I write in response to the letter "Foreigners must obey the law" (Letters, Nov. 8, page 8 ). I completely agree that all people must obey the law, but the writer's point about working in more than one place is incorrect. A foreigner can work in more than one establishment if at each place of work a new permit for employment is applied for.
People often confuse the Alien Residence Card (ARC) and work permit. No school furnishes you with an ARC. An ARC can be obtained for a number of reasons by the person applying to the foreign affairs department of their central police station. If this reason is to work in Taiwan, then you have to prove that you can do the job, as in all other countries, by producing documentation of education or any other necessary paperwork. If granted, then the employer is issued a permit allowing you to work at that place. You may apply to as many places as you wish as long as you fulfill the obligations for each permit.
Maybe it is the employee who holds the school captive, as the employee can give notice to leave at any time without reason, whereas the school has to have a valid reason for terminating your employment and you then have a right to appeal. Whereas the employer does not. This is why so many places of employment require a deposit from the employee: to prevent the sudden departure of employees.
A. Arnold
Tainan
Having lived through former British prime minister Boris Johnson’s tumultuous and scandal-ridden administration, the last place I had expected to come face-to-face with “Mr Brexit” was in a hotel ballroom in Taipei. Should I have been so surprised? Over the past few years, Taiwan has unfortunately become the destination of choice for washed-up Western politicians to turn up long after their political careers have ended, making grandiose speeches in exchange for extraordinarily large paychecks far exceeding the annual salary of all but the wealthiest of Taiwan’s business tycoons. Taiwan’s pursuit of bygone politicians with little to no influence in their home
In 2025, it is easy to believe that Taiwan has always played a central role in various assessments of global national interests. But that is a mistaken belief. Taiwan’s position in the world and the international support it presently enjoys are relatively new and remain highly vulnerable to challenges from China. In the early 2000s, the George W. Bush Administration had plans to elevate bilateral relations and to boost Taiwan’s defense. It designated Taiwan as a non-NATO ally, and in 2001 made available to Taiwan a significant package of arms to enhance the island’s defenses including the submarines it long sought.
US lobbyist Christian Whiton has published an update to his article, “How Taiwan Lost Trump,” discussed on the editorial page on Sunday. His new article, titled “What Taiwan Should Do” refers to the three articles published in the Taipei Times, saying that none had offered a solution to the problems he identified. That is fair. The articles pushed back on points Whiton made that were felt partisan, misdirected or uninformed; in this response, he offers solutions of his own. While many are on point and he would find no disagreement here, the nuances of the political and historical complexities in
Taiwan faces an image challenge even among its allies, as it must constantly counter falsehoods and misrepresentations spread by its more powerful neighbor, the People’s Republic of China (PRC). While Taiwan refrains from disparaging its troublesome neighbor to other countries, the PRC is working not only to forge a narrative about itself, its intentions and value to the international community, but is also spreading lies about Taiwan. Governments, parliamentary groups and civil societies worldwide are caught in this narrative tug-of-war, each responding in their own way. National governments have the power to push back against what they know to be
RSS