The government on Wednesday declared Hong Kong-based Phoenix Television a Chinese-funded company after Democratic Progressive Party Legislator Liu Shyh-fang (劉世芳) first raised the issue on Monday.
Liu said that due to investment by Chinese State Council-funded Bauhinia Culture Holdings and state-owned China Mobile, the local operations of the channel should be restricted.
Economic Democracy Union researcher Chiang Min-yen (江旻諺) on Wednesday echoed Liu, saying that regardless of Phoenix being a Chinese state-funded firm or a channel for the dissemination of Chinese Communist Party (CCP) propaganda, it should be subject to restrictions stipulated in the Measures Governing Investment Permits to the People of the Mainland Area (大陸地區人民來台投資許可辦法).
The Mainland Affairs Council on the same day announced that Phoenix would be required to exit the local market or change its funding structure, citing the act, followed immediately by Phoenix saying that it would lay off all its local employees next month.
The issue of Chinese officials using shell companies in Hong Kong to channel funds into Taiwan, and engage in talent poaching or the dissemination of propaganda, has come to light numerous times in the past few years. Most recently, police on March 9 raided the local branches of eight Chinese electronic component suppliers suspected of talent poaching. The majority of them were registered in Hong Kong.
Officials have said on various occasions that China’s “one country, two systems” framework, which was meant to guarantee Hong Kong’s autonomy for 50 years after 1997, is dead after less than 30 years. Arguably it was already dead seven years ago, when Hong Kong booksellers were abducted by Chinese authorities and taken across the border, where they were held incommunicado and interrogated because they sold books that the CCP considered subversive.
If there was still any belief in Hong Kong’s autonomy, that should have been eradicated by the introduction of the territory’s National Security Law on June 30, 2020, which outlawed any form of protest against the Hong Kong government or the CCP. This has been demonstrated through the arrests of journalists, politicians and an organizer of a Tiananmen Square Massacre vigil, as well as the closure of pro-democracy media outlets such as the Apple Daily.
Given that the loss of Hong Kong’s autonomy is now well established, it makes no sense that there are different regulations governing Hong Kong-based businesses or investors and those from China. The government should mothball the Act Governing Relations With Hong Kong and Macau (香港澳門關係條例) to close a loophole that the CCP can take advantage of.
From a business perspective, it also makes increasingly little sense for Hong Kong to be regulated differently. A Taipei Times report on Feb. 7 cited a source as saying that the CCP is working to integrate Hong Kong with nearby Chinese cities through its “Greater Bay Area” project, stepping up investment in Hong Kong and poaching talent from the territory.
Al-Jazeera on Saturday last week reported an exodus of international talent from Hong Kong due to stringent COVID-19 prevention measures, as local authorities push strategies to eradicate the virus. Hong Kong’s government is becoming increasingly belligerent toward Taiwan, having last year denied visa renewals for Taiwanese officials stationed there, and is working with Beijing to block Taiwan’s participation in the WTO.
Rather than separately investigating each Hong Kong-registered company that operates in Taiwan, the government should eliminate separate regulations for the territory altogether. At the same time, it should eliminate all references to the “mainland” in Taiwanese legislation, including the Constitution, to protect itself and make headway in its goal of being a normalized nation.
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
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
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
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of