On World Refugee Day on Thursday last week, lawmakers and civic groups issued a reminder that Taiwan still does not have a refugee act.
First proposed in 2005, a refugee bill in 2016 finally made it past a first reading — but nothing has been done since.
Refugees should be screened carefully, but deporting them back to countries where they could be persecuted does not create a good image, especially when Taiwan bills itself as a beacon of freedom and democracy.
Two Chinese asylum seekers who in September last year arrived in Taiwan after skipping their connecting flight to China were stuck in a restricted area inside Taiwan Taoyuan International Airport for months, because Taiwan simply does not have a mechanism to deal with such situations.
Authorities managed to fly them to a third country for “professional exchanges” in January and then had them re-enter. One of them has since settled in Canada.
It is a complicated situation, as Chinese asylum seekers are not technically treated as foreigners and Taiwan could face political repercussions from Beijing if it decides to openly accept Chinese refugees.
However, since the government ended up helping them anyway, it only shows that what the asylum seekers did, however illegal, ended up working in their favor, and more dissidents will follow their lead. Will they also be marooned in the airport for months before Taiwan deals with the situation in the same manner?
There has already been the case of Li Jiabao (李家寶), a Chinese student in Taiwan who requested asylum after he criticized Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Twitter in March, and there will surely be more.
It is important that the nation at least has a policy or a standardized mechanism to deal with asylum seekers from China and other nations.
It will not be an easy process, but doing so will help Taiwan’s international image and differentiate it from China, as well as bring more attention to China’s tightening social control and human rights abuses.
For international refugees, it is a simpler situation. Taiwan already has an fast-growing foreign population of Southeast Asian migrant workers, students and spouses, who do their part to contribute to the nation.
There will always be outliers who cause harm to society, but that is no reason to shun all refugees.
There is still a stigma that all refugees are poor and uneducated, and will become a burden on society, but the truth is that many are talented professionals who were forced to flee due to external circumstances.
If the Southeast Asian migrants can integrate well into Taiwanese society and prove to be productive, then there should be no problem, as long as there is a clear process to ensure that people are not let in without question.
As Taiwan’s birthrate drops and its need for talent and labor increases, it would only benefit the nation’s economy and image to at least consider the act, instead of shelving it indefinitely.
A gap appears to be emerging between Washington’s foreign policy elites and the broader American public on how the United States should respond to China’s rise. From my vantage working at a think tank in Washington, DC, and through regular travel around the United States, I increasingly experience two distinct discussions. This divergence — between America’s elite hawkishness and public caution — may become one of the least appreciated and most consequential external factors influencing Taiwan’s security environment in the years ahead. Within the American policy community, the dominant view of China has grown unmistakably tough. Many members of Congress, as
The Hong Kong government on Monday gazetted sweeping amendments to the implementation rules of Article 43 of its National Security Law. There was no legislative debate, no public consultation and no transition period. By the time the ink dried on the gazette, the new powers were already in force. This move effectively bypassed Hong Kong’s Legislative Council. The rules were enacted by the Hong Kong chief executive, in conjunction with the Committee for Safeguarding National Security — a body shielded from judicial review and accountable only to Beijing. What is presented as “procedural refinement” is, in substance, a shift away from
Taiwan no longer wants to merely manufacture the chips that power artificial intelligence (AI). It aims to build the software, platforms and services that run on them. Ten major AI infrastructure projects, a national cloud computing center in Tainan, the sovereign language model Trustworthy AI Dialogue Engine, five targeted industry verticals — from precision medicine to smart agriculture — and the goal of ranking among the world’s top five in computing power by 2040: The roadmap from “Silicon Island” to “Smart Island” is drawn. The question is whether the western plains, where population, industry and farmland are concentrated, have the water and
The shifting geopolitical tectonic plates of this year have placed Beijing in a profound strategic dilemma. As Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) prepares for a high-stakes summit with US President Donald Trump, the traditional power dynamics of the China-Japan-US triangle have been destabilized by the diplomatic success of Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi in Washington. For the Chinese leadership, the anxiety is two-fold: There is a visceral fear of being encircled by a hardened security alliance, and a secondary risk of being left in a vulnerable position by a transactional deal between Washington and Tokyo that might inadvertently empower Japan
RSS