As Typhoon Sepat lashed Taiwan, the government put the nation on full alert. But to really prevent heavy damage, disaster prevention and relief must be improved. This is the responsibility of the central and local governments, the fire administration and other departments. The government must take the biggest responsibility as it holds the most extensive resources.
Many indicators show a lack of crisis awareness causing the government's disaster relief and prevention mechanisms to not function very well. This can be seen in the government's handling of earlier crises. For example, after the 921 Earthquake in 1999, the central disaster response authorities failed to take immediate action. Disaster relief officials at the local level waited for superiors to examine the situation, without knowing -- or even thinking about -- how to deal with the crisis.
Since the earthquake, the National Fire Agency under the Ministry of the Interior and local fire departments have greatly improved their facilities and disaster prevention abilities.
However, judging from the government's mobilization plans, there has been only limited development in their disaster prevention and relief capability.
The problems stem from a political system in which administrative neutrality is often violated and there is inappropriate political interference in administrative and personnel affairs. Not only that, but the administrative organization is incomplete.
Theoretically, the relief system should react immediately and with high sensitivity, willingness and capability in the face of disaster.
My observations show, however, that except for fire fighters, government officials from the top all the way down are rarely willing to, capable of or induced to carry out disaster prevention and relief work. Local government preparation in particular is lacking.
The most crucial cause of this phenomenon lies in the lack of coordination.
Even if central and local governments establish disaster response centers when a major disaster is approaching, those staffing these centers are little more than a motley crew temporarily thrown together at random, as disaster response drills are rarely held.
Even if the participants are government heads or first-level officials, basic ability and know-ledge about organizing disaster prevention and relief mobilization is insufficient, often limiting the effectivenss of the efforts.
The disaster relief systems in the US and Japan are much more advanced. In addition to fire agencies under the control of the central government and fire departments, there are official crisis management departments handling disaster prevention and relief work.
I have twice visited Japan to study local disaster relief systems. I discovered that they implemented annual disaster relief drills on a prefectural level and that the government chiefs and junior level civil servants all took these drills seriously.
Several local governments in Japan would invite experts to attend emergency response meetings during a disaster in order to prevent rigid bureaucracy from interfering with disaster prevention and relief work decisions.
Although Taiwan's government can't strengthen disaster relief systems immediately, it should at least invite experts and demand that government officials place importance on coordinating disaster relief and organization mobilization in order to make the system more responsive and effective.
Yang Yung-nane is a professor in the Department of Political Science and the vice dean of the College of Social Sciences at Cheng Kung University
Translated by Ted Yang
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under