiwan by 2027. Xi in 2017
RSS