Society in Taiwan is fraught with crises. Looking back at the environmental catastrophes over the years, we can more or less break them down into three typical phases. In the first phase of each crisis, the relevant policy-makers typically failed to realize the existence of the problem. An environmental crisis is not only a physiological phenomenon; it also triggers human anxiety and fears. It is virtually impossible to communicate the seriousness of a crisis by words alone.
Only when policy-makers go to the scene of the disaster, there-fore, can they get to the heart of the problem and understand the dangers. It is truly unfortunate that, in a cultural setting giving priority to hierarchy and seniority, high-ranking officials usually stay far away from the scene of the incident. They are thus unable to grasp the severity of the problem. Things were this way in the 921 earthquake and in the recent oil spill incident. The golden opportunity to stay ahead of the crisis was simply missed.
In the second phase of a typical crisis in Taiwan, the blood-thirsty "sharks" or political opportunists are lured by the smell of blood. This phase begins with warnings from environmentalists about the potential dangers of the incident. Public fear then turns to rage due to the author-ities' poor handling of the crisis. Mass protests are held. At the same time, individuals with ulterior motives begin to come out like famished hyenas and seize the opportunity to benefit themselves. Typical examples are the elected legislative representatives. They can use the chance to "serve their constituents" and prepare for the next election, while keeping an eye out for means of benefiting themselves.
In the past, some DPP members used to enjoy playing this kind of role. Interestingly, even KMT Chairman Lien Chan (連戰) stepped into the spotlight over the recent oil spill incident. Due to their political influence and status, their extreme comments often attract media attention, while the real environmental issues are left unnoticed. Professional environmentalists have no say, unless their opinions happen to conform with the stance of politicians. Not only does the problem remain unresolved, but the situation gets even worse. A messy phenomenon is thus created -- government officials fear elected legislative representatives, who in turn fear reporters.
The last phase of a crisis consists of "sharing the loot and dividing the community." In this phase, the government officials handling the crisis have been bitten all over by those "sharks." They have no strength left to resist. All they can do is make compromises. Throwing money around, however, does not necessarily solve the problems, because an uneven allocation of money will only divide and polarize different groups, sowing the seeds for even more vehement struggles. The phenomenon will only worsen the business environment and result in an industrial exodus. Furthermore, fights within each political party will increase tremendously, leaving Taiwan's politics in turmoil.
In the process of creating economic miracles, Taiwan has also produced many crises in the past. It is due to improper crisis management, however, that we have to face the current setbacks in economic development and continual political conflicts. Many disasters, though, can be good opportunities. If they are handled properly, society sees progress.
First, the inability of officials to detect pending crises is attributable to human nature. Sigmund Freud said human behavior is prompted by the pleasure principle. This being the case, humans will never actively try to seek out crises. In fact, they will try to deny their existence and engage in wishful thinking about its consequences. Only a well-organized and well-designed crisis-management mechanism can overcome this human weakness. It is important to invite professionals and members of the local community to visit the scene of the disaster as well. This way, we can sketch a clear picture of the "who, what, when, where and how" elements of the crisis at the same time.
Secondly, the authorities should periodically report on the incident and the way it is being handled to the media and local residents. Local residents and professionals should be invited to hammer out important decisions on crisis management, instead of having a handful of people drawing up plans behind closed doors. Only with a transparent and professional crisis-management procedure can we ease the local residents' fear and anger and prevent those with ulterior motives from fanning the flames of disorder.
Lastly, personal feelings, reason and law should be equally balanced during negotiations. We should not have blind faith in the power of money. If all involved can communicate with each other with patience, we can find win-win solutions.
Taiwan seems to have become immersed in the whirlpool of the above-described three phases of crisis-management. It is to be hoped that Environmental Protection Administration head Lin Jun-yi (林俊義) can see what's behind Taiwan's crises and change the situation. As an outstanding environmentalist, Lin once played the role of a "shark." Although now he has become shark prey, he can make good use of his experience to explore a positive solution for Taiwan's industrial development and ecological protection.
Bob Kuo is a professor of information systems at National Sun Yat-sen University.
Translated by Jackie Lin
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with