Addressing the 2005 Youth National Affairs Conference (
Generally, only four universities in China are recognized as meeting top-flight international standards: Peking University and Tsinghua University in Beijing, and Fudan University and Jiao Tong University in Shanghai. US assessments rank Peking University, the most prestigious of the four, 170th on a list of major universities. Taiwan's top university, National Taiwan University, ranks around 100th. It is hardly likely that Taiwan's elite students would forgo attending the nation's top universities in favor of going to China, as one pro-unification newspaper has suggested.
There are three types of Taiwanese students studying in China. There are those who performed poorly in college entrance or graduate school entrance exams; those who intend to pursue advanced studies in Chinese medicine; and KMT, People First Party or independent politicians who want to obtain a higher degree while avoiding the more stringent standards they would face at home.
Moreover, entry into universities in China is generally organized by agencies that charge between NT$100,000 to NT$200,000 for admission. Students who are admitted in this way are not required to go through the examinations held by China's Ministry of Education, and therefore only obtain a "certificate of completion" rather than a degree recognized by the Chinese government at the end of their studies.
What is even more absurd is that a number of especially affluent lawmakers, seeking to avoid the fate of KMT Legislator Yu Yueh-hsia (游月霞) -- who remained so long in China that she failed to attend legislative sittings and subsequently lost her seat -- are bringing their "teachers" over from China. In this way, classes can be held at convenient times, between legislative sessions and seeing to constituents.
Others attend classes for a few days at the beginning and end of each term, then settle matters with their professors to guarantee that they pass the exams. There is no need to ask about the quality of graduates produced from this system.
Some education professionals in Taiwan have warned against recognizing Chinese degrees, as the nation's 100 or so universities already have trouble filling spots. If Chinese degrees were recognized, many of these schools might face closure because of a lack of students. The result would be more unemployed teachers. It would also deal a serious blow to education in Taiwan, not dissimilar to that caused by the hollowing out of the industrial base through the transfer of production to China.
If Ma has any concern for Taiwan, how can he countenance a "united front" strategy that attempts to drag Taiwan's education down to the same level as China's? The low standing of many Chinese institutes of higher education is a result of its poor education system. Taiwan has the right not to recognize qualifications of such institutes in order to protect its own institutions.
Chen's insistence that Chinese degrees not be recognized is perfectly appropriate. Ma should take a long, hard look at his own misdirected policy.
In the US’ National Security Strategy (NSS) report released last month, US President Donald Trump offered his interpretation of the Monroe Doctrine. The “Trump Corollary,” presented on page 15, is a distinctly aggressive rebranding of the more than 200-year-old foreign policy position. Beyond reasserting the sovereignty of the western hemisphere against foreign intervention, the document centers on energy and strategic assets, and attempts to redraw the map of the geopolitical landscape more broadly. It is clear that Trump no longer sees the western hemisphere as a peaceful backyard, but rather as the frontier of a new Cold War. In particular,
When it became clear that the world was entering a new era with a radical change in the US’ global stance in US President Donald Trump’s second term, many in Taiwan were concerned about what this meant for the nation’s defense against China. Instability and disruption are dangerous. Chaos introduces unknowns. There was a sense that the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) might have a point with its tendency not to trust the US. The world order is certainly changing, but concerns about the implications for Taiwan of this disruption left many blind to how the same forces might also weaken
As the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) races toward its 2027 modernization goals, most analysts fixate on ship counts, missile ranges and artificial intelligence. Those metrics matter — but they obscure a deeper vulnerability. The true future of the PLA, and by extension Taiwan’s security, might hinge less on hardware than on whether the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) can preserve ideological loyalty inside its own armed forces. Iran’s 1979 revolution demonstrated how even a technologically advanced military can collapse when the social environment surrounding it shifts. That lesson has renewed relevance as fresh unrest shakes Iran today — and it should
On today’s page, Masahiro Matsumura, a professor of international politics and national security at St Andrew’s University in Osaka, questions the viability and advisability of the government’s proposed “T-Dome” missile defense system. Matsumura writes that Taiwan’s military budget would be better allocated elsewhere, and cautions against the temptation to allow politics to trump strategic sense. What he does not do is question whether Taiwan needs to increase its defense capabilities. “Given the accelerating pace of Beijing’s military buildup and political coercion ... [Taiwan] cannot afford inaction,” he writes. A rational, robust debate over the specifics, not the scale or the necessity,
RSS