The Ministry of Labor on Saturday last week launched a program to provide a pathway to permanent residency for migrant workers, as well as foreign and “overseas compatriot” students who earn an associate degree in Taiwan.
The program allows such graduates to be classified as “intermediate-skilled labor” at their place of employment, qualifying them for permanent residency if they earn a minimum of NT$30,000 per month, the ministry said.
The program is a step in the right direction as Taiwan seeks ways to curb its population decline and labor shortage. However, the ministry’s differentiation between “foreign” students and “overseas compatriots” highlights outdated ideas about ethnicity that could hamper the government’s goals.
Article 2 of the Regulations Regarding Study and Counseling Assistance for Overseas Chinese Students in Taiwan (僑生回國就學及輔導辦法) defines an “overseas Chinese student” as a “student of Chinese descent who has come to Taiwan to study,” or one “who was born and lived overseas until the present time.” In the Chinese-language version of the law, the term used for “Chinese descent” is hua yi (華裔), meaning “ethnic Chinese.” This is distinct from the term hua qiao (華僑), which refers to a citizen of China who lives overseas.
In other words, the law presents favorable immigration terms for certain individuals based on ethnicity. Most countries that follow the principle of jus sanguinis make no mention of ethnicity, and recognize the eligibility of a person born overseas to immigrate based on that principle if at least one parent is a citizen of that country.
For example, Canada’s Citizenship Act allows a child born overseas to at least one Canadian parent to be considered Canadian at birth. Adopted children of Canadian parents, regardless of where they were adopted or what their race is, are also automatically granted Canadian citizenship. In the US, Section 301(c) of the Nationality Act of 1952 allows children born abroad to two US parents to be granted US citizenship if at least one parent has spent a certain amount of time living in the US.
An article published in February 2016 by Scientific American cited Drexel University professor Michael Yudell as saying: “Race is understood to be a poorly defined marker of diversity and an imprecise proxy for the relationship between ancestry and genetics.”
The article also cites a study on genetic differences between Europeans and Africans by Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology director Svante Paabo, who said: “There is not a single absolute genetic difference, meaning no single variant where all Africans have one variant and all Europeans another one, even when recent migration is disregarded.”
Simply put, ideas about race and ethnicity are social constructs, and that is at least one reason such ideas have no place in modern immigration laws. Furthermore, there is no benefit to a nation to promote immigration by what it perceives to be a specific race. For example, it would not benefit Taiwan’s economy to emphasize industry talents or academic researchers who by perception are descendants of Chinese or Taiwanese. It would not even benefit lofty aspirations of a “pure Taiwanese race” to do so, as it would be scientifically unachievable to pinpoint specific “Taiwanese genetics.”
The US and Canada have staved off population decline with open immigration laws. Those countries also benefit from the diversity of their multicultural populations, which introduce a wider range of ideas and traditions to the national culture.
Immigration laws that emphasize ethnicity, while continuing to impose restrictions (such as high salary requirements and disallowing dual citizenship) on potential immigrants only hurt Taiwan in the long run. The government should discuss the issue and consider putting it to a referendum.
Taiwan’s victory in the World Baseball Softball Confederation Premier12 championship is an historic achievement. Yet once again this achievement is marred by the indignity of the imposed moniker “Chinese Taipei.” The absurdity is compounded by the fact that none of the players are even from Taipei, and some, such as Paiwan catcher Giljegiljaw Kungkuan, are not even ethnically Chinese. The issue garnered attention around the Paris Olympics, yet fell off the agenda as Olympic memories retreated. “Chinese Taipei” persists, and the baseball championship serves as a reminder that fighting “Chinese Taipei” must be a continuous campaign, not merely resurfacing around international
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) appears to be encountering some culture shock and safety issues at its new fab in Arizona. On Nov. 7, Arizona state authorities cited TSMC for worker safety violations, fining the company US$16,131, after a man died in May. The Arizona Division of Occupational Safety and Health released its six-month investigation into the fatality and cited TSMC for failing to keep the workplace free from hazards likely to cause death or serious harm. At about the same time, the chip giant was also sued for alleged discriminatory hiring practices favoring Asians, prompting a flurry of debate on whether TSMC’s
This month, the National Health Insurance (NHI) is to implement a major policy change by eliminating the suspension-and-resumption mechanism for Taiwanese residing abroad. With more than 210,000 Taiwanese living overseas — many with greater financial means than those in Taiwan — this reform, catalyzed by a 2022 Constitutional Court ruling, underscores the importance of fairness, sustainability and shared responsibility in one of the world’s most admired public healthcare systems. Beyond legal obligations, expatriates have a compelling moral duty to contribute, recognizing their stake in a system that embodies the principle of health as a human right. The ruling declared the prior
US president-elect Donald Trump is inheriting from President Joe Biden a challenging situation for American policy in the Indo-Pacific region, with an expansionist China on the march and threatening to incorporate Taiwan, by force if necessary. US policy choices have become increasingly difficult, in part because Biden’s policy of engagement with China, including investing in personal diplomacy with President Xi Jinping (習近平), has not only yielded little but also allowed the Chinese military to gain a stronger footing in the South China Sea and the Taiwan Strait. In Xi’s Nov. 16 Lima meeting with a diminished Biden, the Chinese strongman signaled little
RSS