On Wednesday last week, US President Joe Biden called the immigration policies of Japan and India “xenophobic,” lumping them in with China and Russia. Comparing them with the US’ principle of welcoming immigrants, he accounted for their troubled economies by saying that “they don’t want immigrants.”
This is not the impression one gets from walking around certain areas of Japan. There are places in the country where Indians and Southeast Asians can frequently be seen working in the streets and shops. It is also a rather simplistic analysis of the economic situation in these different societies, and ignores the perceived impact of demographic changes and possible social tensions that large-scale immigration and the offer of permanent residency might entail.
The White House said Biden’s words were not intended to offend India or Japan. It was certainly an inadvisable choice of word and one that could reasonably have caused offense, even if none was intended. Former US deputy assistant secretary of defence Elbridge Colby wrote on X, formerly known as Twitter, that voicing “parochial progressive views” to allies was “patronising and foolish.”
More cultural sensitivity would be advised.
Tokyo’s policy on streamlining the introduction of foreign workers to increase the number of non-Japanese in the workforce would suggest that it is far from the truth that Japan “does not want” immigrants. It certainly does, as do many other nations in the region — including South Korea and Taiwan — that are having to adjust policy to address falling birthrates and shrinking numbers of working-age nationals.
In these countries, the debate has shifted from how to bolster the birthrate to how to attract more foreign workers.
Neither does the need to increase foreign labor exist in isolation of other nations: The question is about how to vie with other countries to attract workers and not lose them to other destinations.
The Japanese government’s initiatives to change the broken Technical Intern Training Program for unskilled foreign workers have sought to give them more freedom and agency in Japan, such as the ability to change employers and improve the framework governing supervisory agencies and support. However, labor law expert Yoshihisa Saito, an associate professor of the Graduate School of International Cooperation Studies in Kobe, in August last year said that Japan continues to view foreign workers as disposable objects to which a bare minimum of support should be given.
Xenophobic is too strong a word, but there is little doubt that the system needs to be reformed to bring it into line with more progressive international standards focusing on the rights of the individual.
Biden did not mention Taiwan, but the nation does not fare too well in this regard, either. There is so much to do in terms of reforming the foreign labor recruitment system to address high fees payable by the worker, not the employer, leading to a form of debt bondage and higher incidence of absconding. It is regrettable that the most recent opportunity to address this issue, the presidential campaigns before the elections on Jan. 13, passed by without the candidates broaching solutions.
Nations in the region need to augment their working age populations, and do so despite objections by more conservative elements in society that are concerned with dilution of local culture and with demographic changes. Instead of treating foreign workers as short-term solutions to a long-term problem, they need to look into ways to integrate them and recognize them as full, legitimate members of society.
They need to be aware that it is increasingly a sellers’ market, and that there is a race on.
In the US’ National Security Strategy (NSS) report released last month, US President Donald Trump offered his interpretation of the Monroe Doctrine. The “Trump Corollary,” presented on page 15, is a distinctly aggressive rebranding of the more than 200-year-old foreign policy position. Beyond reasserting the sovereignty of the western hemisphere against foreign intervention, the document centers on energy and strategic assets, and attempts to redraw the map of the geopolitical landscape more broadly. It is clear that Trump no longer sees the western hemisphere as a peaceful backyard, but rather as the frontier of a new Cold War. In particular,
When it became clear that the world was entering a new era with a radical change in the US’ global stance in US President Donald Trump’s second term, many in Taiwan were concerned about what this meant for the nation’s defense against China. Instability and disruption are dangerous. Chaos introduces unknowns. There was a sense that the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) might have a point with its tendency not to trust the US. The world order is certainly changing, but concerns about the implications for Taiwan of this disruption left many blind to how the same forces might also weaken
As the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) races toward its 2027 modernization goals, most analysts fixate on ship counts, missile ranges and artificial intelligence. Those metrics matter — but they obscure a deeper vulnerability. The true future of the PLA, and by extension Taiwan’s security, might hinge less on hardware than on whether the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) can preserve ideological loyalty inside its own armed forces. Iran’s 1979 revolution demonstrated how even a technologically advanced military can collapse when the social environment surrounding it shifts. That lesson has renewed relevance as fresh unrest shakes Iran today — and it should
As the new year dawns, Taiwan faces a range of external uncertainties that could impact the safety and prosperity of its people and reverberate in its politics. Here are a few key questions that could spill over into Taiwan in the year ahead. WILL THE AI BUBBLE POP? The global AI boom supported Taiwan’s significant economic expansion in 2025. Taiwan’s economy grew over 7 percent and set records for exports, imports, and trade surplus. There is a brewing debate among investors about whether the AI boom will carry forward into 2026. Skeptics warn that AI-led global equity markets are overvalued and overleveraged
RSS