Improving ‘competitiveness’
I’d like to offer some observations on President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) announcement concerning university classes taught in English (“Ma calls for more university classes taught in English,” Nov. 8, page 3).
“If we refuse to make changes, great teachers and students will be gone and it will be more difficult for us to raise competitiveness,” Ma was quoted as saying.
This fragment is ambiguous. In what sense did Ma mean “competitiveness” — in relation to the economy or to Taiwan’s universities versus universities in other countries?
Unfortunately, the article does not clarify this. If Ma intended it in the former sense rather than the latter, then that is substantially different. However, I suppose it would strike most people as obvious that more competitive universities would improve general economic competitiveness.
Yet there is overwhelming evidence that this is simply not true. Two months ago, the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, in China, reported that graduates from Chinese universities were earning salaries equal to or in many cases lower than those of migrant field workers from Southeast Asia.
The situation in Taiwan is not vastly different. How does it raise economic competitiveness for a young person to spend large sums of their parents’ money (often financed by debt) and four crucial years of their young lives only to graduate and work at a deli counter or a KFC?
This is lunacy.
Earlier in the article, Ma is quoted as saying: “Higher education in Taiwan should not keep its doors closed any more.”
Might I suggest that Taiwan do precisely the opposite? It is high time that many universities and technical colleges were deprived of state funding. This would not only result in the closure of many smaller, less prestigious universities, but, perhaps more importantly, force the government to repeal or relax laws and regulations that stand in the way of entrepreneurial start-ups.
The best way to raise economic competitiveness is to allow young people to learn to compete economically. The traditional Chinese attitude of revering education, along with disproportionate state support for education, is destroying the potential for many young people to create and sustain their own lives.
Michael Fagan
Tainan
Nazi camps weren’t ‘Polish’
I was shocked to read your photo caption describing a survivor of a “Polish concentration camp” (“Auschwitz survivor speaks against hazards of hatred,” Nov. 11, page 4).
There were no Polish concentration camps — only German ones. This is a complete mix-up of victims and aggressors.
Polish nationals were killed just like Jews in numerous German concentration camps during World War II. Polish citizens regardless of ethnic background were victims of barbaric German and Soviet acts.
It’s completely unacceptable and insensitive to make this kind of mistake. The infamous Auschwitz concentration camp was built by the German government and run by the German military from beginning to end.
I have much higher expectations of the Taipei Times, in particular when touching on issues related to history or human rights. I think most Taiwanese would feel outraged if an international media outlet made a mistake like this regarding Taiwan’s history.
TOMASZ SWATOWSKI
Taipei
On Sept. 3 in Tiananmen Square, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) rolled out a parade of new weapons in PLA service that threaten Taiwan — some of that Taiwan is addressing with added and new military investments and some of which it cannot, having to rely on the initiative of allies like the United States. The CCP’s goal of replacing US leadership on the global stage was advanced by the military parade, but also by China hosting in Tianjin an August 31-Sept. 1 summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which since 2001 has specialized
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
A large part of the discourse about Taiwan as a sovereign, independent nation has centered on conventions of international law and international agreements between outside powers — such as between the US, UK, Russia, the Republic of China (ROC) and Japan at the end of World War II, and between the US and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) since recognition of the PRC as the sole representative of China at the UN. Internationally, the narrative on the PRC and Taiwan has changed considerably since the days of the first term of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) of the Democratic
A report by the US-based Jamestown Foundation on Tuesday last week warned that China is operating illegal oil drilling inside Taiwan’s exclusive economic zone (EEZ) off the Taiwan-controlled Pratas Island (Dongsha, 東沙群島), marking a sharp escalation in Beijing’s “gray zone” tactics. The report said that, starting in July, state-owned China National Offshore Oil Corp installed 12 permanent or semi-permanent oil rig structures and dozens of associated ships deep inside Taiwan’s EEZ about 48km from the restricted waters of Pratas Island in the northeast of the South China Sea, islands that are home to a Taiwanese garrison. The rigs not only typify
RSS