According to the Ministry of Labor, Taipei and New Delhi are to sign a memorandum of understanding (MOU) before the end of this year, allowing for Indian migrant workers to come to Taiwan. This is beneficial to both sides.
Today, most migrant workers in Taiwan are from Southeast Asia. Cultural differences between Taiwan and India are more obvious than those between Taiwan and Southeast Asian countries, and the government should come up with ways to deal with Taiwan’s lack of understanding so that the plan could be carried out smoothly.
The first issue is language. Most people think that all Indians are fluent in English, which is not true. On the contrary, only 10 percent of the Indian population use English as their primary language. The percentage of Indian workers capable of speaking English is even lower. The Indian constitution recognizes 22 official languages and the primary language in use varies from region to region. The government’s foremost task is to take care of language and translation issues for Indian migrant workers. Without appropriate interpreters, it would be difficult for Taiwanese supervisors to communicate with Indian overseers who manage other workers. Therefore, more resources should be invested in training intermediate supervisors in managing Indian workers.
Religion is another issue. Around 80 percent of the Indian population practice Hinduism, whereas in Taiwan, only one Hindu temple has been officially recognized. In the past, there were some Indians who had turned their houses into Hindu temples, causing serious community disputes; a lawsuit was even filed. If more than 10,000 Indian migrant workers are to come to Taiwan, the religious needs and potential problems would increase.
Additionally, Indians have their own dietary needs due to religious reasons. There was an incident in which Indian students cooked curry in their dormitory and Taiwanese students protested. For followers of Hinduism, eating beef is a sin. For the second-largest religious community in India, Muslims, eating pork or derivative products is forbidden. Many Indians are vegetarians. If these dietary needs cannot be met, managing Indian workers would be a difficult task.
The government also needs to consider which sectors Indian migrant workers would participate in. Taiwan’s labor-intensive industries are confronting serious labor shortages. For this reason, the government might want to increase its admission quota for Indian students enrolling in technical courses or collaborative industry-academia programs at the university level. This has become a sensitive issue for the official agencies, given that in recent years, some illegal agencies and private universities have exploited foreign students in the name of educational exchange.
Even so, if the government would allow Indians to come to Taiwan as students and workers at once, studying toward further degrees while working part-time, Indians would be able to pay their tuition while learning technical skills. This would be a “triple-win” situation for universities currently dealing with a lack of students due to the country’s low fertility rates, for industries facing labor shortages and for Indians seeking opportunities abroad. This triple-win situation could be achieved by regulating wicked brokers and illicit agencies. The government should not throw the baby out with the bathwater.
The migrant workers quota must be discussed. India has become the most populous country, and Indian workers are certain to become a labor force in other places such as the Middle East. It has been reported that the government might bring in 100,000 Indian migrant workers. However, before more comprehensive measures are put in place, the government should start with a trial period with a smaller group of Indian migrant workers to see if everything goes as planned. Today, communication between Taiwanese and Indian societies is still quite limited. A large group of Indians who suddenly appear in Taiwan might cause an impact. If Taiwanese are not ready for this, cultural differences might lead to misunderstanding or even discrimination, and that would be extremely disadvantageous to deepening and developing Taiwan-Indian relations in the long run.
Lastly, to facilitate this plan, the government should enhance the personnel at the embassy and official agencies so that the review process could be implemented smoothly. Before the plan is carried out, governmental officials should also consult with professional institutions and experts in India on migrant worker issues.
A well-intentioned plan should not be rushed into right before an election just for the sake of winning more votes.
Fang Tien-sze is a visiting professor at National Chengchi University’s Department of Diplomacy and deputy director at National Tsing Hua University’s Center for India Studies.
Translated by Emma Liu
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
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) will stop at nothing to weaken Taiwan’s sovereignty, going as far as to create complete falsehoods. That the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has never ruled Taiwan is an objective fact. To refute this, Beijing has tried to assert “jurisdiction” over Taiwan, pointing to its military exercises around the nation as “proof.” That is an outright lie: If the PRC had jurisdiction over Taiwan, it could simply have issued decrees. Instead, it needs to perform a show of force around the nation to demonstrate its fantasy. Its actions prove the exact opposite of its assertions. A
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
RSS