Media reports say former education minister Cheng Jei-cheng (鄭瑞城) was replaced because he was not doing enough to open up Taiwan’s education system to Chinese students. Regardless of the veracity of the reports, accepting Chinese students and recognizing Chinese education credentials is part of President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) strategy for opening up to China. The policy, however, has caused some concern and an uneasy atmosphere is spreading.
With Ma’s policies, cross-strait relations seem more relaxed, but they are also very unpredictable. Each time the government makes a move, it must anticipate China’s reaction.
China’s attitude toward Taiwan can change at any time because of factors like the Dalai Lama and Uighur rights activist Rebiya Kadeer. China also has yet to renounce the use of force against Taiwan. We must assess whether this rapid opening up will sacrifice the interests of the average Taiwanese as the government continues to focus its attention on the interests of certain businesses and individuals.
The Ministry of Education has proposed “three restrictions” and “six noes” in an attempt to alleviate public concern. But how will the government attract Chinese students if they honor promises not to give them preferential entrance opportunities, not offer scholarships, not allow them to work in Taiwan or take civil service exams while ensuring that the number of Chinese admissions does not affect the quota for Taiwanese students or exacerbate unemployment?
What are these “complimentary measures”? We don’t know.
All we have seen are revisions of the University Act (大學法), the Junior College Act (專科學校法) and the Act Governing Relations Between Peoples of the Taiwan Area and the Mainland Area (臺灣地區與大陸地區人民關係條例), which were sent to the legislature for review not long ago.
The revisions will amount to little more than empty promises if passed. The “three restrictions” and the “six noes” and any other complementary measures will be mere administrative orders without legal authority that can be changed at any time. Will the government give in to Chinese pressure to dump these restrictions?
The government tells us not to worry because it will establish a strict mechanism for checking credentials. However, in a world where forged documents are easily purchased, how will the government convince people that it has the ability to carry out such checks?
The education ministry has said it will not recognize qualifications for Chinese medical practitioners. But when there was a controversy over the recognition of medical qualifications gained in Poland, the regulations in that case were quickly changed after pressure was applied. When the government says it will open up gradually, how can we be sure that it won’t open up fully in a year’s time?
There are countless examples of similar problems awaiting further exploration and clarification.
There are always pros and cons in the implementation of a policy, as well as potential risk. The government has the responsibility to devise ways of minimizing policy downsides and risk.
However, what everyone is concerned about is the lack of transparency in cross-strait policy, a lack of public dialogue and a complete absence of detailed assessment. In addition, many of the people previously involved in negotiations on opening up Taiwanese education to China have had a considerable vested interest. Under these circumstances, how will the rights of Taiwanese be protected?
The Taipei Society, Citizen Congress Watch and academics will be holding a forum today on the issue. All are welcome to participate.
Hawang Shiow-duan is a professor of political science at Soochow University.
TRANSLATED BY DREW CAMERON
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with