As the Ministry of Education and the pan-blue camp wrangle over wording in textbooks, President Chen Shui-bian (
Taiwan has much to gain by reversing this policy.
Fear that exposure to Chinese education and students will corrupt Taiwanese students' minds is a driving force behind the policy. But if the Taiwanese education system is turning out such feeble-minded adults susceptible to Chinese propaganda, then it has only itself to blame. Education should be about opening minds and exposing students to different ideas -- even ideas government officials may not agree with. Sheltering Taiwanese students from certain ideas smacks of Chinese censorship.
Chinese students may influence Taiwan, but certainly not as much as Taiwan will influence them. Every year the ministry gives out thousands of scholarships to students from around the world in the hope that they will become advocates for Taiwan after they return to their countries. Is it difficult to imagine that some Chinese students, having seen what a progressive, liberal society is like, would go back and not demand the same.
Chen's rationale for refusing Chinese diplomas is also irrational. He worries that because it is so easy and cheap to get a Chinese diploma, Taiwan will soon be flooded with PhDs from disreputable Chinese institutions. Hence, having an advanced degree would no longer mean anything, and Taiwanese professors would find themselves out of work.
However, China does not hold a monopoly on dodgy diplomas. A great number of the degrees offered in the US, the holy grail of education for many Taiwanese students, are nothing more than cash-cow programs in soft subjects aimed at foreign students.
A degree is not automatically good because it is from the US or bad because it is from China. Rather, the government should encourage employers and universities to ascertain academic credentials. Businesses that do not bother to thoroughly evaluate who they are hiring will suffer from the frauds who walk through the door. Higher education must to some extent also abide by the rules of free-market capitalism.
Chinese degrees are not automatically rejected in other parts of the world. Chen's policy assures that students who can't afford an expensive Taiwanese degree, or simply want to go abroad and experience education in China, can't come back to work in Taiwan. As the Cabinet's Council for Economic Planning and Development debates how to attract skilled foreigners, Taiwan will contribute to its own brain drain by forcing students educated in China to find work elsewhere.
Taiwan has an interest in making sure that its ties with China are carefully regulated. But education is one area that should be more open. Chen's argument that letting in a trickle of students will inevitably end in a deluge is a pathetic excuse for the government's inability to efficiently regulate educational exchanges. And while the government must take security into account, paranoia over such issues should not outweigh the possible benefits of students on each side of the Strait contributing to more civil exchanges and understanding.
Who knows, Chinese students might even return home and tell their friends that Taiwan is a much different place than the Chinese media make it out to be.
In an article published by the Harvard Kennedy School, renowned historian of modern China Rana Mitter used a structured question-and-answer format to deepen the understanding of the relationship between Taiwan and China. Mitter highlights the differences between the repressive and authoritarian People’s Republic of China and the vibrant democracy that exists in Taiwan, saying that Taiwan and China “have had an interconnected relationship that has been both close and contentious at times.” However, his description of the history — before and after 1945 — contains significant flaws. First, he writes that “Taiwan was always broadly regarded by the imperial dynasties of
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) will stop at nothing to weaken Taiwan’s sovereignty, going as far as to create complete falsehoods. That the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has never ruled Taiwan is an objective fact. To refute this, Beijing has tried to assert “jurisdiction” over Taiwan, pointing to its military exercises around the nation as “proof.” That is an outright lie: If the PRC had jurisdiction over Taiwan, it could simply have issued decrees. Instead, it needs to perform a show of force around the nation to demonstrate its fantasy. Its actions prove the exact opposite of its assertions. A
An American Institute in Taiwan (AIT) spokesperson on Saturday rebuked a Chinese official for mischaracterizing World War II-era agreements as proving that Taiwan was ceded to China. The US Department of State later affirmed that the AIT remarks reflect Washington’s long-standing position: Taiwan’s political status remains undetermined and should only be resolved peacefully. The US would continue supporting Taiwan against military, economic, legal and diplomatic pressure from China, and opposes any unilateral attempt to alter the “status quo,” particularly through coercion or force, the United Daily News cited the department as saying. The remarks followed Chinese Minister of Foreign Affairs
OpenAI CEO Sam Altman recently sat down for an interview with former Fox News host Tucker Carlson in which he openly acknowledged that ChatGPT’s model behavior is indeed influencing the entire world, and that he himself is responsible for the decisions related to the bot’s moral framework. He said that he has not had a good night of sleep since its launch, as the technology could bring about unpredictable consequences. Although the discussion took place in the US, it is closely related to Taiwan. While Altman worries about the concentration of power, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has already weaponized artificial
RSS