It was refreshing to hear expert commentary yesterday on a part of the immigration debate normally blocked out by bickering over the ideal number of brides that should come from China: the tendency for governments to treat children of "mixed" marriages -- normally a Taiwanese husband and a Chinese or Southeast Asian wife -- as an administrative problem rather than an opportunity.
Issues of migration are complex and never easily resolved, nor are they reducible to black-and-white categories of right and wrong. In Taiwan's case, there has been a relatively smooth process of adjustment to hundreds of thousands of new residents as Taiwanese men marry women from markedly poorer, non-Chinese-speaking countries.
The numbers are impressive: Three out of every seven children are now being born to a foreign mother; by 2010, these children will amount to one-tenth of the school-age population.
Those inclined to define Taiwan in ethnic terms will be intimidated by these numbers. But there is no reason to feel that way -- as long as the government and a well-meaning population are willing to adapt, and as long as migrants are willing to learn how to integrate themselves and their "mixed" children into Taiwanese society.
Happily, this is an issue on which legislators of substance from both sides of the political divide can unite to develop constructive policies.
The demand for foreign brides is a function of the increasing wealth and urbanization of a society that raises the standard of living -- and increases life choices. Universal education inculcates in all children the principle of opportunity based on merit rather than geography or ethnic group, and from this comes a natural migration of women from rural areas into wealthier cities in search of better opportunities.
For such a system to function properly, migrant women who fill this demographic gap in rural Taiwan cannot be allowed to descend into an underclass.
Basic economics and good governance provide a powerful incentive for the nation to ensure that the productivity of their children as they become adults is no less substantial than that of any other group.
But there is a distance to travel in providing a migrant-friendly environment. Governments and legislatures are all too willing to speak to foreign spouses in a patronizing tone, and this is not helped by labor policies that treat migrant laborers -- the spouses' compatriots -- like second-class citizens.
It is also hoped that reports of husbands refusing foreign spouses permission to attend government-funded skills seminars will decrease. But for this to happen, the government must assume and proclaim that both parties have rights and responsibilities.
There is a strong argument that any mandatory training for migrant women should be accompanied by mandatory training for their husbands, who in some cases do not understand or respect -- and even obstruct -- their wives' legal and human rights.
Other considerations are ideological. If migrants are to integrate properly, it is important that the residue of race-flavored ideology in street signs, company names, government agencies and so on is removed.
We can only hope that mindless praise for "Hua" (
Until this happens, children of mixed marriages will inevitably experience a degree of discomfort as they come to terms with their differences as minorities. The challenge for elected officials, public servants and people of good conscience is to eliminate gratuitous obstacles containing racist terminology and practices and ensure that people are judged on their merits and not their DNA.
Former US president Jimmy Carter’s legacy regarding Taiwan is a complex tapestry woven with decisions that, while controversial, were instrumental in shaping the nation’s path and its enduring relationship with the US. As the world reflects on Carter’s life and his recent passing at the age of 100, his presidency marked a transformative era in Taiwan-US-China relations, particularly through the landmark decision in 1978 to formally recognize the People’s Republic of China (PRC) as the sole legal government of China, effectively derecognizing the Republic of China (ROC) based in Taiwan. That decision continues to influence geopolitical dynamics and Taiwan’s unique
Having enjoyed contributing regular essays to the Liberty Times and Taipei Times now for several years, I feel it is time to pull back. As some of my readers know, I have enjoyed a decades-long relationship with Taiwan. My most recent visit was just a few months ago, when I was invited to deliver a keynote speech at a major conference in Taipei. Unfortunately, my trip intersected with Double Ten celebrations, so I missed the opportunity to call on friends in government, as well as colleagues in the new AIT building, that replaced the old Xin-yi Road complex. I have
On New Year’s Day, it is customary to reflect on what the coming year might bring and how the past has brought about the current juncture. Just as Taiwan is preparing itself for what US president-elect Donald Trump’s second term would mean for its economy, national security and the cross-strait “status quo” this year, the passing of former US president Jimmy Carter on Monday at the age of 100 brought back painful memories of his 1978 decision to stop recognizing the Republic of China as the seat of China in favor of the People’s Republic of China. It is an
After forcing through a slew of controversial amendments, the opposition Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) on Tuesday last week rejected all seven Constiutional Court candidates nominated by President William Lai (賴清德), an event that triggered public concerns that it could lead to an unprecedented constitutional crisis and jeopardize Taiwan’s democracy. The opposition parties on Dec. 20 forced through three controversial amendments to the Public Officials Election and Recall Act (公職人員選舉罷免法), the Act Governing the Allocation of Government Revenues and Expenditures (財政收支劃分法) and the Constitutional Court Procedure Act (憲法訴訟法). The amendment to tighten the recall process has been
RSS