China
What Next for Taiwan’s Opposition?
Agence France-Presse/Getty Images Tsai Ing-wen, the presidential candidate of Taiwan’s opposition Democratic Progressive Party, waves to supporters at her campaign headquarters in New Taipei City on January 14, 2012 after losing her bid to challenge incumbent Ma Ying-jeou. More In Taiwan Top China Stories from WSJ: Growth Slows, Taiwan Letdown Taiwan Looks Ahead After President Is Re-Elected Top China Stories from WSJ: Taiwan Votes, Apple’s China Challenge Netizens React: The Taiwan Vote Photos: Taiwan Votes for President Taiwan’s opposition Democratic Progressive Party leader Tsai Ing-wen made history by being the island’s first female presidential candidate, but her wider-than-expected defeat last Saturday to incumbent Ma Ying-jeou of the Kuomintang has raised questions about the future of her moderate approach. Ms. Tsai finished with 45.6% of the vote to Mr. Ma’s 51.6%, a loss that prompted her to say she would resign as DPP leader. A professor before she became a politician, Ms. Tsai is often credited with lifting the pro-independence DPP out of the mire after former president Chen Shui-bian’s rocky and scandal-ridden tenure at the helm. “She brings gentleness and sensibility to the party,” Joseph Wu, a former Taiwan envoy to the U.S. and a top advisor to the DPP, said shortly after the election. “She is also very capable in facilitating talks between the factions in the party and consolidating opinions.” That conciliatory leadership style and approachable personality were what drove her surging popularity both within and outside the party, he added. But Ms. Tsai also won support by dialing back the DPP’s pro-independence rhetoric, analysts said. An example of that more moderate China policy was her appeal for further dialogues with Beijing and her promise to accept all 16 cross-strait trade agreements signed under Mr. Ma’s leadership. Although she adamantly rejected the 1992 Consensus—a tacit understanding between the KMT and the Chinese Communist Party that Taiwan and China are one country but each is free to define the term as they see fit—her proposal of a new “ Taiwan Consensus ” did not completely shut out the option of an eventual unification, a sharp detour from the policy pursued by Mr. Chen. Despite that softening, Ms. Tsai’s candidacy still did not appear sit well with leaders in Beijing, who warned that any deviation from the 1992 Consensus would compromise the growing harmony on the Taiwan Strait. During the campaign, the “Taiwan Consensus” became one favorite points of attack for Mr. Ma and the KMT, who pointed to it as evidence that Ms. Tsai was naïve to the realities of cross-strait relations. Yet some analysts said they expected Beijing might still be open to dialogue with a Tsai administration — a notion considered far-fetched during the previous DPP regime. What effect Ms. Tsai’s loss will have on the party’s platform remains to be seen. The fact that she lost by six percentage points – late polls had her losing by between 3% and 5% — is already being interpreted by some as an indictment of her decision to emphasize social equality and her deviation from the party’s anti-China orthodoxy. “Obviously, a campaign focused on social justice was not enough to excite the traditional DPP supporters,” said Wu, adding in the future, the party should incorporate more of the possible threats to Taiwan’s sovereignty under the KMT such as China’s continual interference in Taiwan’s quest for more international participation. Shelley Rigger, a professor of political science at Davidson College expressed similar views, saying that while Ms. Tsai should be lauded for restoring burnishing the DPP’s image, she might have overlooked a key constituency – the “green” pro-independence die-hards—who might constrain the DPP from moving to the center. “[Tsai] did as well as anyone could have done at pacifying the deep greens, by refusing to accept the ’92 consensus, and at the same time minimizing the role of those ideological issues in the elections, by trying not to talk about that anymore than she had to. The result was still hitting that 45% ceiling,” she said. Ms. Tsai’s tenure as party leader will officially terminate on March 1, the DPP said, and it’s unclear what she plans to do next. She has said she plans to maintain an office and rumors suggest she may take the reins at a think tank she helped set up. Analysts say Beijing is concerned less about Ms. Tsia’s future and more about who her successor might be and whether that person will continue the moderate stance she has championed. “Beijing takes a great interest in the DPP’s leadership because there is always a chance that the DPP might return to power. But I think no matter who becomes the next DPP chairman, the party will retain the more moderate stance,” said Shih Cheng-feng, a dean at National Dong Hwa University. Party heavyweights Frank Hsieh and Su Tseng-chang are widely speculated to be vying for the seat, though some political commentators on the island say the party should allow up-and-coming stars, such as some of the current DPP county magistrates, to have a shot. Whether or not Ms. Tsai tries her luck again in 2016, her contribution to the DPP seems likely to be remembered as revolutionary, in a moderate way. – Jenny W. Hsu
- Agence France-Presse/Getty Images
- Tsai Ing-wen, the presidential candidate of Taiwan’s opposition Democratic Progressive Party, waves to supporters at her campaign headquarters in New Taipei City on January 14, 2012 after losing her bid to challenge incumbent Ma Ying-jeou.
Taiwan’s opposition Democratic Progressive Party leader Tsai Ing-wen made history by being the island’s first female presidential candidate, but her wider-than-expected defeat last Saturday to incumbent Ma Ying-jeou of the Kuomintang has raised questions about the future of her moderate approach.
Ms. Tsai finished with 45.6% of the vote to Mr. Ma’s 51.6%, a loss that prompted her to say she would resign as DPP leader.
A professor before she became a politician, Ms. Tsai is often credited with lifting the pro-independence DPP out of the mire after former president Chen Shui-bian’s rocky and scandal-ridden tenure at the helm.
“She brings gentleness and sensibility to the party,” Joseph Wu, a former Taiwan envoy to the U.S. and a top advisor to the DPP, said shortly after the election. “She is also very capable in facilitating talks between the factions in the party and consolidating opinions.”
That conciliatory leadership style and approachable personality were what drove her surging popularity both within and outside the party, he added.
But Ms. Tsai also won support by dialing back the DPP’s pro-independence rhetoric, analysts said. An example of that more moderate China policy was her appeal for further dialogues with Beijing and her promise to accept all 16 cross-strait trade agreements signed under Mr. Ma’s leadership.
Although she adamantly rejected the 1992 Consensus—a tacit understanding between the KMT and the Chinese Communist Party that Taiwan and China are one country but each is free to define the term as they see fit—her proposal of a new “Taiwan Consensus” did not completely shut out the option of an eventual unification, a sharp detour from the policy pursued by Mr. Chen.
Despite that softening, Ms. Tsai’s candidacy still did not appear sit well with leaders in Beijing, who warned that any deviation from the 1992 Consensus would compromise the growing harmony on the Taiwan Strait. During the campaign, the “Taiwan Consensus” became one favorite points of attack for Mr. Ma and the KMT, who pointed to it as evidence that Ms. Tsai was naïve to the realities of cross-strait relations.
Yet some analysts said they expected Beijing might still be open to dialogue with a Tsai administration — a notion considered far-fetched during the previous DPP regime.
What effect Ms. Tsai’s loss will have on the party’s platform remains to be seen. The fact that she lost by six percentage points – late polls had her losing by between 3% and 5% — is already being interpreted by some as an indictment of her decision to emphasize social equality and her deviation from the party’s anti-China orthodoxy.
“Obviously, a campaign focused on social justice was not enough to excite the traditional DPP supporters,” said Wu, adding in the future, the party should incorporate more of the possible threats to Taiwan’s sovereignty under the KMT such as China’s continual interference in Taiwan’s quest for more international participation.
Shelley Rigger, a professor of political science at Davidson College expressed similar views, saying that while Ms. Tsai should be lauded for restoring burnishing the DPP’s image, she might have overlooked a key constituency – the “green” pro-independence die-hards—who might constrain the DPP from moving to the center.
“[Tsai] did as well as anyone could have done at pacifying the deep greens, by refusing to accept the ’92 consensus, and at the same time minimizing the role of those ideological issues in the elections, by trying not to talk about that anymore than she had to. The result was still hitting that 45% ceiling,” she said.
Ms. Tsai’s tenure as party leader will officially terminate on March 1, the DPP said, and it’s unclear what she plans to do next. She has said she plans to maintain an office and rumors suggest she may take the reins at a think tank she helped set up.
Analysts say Beijing is concerned less about Ms. Tsia’s future and more about who her successor might be and whether that person will continue the moderate stance she has championed.
“Beijing takes a great interest in the DPP’s leadership because there is always a chance that the DPP might return to power. But I think no matter who becomes the next DPP chairman, the party will retain the more moderate stance,” said Shih Cheng-feng, a dean at National Dong Hwa University.
Party heavyweights Frank Hsieh and Su Tseng-chang are widely speculated to be vying for the seat, though some political commentators on the island say the party should allow up-and-coming stars, such as some of the current DPP county magistrates, to have a shot.
Whether or not Ms. Tsai tries her luck again in 2016, her contribution to the DPP seems likely to be remembered as revolutionary, in a moderate way.
– Jenny W. Hsu
Cumulative appreciation of the renminbi against the US dollar since the end of the dollar peg was more than 20% by late 2008, but the exchange rate has remained virtually pegged since the onset of the global financial crisis.
The Chinese government faces numerous economic development challenges, including:
(a) reducing its high domestic savings rate and correspondingly low domestic demand through increased corporate transfers and a strengthened social safety net;
(b) sustaining adequate job growth for tens of millions of migrants and new entrants to the work force; (c) reducing corruption and other economic crimes; and
(d) containing environmental damage and social strife related to the economy’s rapid transformation.
China is also the second largest trading nation in the world and the largest exporter and second largest importer of goods.
The PRC government’s decision to permit China to be used by multinational corporations as an export platform has made the country a major competitor to other Asian export-led economies, such as South Korea, Singapore, and Malaysia.
Available energy is insufficient to run at fully installed industrial capacity, and the transport system is inadequate to move sufficient quantities of such critical items as coal.
The country is one of the world’s largest producers of a number of industrial and mineral products, including cotton cloth, tungsten, and antimony, and is an important producer of cotton yarn, coal, crude oil, and a number of other products.
The technological level and quality standards of its industry as a whole are still fairly low, notwithstanding a marked change since 2000, spurred in part by foreign investment.
The market-oriented reforms China has implemented over the past two decades have unleashed individual initiative and entrepreneurship, whilst retaining state domination of the economy.
The ministry made the announcements during a press conference held in Xiamen on the upcoming United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) World Investment Forum and the 14th China International Fair for Investment and Trade.
In this period the average annual growth rate stood at more than 50 percent.
It also aims to sell more than 15 million of the most fuel-efficient vehicles in the world each year by then.
China’s challenge in the early 21st century will be to balance its highly centralized political system with an increasingly decentralized economic system.
Agriculture is by far the leading occupation, involving over 50% of the population, although extensive rough, high terrain and large arid areas – especially in the west and north – limit cultivation to only about 10% of the land surface.
In terms of cash crops, China ranks first in cotton and tobacco and is an important producer of oilseeds, silk, tea, ramie, jute, hemp, sugarcane, and sugar beets.
Hogs and poultry are widely raised in China, furnishing important export staples, such as hog bristles and egg products.
China is one of the world’s major mineral-producing countries.
China’s leading export minerals are tungsten, antimony, tin, magnesium, molybdenum, mercury, manganese, barite, and salt.
The largest completed project, Gezhouba Dam, on the Chang (Yangtze) River, opened in 1981; the Three Gorges Dam, the world’s largest engineering project, on the lower Chang, is scheduled for completion in 2009.
Beginning in the late 1970s, changes in economic policy, including decentralization of control and the creation of special economic zones to attract foreign investment, led to considerable industrial growth, especially in light industries that produce consumer goods.
There are railroads to North Korea, Russia, Mongolia, and Vietnam, and road connections to Pakistan, India, Nepal, and Myanmar.
Business
China Limits Apple Operations as BYD Manufacturing Moves to India and Southeast Asia Amid Trade Frictions | International Business News – The Times of India
China is restricting the export of high-tech manufacturing equipment and personnel to India and Southeast Asia, aiming to maintain domestic production amid potential US tariffs, impacting companies like Foxconn and BYD.
China Curbs on High-Tech Manufacturing
China is intensifying restrictions on the movement of employees and specialized equipment essential for high-tech manufacturing in India and Southeast Asia. This measure aims to prevent companies from relocating production due to potential tariffs under the incoming US administration. Beijing has urged local governments to restrict technology transfers and export of manufacturing tools as part of this strategy.
Impact on Foxconn and Apple’s Strategy
Foxconn, Apple’s primary assembly partner, is facing challenges in sending staff and receiving equipment in India, which could impact production. Despite these hurdles, current manufacturing operations remain unaffected. The Chinese government insists it treats all nations equally while reinforcing its domestic production to mitigate job losses and retain foreign investments.
Broader Implications for India
Additionally, these restrictions affect electric vehicle and solar panel manufacturers in India, notably BYD and Waaree Energies. Although the measures are not explicitly targeting India, they complicate the business landscape. As foreign companies seek alternatives to China, these developments are likely to reshape manufacturing strategies amidst ongoing geopolitical tensions.
China
China’s GDP Grows 5% in 2024: Key Insights and Main Factors
In 2024, China’s GDP grew by 5.0%, meeting its annual target. The fourth quarter saw a 5.4% increase, driven by exports and stimulus measures. The secondary industry grew 5.3%, while the tertiary increased by 5.0%, totaling RMB 134.91 trillion.
China’s GDP grew by 5.0 percent in in 2024, meeting the government’s annual economic target set at the beginning of the year. Fourth-quarter GDP exceeded expectations, rising by 5.4 percent, driven by exports and a flurry of stimulus measures. This article provides a brief overview of the key statistics and the main drivers behind this growth.
According to official data released by the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) on January 17, 2025, China’s GDP reached RMB 134.91 trillion (US$18.80 trillion) in 2024, reflecting a 5.0 percent year-on-year growth at constant prices. During the 2024 Two Sessions, the government set the 2024 GDP growth target of “around 5 percent”.
By sector, the secondary industry expanded by 5.3 percent year-on-year to RMB 49.21 trillion (US$6.85 trillion), the fastest among the three sectors, while the tertiary industry grew by 5.0 percent, reaching RMB 76.56 trillion (US$10.63 trillion) and the primary industry contributed RMB 9.14 trillion (US$1.31 trillion), growing 3.5 percent.
A more detailed analysis of China’s economic performance in 2024 will be provided later.
(1USD = 7.1785 RMB)
| This article was first published by China Briefing , which is produced by Dezan Shira & Associates. The firm assists foreign investors throughout Asia from offices across the world, including in in China, Hong Kong, Vietnam, Singapore, and India . Readers may write to info@dezshira.com for more support. |
Read the rest of the original article.
China
Can science be both open and secure? Nations grapple with tightening research security as China’s dominance grows
The U.S.-China science agreement renewal narrows collaboration scopes amid security concerns, highlighting tensions. Nations fear espionage, hindering vital international partnerships essential for scientific progress. Openness risks declining.
Amid heightened tensions between the United States and China, the two countries signed a bilateral science and technology agreement on Dec. 13, 2024. The event was billed as a “renewal” of a 45-year-old pact to encourage cooperation, but that may be misleading.
The revised agreement drastically narrows the scope of the original agreement, limits the topics allowed to be jointly studied, closes opportunities for collaboration and inserts a new dispute resolution mechanism.
This shift is in line with growing global concern about research security. Governments are worried about international rivals gaining military or trade advantages or security secrets via cross-border scientific collaborations.
The European Union, Canada, Japan and the United States unveiled sweeping new measures within months of each other to protect sensitive research from foreign interference. But there’s a catch: Too much security could strangle the international collaboration that drives scientific progress.
As a policy analyst and public affairs professor, I research international collaboration in science and technology and its implications for public and foreign policy. I have tracked the increasingly close relationship in science and technology between the U.S. and China. The relationship evolved from one of knowledge transfer to genuine collaboration and competition.
Now, as security provisions change this formerly open relationship, a crucial question emerges: Can nations tighten research security without undermining the very openness that makes science work?
Chinese Premier Deng Xiaoping and American President Jimmy Carter sign the original agreement on cooperation in science and technology in 1979.
Dirck Halstead/Hulton Archive via Getty Images
China’s ascent changes the global landscape
China’s rise in scientific publishing marks a dramatic shift in global research. In 1980, Chinese authors produced less than 2% of research articles included in the Web of Science, a curated database of scholarly output. By my count, they claimed 25% of Web of Science articles by 2023, overtaking the United States and ending its 75-year reign at the top, which had begun in 1948 when it surpassed the United Kingdom.
In 1980, China had no patented inventions. By 2022, Chinese companies led in U.S. patents issued to foreign companies, receiving 40,000 patents compared with fewer than 2,000 for U.K. companies. In the many advanced fields of science and technology, China is at the world frontier, if not in the lead.
Since 2013, China has been the top collaborator in science with the United States. Thousands of Chinese students and scholars have conducted joint research with U.S. counterparts.
Most American policymakers who championed the signing of the 1979 bilateral agreement thought science would liberalize China. Instead, China has used technology to shore up autocratic controls and to build a strong military with an eye toward regional power and global influence.
Leadership in science and technology wins wars and builds successful economies. China’s growing strength, backed by a state-controlled government, is shifting global power. Unlike open societies where research is public and shared, China often keeps its researchers’ work secret while also taking Western technology through hacking, forced technology transfers and industrial espionage. These practices are why many governments are now implementing strict security measures.
Nations respond
The FBI claims China has stolen sensitive technologies and research data to build up its defense capabilities. The China Initiative under the Trump administration sought to root out thieves and spies. The Biden administration did not let up the pressure. The 2022 Chips and Science Act requires the National Science Foundation to establish SECURE – a center to aid universities and small businesses in helping the research community make security-informed decisions. I am working with SECURE to evaluate the effectiveness of its mission.
Other advanced nations are on alert, too. The European Union is advising member states to boost security measures. Japan joined the United States in unveiling sweeping new measures to protect sensitive research from foreign interference and exploitation. European nations increasingly talk about technological sovereignty as a way to protect against exploitation by China. Similarly, Asian nations are wary of China’s intentions when it seeks to cooperate.
Australia has been especially vocal about the threat posed by China’s rise, but others, too, have issued warnings. The Netherlands issued a policy for secure international collaboration. Sweden raised the alarm after a study showed how spies had exploited its universities.
Canada has created the Research Security Centre for public safety and, like the U.S., has established regionally dispersed advisers to provide direct support to universities and researchers. Canada now requires mandatory risk assessment for research partnerships involving sensitive technologies. Similar approaches are underway in Australia and the U.K.
Germany’s 2023 provisions establish compliance units and ethics committees to oversee security-relevant research. They are tasked with advising researchers, mediating disputes and evaluating the ethical and security implications of research projects. The committees emphasize implementing safeguards, controlling access to sensitive data and assessing potential misuse.
Japan’s 2021 policy requires researchers to disclose and regularly update information regarding their affiliations, funding sources – both domestic and international – and potential conflicts of interest. A cross-ministerial R&D management system is unrolling seminars and briefings to educate researchers and institutions on emerging risks and best practices for maintaining research security.
The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development keeps a running database with more than 206 research security policy statements issued since 2022.
Emmanuelle Charpentier, left, from France, and Jennifer Doudna, from the U.S., shared the Nobel Prize in chemistry in 2020 for their joint research.
Miguel RiopaI/AFP via Getty Images
Openness waning
Emphasis on security can strangle the international collaboration that drives scientific progress. As much as 25% of all U.S. scientific articles result from international collaboration. Evidence shows that international engagement and openness produce higher-impact research. The most elite scientists work across national borders.
Even more critically, science depends on the free flow of ideas and talent across borders. After the Cold War, scientific advancement accelerated as borders opened. While national research output remained flat in recent years, international collaborations showed significant growth, revealing science’s increasingly global nature.
The challenge for research institutions will be implementing these new requirements without creating a climate of suspicion or isolation. Retrenchment to national borders could slow progress. Some degree of risk is inherent in scientific openness, but we may be coming to the end of a global, collaborative era in science.
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
- China Limits Apple Operations as BYD Manufacturing Moves to India and Southeast Asia Amid Trade Frictions | International Business News – The Times of India
- China’s GDP Grows 5% in 2024: Key Insights and Main Factors
- Can science be both open and secure? Nations grapple with tightening research security as China’s dominance grows
- China Lures Indonesia to Ease Its Position on the South China Sea
- EFIS Maroc and China Eastern Airlines Set to Launch Service Between Morocco and China
- China Considers Selling TikTok US Operations to Musk as a Viable Option – Bloomberg
