Russia’s senseless invasion of Ukraine has forced the world to take sides, exposing the convictions of everyone from nation states to individuals. Democratic countries and their citizens have been enthusiastic in their support for Ukraine and unequivocal in espousing their liberal convictions, while others, such as China, have been hedging their bets or defending the Kremlin’s actions.
As foot soldiers in the economic war against Russia, companies are also expected to step up. Asustek Computer Inc has learned this the hard way, as pressure grows on the firm to sever its ties with Russia.
In a letter addressed to Asustek chairman Jonney Shih (施崇棠) that was posted to Twitter on Thursday last week, Ukrainian Vice Prime Minister and Minister of Digital Transformation Mykhailo Fedorov formally requested that the Taipei-based firm stop doing business in Russia until “the Russian aggression in Ukraine is fully stopped and fair order is restored.”
“Russians have no moral right to use your brilliant technology! It’s for peace, not for war!” he said in an accompanying Twitter message, one of dozens the digital minister has been making to pressure multinationals into intensifying existing sanctions.
Asustek yesterday said that logistics and banking issues have brought its Russian shipments to a standstill, and that it would donate NT$30 million (US$1.05 million) to Ukrainian assistance, adding that it “would pay close attention to any new developments,” stopping short of severing ties with the market.
Those in the business world are finding that refusing to declare a position is now understood as taking a stance, especially in a situation with stakes this high. Dodging the question has also become impossible, as the public can now deluge a company with social media criticism when it refuses to engage.
Pressure on Asustek to pull out of Russia has only increased since Fedorov’s initial Twitter message.
Asked about the issue at a legislative hearing yesterday, Minister of Economic Affairs Wang Mei-hua (王美花) said it was her understanding that Asustek would “consider an evacuation” from the Russian market. She cited concern about its reputation, but declined to comment further.
The pressure is unlikely to dissipate soon, especially with so many people ready to call out companies trying to have it both ways.
Especially as a Taiwanese company, Asustek has a responsibility to stand up for the democratic values that have made its success possible. Pulling out of the Russian market would result in a loss of less than 5 percent of its notebook sales, according to an estimate from a local investment consultant, while the move could have a significant effect on the Russian economy, given that 29 percent of Russian respondents to a Statista survey last year said that their household uses an Asus laptop.
Taiwanese and the government were quick to show their support for Ukraine. Sanctions announced late last month shortly after the invasion began earned Taiwan a spot on Russia’s “unfriendly list,” while Taiwanese as of Friday had donated NT$521.98 million to assist Ukrainian refugees.
It is time for companies still on the sidelines to enthusiastically join this united front and show the world that all of Taiwan’s society is committed to the values that set it apart from its bellicose neighbor, even if it would hurt their bottom lines. After all, if Taiwan is one day at the epicenter of conflict, hopefully the world would decide to help rather than pinch pennies.
As Vice President William Lai (賴清德) said last week, if Taiwan is a bystander in Ukraine’s war, why would other countries support Taiwan?
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (傅?萁) has caused havoc with his attempts to overturn the democratic and constitutional order in the legislature. If we look at this devolution from the context of a transition to democracy from authoritarianism in a culturally Chinese sense — that of zhonghua (中華) — then we are playing witness to a servile spirit from a millennia-old form of totalitarianism that is intent on damaging the nation’s hard-won democracy. This servile spirit is ingrained in Chinese culture. About a century ago, Chinese satirist and author Lu Xun (魯迅) saw through the servile nature of
In their New York Times bestseller How Democracies Die, Harvard political scientists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt said that democracies today “may die at the hands not of generals but of elected leaders. Many government efforts to subvert democracy are ‘legal,’ in the sense that they are approved by the legislature or accepted by the courts. They may even be portrayed as efforts to improve democracy — making the judiciary more efficient, combating corruption, or cleaning up the electoral process.” Moreover, the two authors observe that those who denounce such legal threats to democracy are often “dismissed as exaggerating or
Monday was the 37th anniversary of former president Chiang Ching-kuo’s (蔣經國) death. Chiang — a son of former president Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), who had implemented party-state rule and martial law in Taiwan — has a complicated legacy. Whether one looks at his time in power in a positive or negative light depends very much on who they are, and what their relationship with the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is. Although toward the end of his life Chiang Ching-kuo lifted martial law and steered Taiwan onto the path of democratization, these changes were forced upon him by internal and external pressures,
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus in the Legislative Yuan has made an internal decision to freeze NT$1.8 billion (US$54.7 million) of the indigenous submarine project’s NT$2 billion budget. This means that up to 90 percent of the budget cannot be utilized. It would only be accessible if the legislature agrees to lift the freeze sometime in the future. However, for Taiwan to construct its own submarines, it must rely on foreign support for several key pieces of equipment and technology. These foreign supporters would also be forced to endure significant pressure, infiltration and influence from Beijing. In other words,