The European Commission and associated national enforcement agencies conducted unannounced inspections of the Polish and Dutch subsidiaries of Chinese security scanner manufacturer Nuctech Co (同方威視) on Tuesday last week. The raids were carried out under the EU’s Foreign Subsidies Rule (FSR).
Former Chinese president Hu Jintao’s (胡錦濤) son, Hu Haifeng (胡海峰), was the former chairman of Nuctech, which is regarded as a China-controlled company and was, for a time, listed on the US Bureau of Industry and Security’s Entity List.
Although several countries have raised doubts and issued warnings regarding Nuctech’s security inspection equipment, which includes X-ray machines for baggage and cargo passing through customs, the company has won procurement contracts in several European countries that add up to more than 110 million euros (US$118 million).
For example, the southern Polish city of Rzeszow, which is the main hub for Western arms supplies to Ukraine, last month signed a contract for Nuctech X-ray equipment costing 3.5 million euros. This raises the possibility that China could use the equipment to provide intelligence to Russia. In fact, the Chinese government might well have used such devices’ connections with EU customs declaration systems to obtain substantial data about goods entering and leaving the EU.
Although Europe has long been on the alert about the security issues of Chinese electronic products, when confronted with security concerns regarding 5G devices, EU countries did not have a consistent way of dealing with the issue. Less than half of EU member states have followed the example of the US and Canada by banning Huawei (華為) products. This reveals a difficulty in implementing measures regarding cybersecurity. However, the EU’s decision to base its recent raids on the FSR indicates that it has, within the framework of existing laws, found a tool that kills two birds with one stone: Addressing cybersecurity worries about China while upholding fair market competition and safeguarding the interests of EU businesses.
The huge subsidies that Chinese businesses receive from the government enable them to drastically cut production costs and dump cheap products all over the world, distorting markets and breaching the principle of fairness.
China’s sluggish economy and wilting domestic market have led to excess productive capacity, which is causing worry in Europe and North America. In the past few years, the EU has conducted anti-dumping investigations into various Chinese goods, including electric vehicles, medical equipment, lithium batteries, solar power equipment, components and raw materials.
French lawmaker Antoine Vermorel-Marques has proposed a bill to rein in the “fast fashion” style of business practiced by China-based companies such as Shein and Temu, which is a subsidiary of Pinduoduo (拼多多). The signs are that a trade war between Europe and China could break out at any time.
Taiwan’s market has also been flooded with cheap Chinese goods. Notably, e-commerce merchants source many of their products from China, which is sure to have a negative impact on Taiwanese industry. There are also potential safety hazards, including concerns about national security, cybersecurity and food safety.
Taiwan’s government would be well advised to follow the example of European and North American countries by levying additional tariffs on Chinese goods. This would increase tax revenue, safeguard fair market competition and guard against any malicious intentions that China might have.
Hong Tsun-ming is a specialist in the Taiwan Statebuilding Party’s international section.
Translated by Julian Clegg
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
RSS