On Wednesday last week, US President Joe Biden called the immigration policies of Japan and India “xenophobic,” lumping them in with China and Russia. Comparing them with the US’ principle of welcoming immigrants, he accounted for their troubled economies by saying that “they don’t want immigrants.”
This is not the impression one gets from walking around certain areas of Japan. There are places in the country where Indians and Southeast Asians can frequently be seen working in the streets and shops. It is also a rather simplistic analysis of the economic situation in these different societies, and ignores the perceived impact of demographic changes and possible social tensions that large-scale immigration and the offer of permanent residency might entail.
The White House said Biden’s words were not intended to offend India or Japan. It was certainly an inadvisable choice of word and one that could reasonably have caused offense, even if none was intended. Former US deputy assistant secretary of defence Elbridge Colby wrote on X, formerly known as Twitter, that voicing “parochial progressive views” to allies was “patronising and foolish.”
More cultural sensitivity would be advised.
Tokyo’s policy on streamlining the introduction of foreign workers to increase the number of non-Japanese in the workforce would suggest that it is far from the truth that Japan “does not want” immigrants. It certainly does, as do many other nations in the region — including South Korea and Taiwan — that are having to adjust policy to address falling birthrates and shrinking numbers of working-age nationals.
In these countries, the debate has shifted from how to bolster the birthrate to how to attract more foreign workers.
Neither does the need to increase foreign labor exist in isolation of other nations: The question is about how to vie with other countries to attract workers and not lose them to other destinations.
The Japanese government’s initiatives to change the broken Technical Intern Training Program for unskilled foreign workers have sought to give them more freedom and agency in Japan, such as the ability to change employers and improve the framework governing supervisory agencies and support. However, labor law expert Yoshihisa Saito, an associate professor of the Graduate School of International Cooperation Studies in Kobe, in August last year said that Japan continues to view foreign workers as disposable objects to which a bare minimum of support should be given.
Xenophobic is too strong a word, but there is little doubt that the system needs to be reformed to bring it into line with more progressive international standards focusing on the rights of the individual.
Biden did not mention Taiwan, but the nation does not fare too well in this regard, either. There is so much to do in terms of reforming the foreign labor recruitment system to address high fees payable by the worker, not the employer, leading to a form of debt bondage and higher incidence of absconding. It is regrettable that the most recent opportunity to address this issue, the presidential campaigns before the elections on Jan. 13, passed by without the candidates broaching solutions.
Nations in the region need to augment their working age populations, and do so despite objections by more conservative elements in society that are concerned with dilution of local culture and with demographic changes. Instead of treating foreign workers as short-term solutions to a long-term problem, they need to look into ways to integrate them and recognize them as full, legitimate members of society.
They need to be aware that it is increasingly a sellers’ market, and that there is a race on.
As Taiwan’s domestic political crisis deepens, the opposition Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) have proposed gutting the country’s national spending, with steep cuts to the critical foreign and defense ministries. While the blue-white coalition alleges that it is merely responding to voters’ concerns about corruption and mismanagement, of which there certainly has been plenty under Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) and KMT-led governments, the rationales for their proposed spending cuts lay bare the incoherent foreign policy of the KMT-led coalition. Introduced on the eve of US President Donald Trump’s inauguration, the KMT’s proposed budget is a terrible opening
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus in the Legislative Yuan has made an internal decision to freeze NT$1.8 billion (US$54.7 million) of the indigenous submarine project’s NT$2 billion budget. This means that up to 90 percent of the budget cannot be utilized. It would only be accessible if the legislature agrees to lift the freeze sometime in the future. However, for Taiwan to construct its own submarines, it must rely on foreign support for several key pieces of equipment and technology. These foreign supporters would also be forced to endure significant pressure, infiltration and influence from Beijing. In other words,
“I compare the Communist Party to my mother,” sings a student at a boarding school in a Tibetan region of China’s Qinghai province. “If faith has a color,” others at a different school sing, “it would surely be Chinese red.” In a major story for the New York Times this month, Chris Buckley wrote about the forced placement of hundreds of thousands of Tibetan children in boarding schools, where many suffer physical and psychological abuse. Separating these children from their families, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) aims to substitute itself for their parents and for their religion. Buckley’s reporting is
Last week, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), together holding more than half of the legislative seats, cut about NT$94 billion (US$2.85 billion) from the yearly budget. The cuts include 60 percent of the government’s advertising budget, 10 percent of administrative expenses, 3 percent of the military budget, and 60 percent of the international travel, overseas education and training allowances. In addition, the two parties have proposed freezing the budgets of many ministries and departments, including NT$1.8 billion from the Ministry of National Defense’s Indigenous Defense Submarine program — 90 percent of the program’s proposed