The COVID-19 pandemic has challenged democracies worldwide with legal and ethical dilemmas, pitting public health against other core values such as privacy and freedom of movement.
Throughout most of the pandemic, Taiwan has been uniquely successful at avoiding these tradeoffs by keeping the virus at bay with minimal restrictions, the strictest among them border controls. Yet even while the government deserves praise for its successes, it is still allowing some violations of basic rights to skirt by under the radar.
Since last year, foreign spouses have been calling for senseless spousal visa rules to be eased, but their concerns have fallen on deaf ears. There have been countless stories about people stuck in bureaucratic limbo, some of whom have been forced to separate after spouses were told they cannot apply for a dependent visa without leaving the country. In one case, a French woman on a working holiday visa was left scrambling when officials denied her application for a dependent visa under her husband’s residence permit and she was told she would have to leave the country to apply again, even though she was seven months pregnant.
When a domestic COVID-19 outbreak began in May, the government took the further step of suspending the issuance of all spousal visas. Even after the outbreak was tenuously contained, this ban has remained because of concerns about the Delta variant of SARS-CoV-2. Meanwhile, education officials are allowing more than 13,000 foreign students to enter the country for the start of the fall semester, leaving foreign spouses wondering why school supersedes their right to be with their families.
Asked about the issue at a news conference on Wednesday last week, the Central Epidemic Command Center said it would keep handling cases “on an individual basis.” The problem with this strategy is that it has already proven problematic.
Exceptions are allowed for “humanitarian” reasons, such as visiting a critically ill relative or accompanying a pregnant spouse, but while intended to give immigration officials leeway to make their own judgement calls, the ill-defined rules have in some cases had the opposite effect.
According to an unnamed official interviewed by the Chinese-language Liberty Times (the Taipei Times’ sister newspaper), those who do not know about the exception are left waiting, while applications from more privileged petitioners who have access to support networks and can apply pressure through the media have all been accepted, many for less important reasons such as employment or because they miss their partner.
Unaware of the policy and what constitutes a “humanitarian” reason, few immigration officials are recommending this route, inadvertently separating an estimated 1,000-plus spouses and children from their families.
The vast majority of people would agree that the “humanitarian” thing to do would be to keep immediate families together, especially while weathering a global pandemic. Yet ambiguous rules — however well-intentioned — are adding undue stress to people already anxious about being separated from their partners, as well as to immigration officials who are unsure of the rules and reluctant to pass judgement on a case.
Even Australia, whose extremely strict movement restrictions in pursuit of a “COVID zero” policy have attracted heated debate, unambiguously allows immediate family members of Australians and permanent residents to enter the country.
Considering the low impact of allowing so few people into the country versus its immense significance to the individuals involved and to Taiwan’s reputation as a nation that upholds human rights, it only makes sense for the government to allow dependents into the country.
The closure of the Strait of Hormuz has sent the vast Asian chemicals industry into a tailspin. Deprived of the likes of Qatari natural gas and Saudi Arabian oil, the region’s fertilizer and plastics plants are slowing production or even shutting down. Everywhere except China, that is. In petrochemicals, China is unique. As well as a traditional industry that uses oil and gas as feedstock, it has parallel output that relies on its abundant domestic coal. Unsurprisingly, India and other regional powers want to copy and paste the Chinese method. This would not be easy — or climate friendly. The
KMT Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun’s (鄭麗文) recent visit to Beijing and her upcoming visit to Washington will serve as a high-level test of her diplomatic mettle. In Beijing, Cheng was received with symbolic gestures, a warm reception, and high-level access. In Washington, she will receive far less pomp and far sharper questions about the KMT’s vision for the future of Taiwan. Her challenge will be to persuade Washington that the KMT’s engagement with China can coexist with strong deterrence. Cheng’s April 7-12 visit to mainland China coincided with an intense period of conflict in Iran. Despite the strategic significance of Cheng’s trip,
History might remember 2026, not 2022, as the year artificial intelligence (AI) truly changed everything. ChatGPT’s launch was a product moment. What is happening now is an anthropological moment: AI is no longer merely answering questions. It is now taking initiative and learning from others to get things done, behaving less like software and more like a colleague. The economic consequence is the rise of the one-person company — a structure anticipated in the 2024 book The Choices Amid Great Changes, which I coauthored. The real target of AI is not labor. It is hierarchy. When AI sharply reduces the cost
US President Donald Trump recently repeated his claim that “Taiwan stole America’s chip industry,” reigniting public debate on the issue. As a former Taiwanese minister of economic affairs and an entrepreneur deeply involved in semiconductor supply chain development, I feel a responsibility to clarify this misunderstanding. From the perspective of global industrial evolution and the economic principle of comparative advantage, such a statement appears overly simplistic and risks obscuring the essence of the issue. The rise of Taiwan’s semiconductor industry was not built on “replacing America,” but rather emerged as a result of countries pursuing different development paths within the
RSS