Foreigners kept at bay
A local newspaper recently recalled the story of Father Brendan O’Connell, a US citizen who has lived more than 50 years in Taiwan and founded the Institute for Developmentally Impaired Children.
O’Connell cannot obtain Republic of China (ROC) citizenship because of Article 9 of the Nationality Law (國籍法), which requires that the applicant must renounce his existing citizenship. ROC citizens wishing to apply for US citizenship are not subjected to such a sacrifice and Taiwan recognizes dual nationality for its citizens.
“Legislators are planning to table bills that would expand the clause for honorary obtainment of citizenship,” the report said.
Eventually the restriction could be lifted for candidates who have made “outstanding contributions to the country or are needed specialists.”
In other words, if this law is amended, only a few hand-picked brilliant and valuable foreigners could obtain an ROC citizenship without renunciation of their home country.
The ROC naturalization rules tinged with racial segregation appear as aberrant and grotesque as they are ironical as they are dictated by institutions whose head holds a US resident card and who has a daughter who has become a US citizen.
Prejudices and discrimination commonly practiced here forbid other foreigners from obtaining a simple resident status, whereas any Taiwanese in the same situation would probably be granted a resident visa in most Western democracies.
It reveals Taiwan’s persistent, biased considerations and double standards for foreigners. Consequently, not all [foreigners] are lulled by the embroidered cliches about the island or regard it as the hospitable and friendly place shown in picture postcards issued in pamphlets for tourists.
If generous Western countries had applied such stringent, absurd and unfair rules as a mere reciprocity, some rare Taiwanese would have qualified to enjoy the unparalleled privileges of being a naturalized American, Australian, Canadian or European.
Thousands of Taiwanese who are neither “needed specialists,” nor outstanding contributors to their respective host country, have obtained naturalization with all the prerogatives offered accordingly. They take for granted the immense chance to benefit from the identical advantages of other nationals, but naturally do not find it relevant to grant the reciprocity for a foreigner living, working and paying taxes on their island.
Taiwan dreams of recognition and more significance on the international stage, but excels in keeping foreigners at bay, with exceptions made for tourists and expatriates who bring money. Taiwan maintains a blatant favoritism for its nationals or Chinese-ethnicity immigrants and encourages protectionism.
This is in complete contradiction to the norms of globalization, which lift barriers and open borders to different people.
If Taiwan intends to embrace the future with credibility, it should start being an outstanding model in terms of multiethnicity, lead by example and make outstanding uninterested contributions to the world beyond its diplomatic friends. Mostly, Taiwan should be aware that any democracy worthy of the name extends basic human rights, generosity, respect, tolerance and fairness to anyone without distinction of race, religion, gender or sexual orientation.
Only with genuine democratic and altruistic transformation can Taiwan someday be entitled to a legitimate right for membership in the democratic club and the world community.
Alas, the institutions in Taiwan desperately lack “needed specialists.”
A. Sanders
Taipei
The first Donald Trump term was a boon for Taiwan. The administration regularized the arms sales process and enhanced bilateral ties. Taipei will not be so fortunate the second time around. Given recent events, Taiwan must proceed with the assumption that it cannot count on the United States to defend it — diplomatically or militarily — during the next four years. Early indications suggested otherwise. The nomination of Marco Rubio as US Secretary of State and the appointment of Mike Waltz as the national security advisor, both of whom have expressed full-throated support for Taiwan in the past, raised hopes that
Whether in terms of market commonality or resource similarity, South Korea’s Samsung Electronics Co is the biggest competitor of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC). The two companies have agreed to set up factories in the US and are also recipients of subsidies from the US CHIPS and Science Act, which was signed into law by former US president Joe Biden. However, changes in the market competitiveness of the two companies clearly reveal the context behind TSMC’s investments in the US. As US semiconductor giant Intel Corp has faced continuous delays developing its advanced processes, the world’s two major wafer foundries, TSMC and
Authorities last week revoked the residency permit of a Chinese social media influencer surnamed Liu (劉), better known by her online channel name Yaya in Taiwan (亞亞在台灣), who has more than 440,000 followers online and is living in Taiwan with a marriage-based residency permit, for her “reunification by force” comments. She was asked to leave the country in 10 days. The National Immigration Agency (NIA) on Tuesday last week announced the decision, citing the influencer’s several controversial public comments, including saying that “China does not need any other reason to reunify Taiwan with force” and “why is it [China] hesitant
We are witnessing a sea change in the government’s approach to China, from one of reasonable, low-key reluctance at rocking the boat to a collapse of pretense over and patience in Beijing’s willful intransigence. Finally, we are seeing a more common sense approach in the face of active shows of hostility from a foreign power. According to Article 2 of the 2020 Anti-Infiltration Act (反滲透法), a “foreign hostile force” is defined as “countries, political entities or groups that are at war with or are engaged in a military standoff with the Republic of China [ROC]. The same stipulation applies to
RSS