On the afternoon of February 5, FRA convened a civil defense forum at Jinan Presbyterian Church, titled ‘Civil Resilience in Responding to Sudden Disasters: An Examination of Taiwan’s Civil Defense Architecture.’ The forum was initiated by Professor Ho Mei‑Hsiang, a member of Board of Directors of FRA. Speakers included former Minister of the Interior Lin Yu‑chang, Professor Liu Yu‑Hsi of the Presidential Office’s All‑of‑Society Defense Resilience Committee, as well as representatives from multiple civil defense organizations. Together, they examined the current state of Taiwan’s civil defense system and discussed how it can best coordinate with government agencies so that, in times of disaster, social order can be swiftly restored and the nation’s societal resilience can be fully demonstrated.

The forum opened with remarks from Dr. Jason Chen, Chairman of the Association. In her introduction as moderator, Professor Ho Mei‑Hsiang emphasized that whether facing natural disasters or human‑made crises, society must possess the capacity for self‑support and rapid response. Drawing on her own experience with individual firearms training, she noted that those outside the formal national system cannot participate in combat operations; nevertheless, civil organizations can still serve as crucial auxiliary forces, playing important roles in regional defense and disaster response. Professor Ho underscored that understanding how the national system operates is the foundation for effective collaboration between civil organizations and the state.

Associate Professor Liu Yu‑Hsi, a member of the Presidential Office’s All‑of‑Society Defense Resilience Committee, noted in her remarks that more than thirty civil organizations across Taiwan are now engaged in civil defense training and community defense efforts. These groups include local civic associations, overseas Taiwanese organizations, and civil defense education groups. Many members participate in training at their own expense, covering physical conditioning, first aid, communications, and the operation and counter‑operation of drones, while gradually establishing command and organizational structures—demonstrating a strong, grassroots commitment to self‑initiated defense. She emphasized that civil groups understand that the core principle of all‑of‑society defense resilience lies in maintaining society’s operational capacity during wartime or disasters, rather than directly engaging in combat.

In his address, former Minister of the Interior Lin Yu‑chang explained that the distinction between civil defense and militia lies in whether personnel are armed and enter combat, whereas all‑of‑society defense resilience emphasizes the ability of society to maintain functioning during crises. During his tenure, President Tsai Ing‑wen entrusted him with a critical mission: advancing the concept of ‘all‑of‑society defense resilience.’ He devoted substantial effort to driving institutional reforms. For example, in organizational restructuring, he promoted the professionalization of the Security Police to focus on protecting critical infrastructure, while coordinating with the Ministry of National Defense to clearly delineate responsibilities—assigning the unarmed civil defense system to be integrated under the Ministry of the Interior, thereby improving operational efficiency. Lin also highlighted the mobilization potential of Taiwan’s alternative service personnel: approximately 279,000 men who have completed service and are under age 36. Historically, they were not effectively incorporated into the national mobilization system. He therefore planned to strengthen alternative service training centers and considered institutional designs for making the conscription administration system more independent, so that this pool of young manpower could be better integrated. He further shared observations and insights from his visit to Israel. Following his speech, participants engaged in direct questioning and discussion, exchanging a wide range of experiences and perspectives.

Taiwan’s security depends not only on military capability, but also on the organizational capacity, mobilization potential, and institutional resilience of society as a whole. The self‑initiated training and gradual institutionalization of civil groups, together with government reforms and system integration, are steadily forming the foundational architecture of Taiwan’s ‘all‑of‑society defense.’ Looking ahead, the Formosa Association will continue bringing together academia, policymakers, and civil organizations to deepen research on civil defense systems and advance public advocacy—promoting the development of a resilient society capable of maintaining operations in the face of natural disasters and wartime shocks.

On the 17th, FRA held the third session of its ‘Left–Right Forum’ series at the College of Public Health, National Taiwan University. Focusing on the topics of Migrant Workers and Immigration, the event brought together representatives from the legal community, political parties, and industry. From the perspectives of both the left and right of the political spectrum, the forum examined the structural controversies arising from Taiwan’s long‑standing labor shortages, declining birthrate, and immigration policies.

In his remarks, Chairman Dr. Jason Chen noted that Taiwan’s economy cannot rely solely on its highly internationalized semiconductor industry. The government must also confront the labor shortages and transformation needs faced by traditional industries, which directly affect the livelihoods of most citizens. Through open public discussion, he emphasized, Taiwan should work toward building a more comprehensive social consensus on migrant worker and immigration policies.

The first session of the forum focused on ‘Migrant Workers, the Labor Market, and Cost Distribution.’ Attorney Tung Wen‑Hsuan pointed out that the government has long negotiated migrant worker wages through state‑to‑state agreements, resulting in employers bearing costs far above market rates. She further questioned the unclear disposition of the substantial wage differentials accumulated over the years and the opaque flow of the Employment Stability Fund. Tung warned that if the high cost of household migrant workers continues to burden families with young children, it will intensify the declining birthrate and severely impact Taiwan’s future demographic structure.

Chairwoman Chou Ni‑an of the Taiwan Solidarity Union stated that the party advocates ‘Taiwan First, Protecting Local Labor,’ arguing that equal wages for migrant and domestic workers—while employers must additionally cover food and housing for migrant workers—is unfair to Taiwanese laborers. She asserted that foreign workers should be covered by commercial insurance rather than the national health insurance system, and called on the government to strictly manage foreign labor quotas and rigorously investigate public safety issues and welfare misuse. Such measures, she emphasized, are necessary to prevent systemic abuses of human rights that could negatively impact society.

Kuan Wen‑chieh, former chairman of the Employment Service Industry Association, offered a practical perspective, noting that the government’s promoted ‘direct hiring system’ cannot replace the broker‑based model and has failed to resolve labor‑management challenges—ultimately increasing the burden on employers. He urged the government to follow Singapore’s ‘citizens first’ principle by establishing a dedicated manpower authority and undertaking a comprehensive overhaul of the migrant‑worker system that has been in place for many years.

Lin Yi‑hsuan, Secretary‑General of the New Power Party, noted that Taiwan has long mixed market logic with administrative intervention in its migrant‑worker policies, resulting in a ‘decoupled wage’ system that risks suppressing domestic workers’ wages. He argued for liberalizing the migrant‑labor market while opposing politically driven wage controls, allowing labor prices to return to a rational market mechanism.

The second session addressed immigration, refugees, and border security. In his written remarks, Chang Ming‑you, Deputy Secretary‑General of the Taiwan Statebuilding Party, noted that issues concerning migrant workers and refugees simultaneously touch on human rights, public safety, and democratic values. He emphasized that the state must establish a transparent and predictable system to prevent legal vacuums from being exploited.

Chou Ni‑an further warned that the Chinese Communist Party may attempt infiltration through cross‑Strait marriages and community organizations. She advocated raising the threshold for naturalization and opposed including individuals from China, Hong Kong, and Macau under a refugee law. Lin Yi‑hsuan, meanwhile, argued that given Taiwan’s substantial labor shortage, the country should conditionally retain foreign workers who have made long‑term contributions to society, and incorporate national‑security screening into any refugee system to strike a balance between humanitarian considerations and security.

On the afternoon of February 5, FRA convened a civil defense forum at Jinan Presbyterian Church, titled ‘Civil Resilience in Responding to Sudden Disasters: An Examination of Taiwan’s Civil Defense Architecture.’ The forum was initiated by Professor Ho Mei‑Hsiang, a member of Board of Directors of FRA. Speakers included former Minister of the Interior Lin Yu‑chang, Professor Liu Yu‑Hsi of the Presidential Office’s All‑of‑Society Defense Resilience Committee, as well as representatives from multiple civil defense organizations. Together, they examined the current state of Taiwan’s civil defense system and discussed how it can best coordinate with government agencies so that, in times of disaster, social order can be swiftly restored and the nation’s societal resilience can be fully demonstrated.

The forum opened with remarks from Dr. Jason Chen, Chairman of the Association. In her introduction as moderator, Professor Ho Mei‑Hsiang emphasized that whether facing natural disasters or human‑made crises, society must possess the capacity for self‑support and rapid response. Drawing on her own experience with individual firearms training, she noted that those outside the formal national system cannot participate in combat operations; nevertheless, civil organizations can still serve as crucial auxiliary forces, playing important roles in regional defense and disaster response. Professor Ho underscored that understanding how the national system operates is the foundation for effective collaboration between civil organizations and the state.

Associate Professor Liu Yu‑Hsi, a member of the Presidential Office’s All‑of‑Society Defense Resilience Committee, noted in her remarks that more than thirty civil organizations across Taiwan are now engaged in civil defense training and community defense efforts. These groups include local civic associations, overseas Taiwanese organizations, and civil defense education groups. Many members participate in training at their own expense, covering physical conditioning, first aid, communications, and the operation and counter‑operation of drones, while gradually establishing command and organizational structures—demonstrating a strong, grassroots commitment to self‑initiated defense. She emphasized that civil groups understand that the core principle of all‑of‑society defense resilience lies in maintaining society’s operational capacity during wartime or disasters, rather than directly engaging in combat.

In his address, former Minister of the Interior Lin Yu‑chang explained that the distinction between civil defense and militia lies in whether personnel are armed and enter combat, whereas all‑of‑society defense resilience emphasizes the ability of society to maintain functioning during crises. During his tenure, President Tsai Ing‑wen entrusted him with a critical mission: advancing the concept of ‘all‑of‑society defense resilience.’ He devoted substantial effort to driving institutional reforms. For example, in organizational restructuring, he promoted the professionalization of the Security Police to focus on protecting critical infrastructure, while coordinating with the Ministry of National Defense to clearly delineate responsibilities—assigning the unarmed civil defense system to be integrated under the Ministry of the Interior, thereby improving operational efficiency. Lin also highlighted the mobilization potential of Taiwan’s alternative service personnel: approximately 279,000 men who have completed service and are under age 36. Historically, they were not effectively incorporated into the national mobilization system. He therefore planned to strengthen alternative service training centers and considered institutional designs for making the conscription administration system more independent, so that this pool of young manpower could be better integrated. He further shared observations and insights from his visit to Israel. Following his speech, participants engaged in direct questioning and discussion, exchanging a wide range of experiences and perspectives.

Taiwan’s security depends not only on military capability, but also on the organizational capacity, mobilization potential, and institutional resilience of society as a whole. The self‑initiated training and gradual institutionalization of civil groups, together with government reforms and system integration, are steadily forming the foundational architecture of Taiwan’s ‘all‑of‑society defense.’ Looking ahead, the Formosa Association will continue bringing together academia, policymakers, and civil organizations to deepen research on civil defense systems and advance public advocacy—promoting the development of a resilient society capable of maintaining operations in the face of natural disasters and wartime shocks.

On the 17th, FRA held the third session of its ‘Left–Right Forum’ series at the College of Public Health, National Taiwan University. Focusing on the topics of Migrant Workers and Immigration, the event brought together representatives from the legal community, political parties, and industry. From the perspectives of both the left and right of the political spectrum, the forum examined the structural controversies arising from Taiwan’s long‑standing labor shortages, declining birthrate, and immigration policies.

In his remarks, Chairman Dr. Jason Chen noted that Taiwan’s economy cannot rely solely on its highly internationalized semiconductor industry. The government must also confront the labor shortages and transformation needs faced by traditional industries, which directly affect the livelihoods of most citizens. Through open public discussion, he emphasized, Taiwan should work toward building a more comprehensive social consensus on migrant worker and immigration policies.

The first session of the forum focused on ‘Migrant Workers, the Labor Market, and Cost Distribution.’ Attorney Tung Wen‑Hsuan pointed out that the government has long negotiated migrant worker wages through state‑to‑state agreements, resulting in employers bearing costs far above market rates. She further questioned the unclear disposition of the substantial wage differentials accumulated over the years and the opaque flow of the Employment Stability Fund. Tung warned that if the high cost of household migrant workers continues to burden families with young children, it will intensify the declining birthrate and severely impact Taiwan’s future demographic structure.

Chairwoman Chou Ni‑an of the Taiwan Solidarity Union stated that the party advocates ‘Taiwan First, Protecting Local Labor,’ arguing that equal wages for migrant and domestic workers—while employers must additionally cover food and housing for migrant workers—is unfair to Taiwanese laborers. She asserted that foreign workers should be covered by commercial insurance rather than the national health insurance system, and called on the government to strictly manage foreign labor quotas and rigorously investigate public safety issues and welfare misuse. Such measures, she emphasized, are necessary to prevent systemic abuses of human rights that could negatively impact society.

Kuan Wen‑chieh, former chairman of the Employment Service Industry Association, offered a practical perspective, noting that the government’s promoted ‘direct hiring system’ cannot replace the broker‑based model and has failed to resolve labor‑management challenges—ultimately increasing the burden on employers. He urged the government to follow Singapore’s ‘citizens first’ principle by establishing a dedicated manpower authority and undertaking a comprehensive overhaul of the migrant‑worker system that has been in place for many years.

Lin Yi‑hsuan, Secretary‑General of the New Power Party, noted that Taiwan has long mixed market logic with administrative intervention in its migrant‑worker policies, resulting in a ‘decoupled wage’ system that risks suppressing domestic workers’ wages. He argued for liberalizing the migrant‑labor market while opposing politically driven wage controls, allowing labor prices to return to a rational market mechanism.

The second session addressed immigration, refugees, and border security. In his written remarks, Chang Ming‑you, Deputy Secretary‑General of the Taiwan Statebuilding Party, noted that issues concerning migrant workers and refugees simultaneously touch on human rights, public safety, and democratic values. He emphasized that the state must establish a transparent and predictable system to prevent legal vacuums from being exploited.

Chou Ni‑an further warned that the Chinese Communist Party may attempt infiltration through cross‑Strait marriages and community organizations. She advocated raising the threshold for naturalization and opposed including individuals from China, Hong Kong, and Macau under a refugee law. Lin Yi‑hsuan, meanwhile, argued that given Taiwan’s substantial labor shortage, the country should conditionally retain foreign workers who have made long‑term contributions to society, and incorporate national‑security screening into any refugee system to strike a balance between humanitarian considerations and security.