The Cabinet has offered a number of explanations for its appalling approval ratings. Officials have cited their failure to clarify new policies and government flip-flops on key issues.
Government officials “constantly change their minds” and fumble when asked to defend policy decisions, according to Research, Development and Evaluation Commission Minister Jiang Yi-huah (江宜樺). The commission’s analysis showed this had fed skepticism over government policies, Jiang said.
The government would do well to heed its own advice. As though on cue, it groped for a response this weekend when it came under fire over plans to create onshore work areas for Chinese fishermen at several ports.
A civic group drew attention to the policy on Saturday, protesting the construction of a fenced-off section in Nanfangao (南方澳), Ilan County, for Chinese fishermen to carry out tasks such as unloading cargo. With at least four other ports set to create similar work areas, protesters accused President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) of breaking his campaign promise not to give jobs to Chinese workers.
Soon the clarifications began. The Fisheries Agency said the Chinese workers would be able to earn extra money doing odd jobs at the areas, though the Mainland Affairs Council (MAC) swiftly rebutted that notion. The head of the Fisheries Agency said fishermen would only be ashore during the day, while the council said they would be housed there. The council said the Chinese fishermen would not be taking up a greater workload, while the Fisheries Agency said there was a need for the foreign workers to fill gaps in manpower.
Since the incentive for creating onshore work areas for Chinese fishermen remains unclear, such contradictions vindicate the questions posed by critics. The latter are concerned that the areas will gradually grow to accommodate more foreign labor for a wider variety of tasks, such as preparing fish for market.
If the reasoning behind a policy — especially one concerning a topic as sensitive as cross-strait labor regulations — is not clear, the plan will be open to any number of interpretations.
But this policy should arouse skepticism for another reason. The work areas being created would be a no man’s land, which should ring a warning bell in a country with a record of little respect for migrant workers’ rights. It would appear that the plan is to cage off hundreds of Chinese workers who will be able to work on Taiwanese soil without officially entering the country — no passing through immigration, no visas.
This is not the only labor twilight zone Ma’s administration has proposed. As part of its i-Taiwan 12 projects, the government hopes to create an “air city” and economic zone at Taiwan Taoyuan International Airport that critics say would fall neatly beyond the reach of the country’s labor laws — a recipe for exploitation. Any form of “special” area where foreign workers can work without being covered by labor laws deserves particular scrutiny.
The Cabinet must follow sound advice and not let this issue drop from view in a muddled state. It should clearly address discrepancies and explain its motivation for dreaming up such a confusing plan. Failure to do so would be just another example of the poor style of administration that has eroded Ma’s once stellar approval ratings.
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
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
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
The military is conducting its annual Han Kuang exercises in phases. The minister of national defense recently said that this year’s scenarios would simulate defending the nation against possible actions the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) might take in an invasion of Taiwan, making the threat of a speculated Chinese invasion in 2027 a heated agenda item again. That year, also referred to as the “Davidson window,” is named after then-US Indo-Pacific Command Admiral Philip Davidson, who in 2021 warned that Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) had instructed the PLA to be ready to invade Taiwan by 2027. Xi in 2017
RSS