The Taipei Economic and Cultural Center in India, Taiwan’s de facto embassy in that country, signed a memorandum of understanding with its Indian counterpart, the India Taipei Association, on Friday last week to pave the way for Indian migrant workers to seek employment in Taiwan.
The details of the process have yet to be agreed, but the Ministry of Labor has confirmed that, according to the memorandum, Taipei would be able to determine the number of Indian workers and which industries they could be employed in.
That is, the government is not flinging open the nation’s doors to a flood of migrant workers.
The agreement has been a long time coming, with negotiations beginning in 2020, but having to be put on hold due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
It is certain to bring many benefits to Taiwan, for a variety of reasons, although news of the plan, when announced last year, was met with a certain amount of resistance among the public.
This resistance is due in large part to misunderstandings about the need for the policy and how it is to be implemented.
It is the government’s responsibility to ensure that these misunderstandings are cleared up, and the opposition’s responsibility not to fan the flames of social tensions resulting from these misunderstandings.
It is not news that Taiwan, like so many other countries, is facing a demographic cliff, an aging society that is going to mean a gradual shrinking of the workforce and the need to bring in migrant workers to address this.
Taiwan already allows workers from Vietnam, Indonesia, the Philippines and Thailand to seek employment in certain industries, but it has become apparent that these sources of migrant workers alone are not sufficient.
Allowing Indian workers into Taiwan, to help bolster the nation’s requirements in industries such as construction, manufacturing, domestic labor and agriculture, could go some way to remedy this situation.
Germany, Italy, France, Singapore, Malaysia and countries in the Middle East have already signed migrant worker agreements with India, and Japan and South Korea are also looking to go down this route.
There are also sound geopolitical reasons for promoting ties with New Delhi, to promote Taiwan-India relations in an international environment in which Taiwan and India share a distrust of Beijing amid its territorial ambitions.
Immigration and increasing the pool of migrant workers does have the potential to create social tensions if the public is not given access to the objective facts. During the presidential election campaign, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) presidential candidate New Taipei City Mayor Hou You-yi (侯友宜) said that allowing 100,000 workers coming into Taiwan would sow social tensions and take jobs away from Taiwanese.
The figure is inflated and inflammatory. It is no surprise that there was a protest in Taipei against the policy on Dec. 3 last year, during the campaign.
Unfortunately, it is also not a major surprise that this attitude toward the policy and the rhetoric of certain politicians, which Hou’s words would only have encouraged, led to negative — and unfounded — tropes about Indian migrant workers entering the debate about the issue.
Hou was criticizing government policy for political purposes during the campaign. Often, things said during an election campaign stay in the election campaign. Hou can change his tune now that the dust has settled.
The opposition needs to work with the government to refine, not hobble, this much-needed policy to ease the problem of labor shortages, improve the relations with New Delhi and help pave the way for a more prosperous and harmonious future.
There are moments in history when America has turned its back on its principles and withdrawn from past commitments in service of higher goals. For example, US-Soviet Cold War competition compelled America to make a range of deals with unsavory and undemocratic figures across Latin America and Africa in service of geostrategic aims. The United States overlooked mass atrocities against the Bengali population in modern-day Bangladesh in the early 1970s in service of its tilt toward Pakistan, a relationship the Nixon administration deemed critical to its larger aims in developing relations with China. Then, of course, America switched diplomatic recognition
The international women’s soccer match between Taiwan and New Zealand at the Kaohsiung Nanzih Football Stadium, scheduled for Tuesday last week, was canceled at the last minute amid safety concerns over poor field conditions raised by the visiting team. The Football Ferns, as New Zealand’s women’s soccer team are known, had arrived in Taiwan one week earlier to prepare and soon raised their concerns. Efforts were made to improve the field, but the replacement patches of grass could not grow fast enough. The Football Ferns canceled the closed-door training match and then days later, the main event against Team Taiwan. The safety
The Chinese government on March 29 sent shock waves through the Tibetan Buddhist community by announcing the untimely death of one of its most revered spiritual figures, Hungkar Dorje Rinpoche. His sudden passing in Vietnam raised widespread suspicion and concern among his followers, who demanded an investigation. International human rights organization Human Rights Watch joined their call and urged a thorough investigation into his death, highlighting the potential involvement of the Chinese government. At just 56 years old, Rinpoche was influential not only as a spiritual leader, but also for his steadfast efforts to preserve and promote Tibetan identity and cultural
Strategic thinker Carl von Clausewitz has said that “war is politics by other means,” while investment guru Warren Buffett has said that “tariffs are an act of war.” Both aphorisms apply to China, which has long been engaged in a multifront political, economic and informational war against the US and the rest of the West. Kinetically also, China has launched the early stages of actual global conflict with its threats and aggressive moves against Taiwan, the Philippines and Japan, and its support for North Korea’s reckless actions against South Korea that could reignite the Korean War. Former US presidents Barack Obama