Most people know little of marine policy and affairs, even though standards have long been practiced internationally. The content and scope of marine affairs in the international community can be gleaned from the Oceans and the Law of the Sea report put forward annually by the UN Secretary General to the General Assembly. In these reports, key topics include: the international development of the law of the sea and the opinions of different countries, sea transportation and safety, marine resources, marine environment, marine science and technology, and international cooperation and coordination, among other topics.
Some argue that the establishment of a marine commission is unnecessary, as the field is relatively new and there is a lack of professionals both within academia and without. This argument is far from the truth. Taiwan is a sea-bound country with a long and intimate relationship with marine affairs.
In terms of fishing, shipping, shipbuilding, navigation, port affairs, traditional marine industries, marine environmental protection, scientific research and energy exploration, Taiwan has an abundance of professionals. The importance of the ocean to Taiwan is far beyond being a mere environmental resource or tourism resource as some may suggest. In order to better control, conserve, and utilize the ocean, many Taiwanese professionals have silently made their contributions. For instance, faced with the several large oil contamination incidents and their aftermath, or the negotiation to enter fishing organizations or enforcing restrictions on fishing areas bound by cross government conventions, Taiwan would not have survived without the efforts of these specialists.
Currently, marine affairs are spread out among various bodies within Taiwan. However, various fields within marine affairs are strongly interrelated. Furthermore, the management of marine affairs often extends beyond the jurisdictions of a single nation. Hence the establishment of a government body responsible for marine affairs could integrate dispersed fields. Such a body would not only concentrate authority but would enforce the formation of marine policy and benefit the energy of the country's marine authority.
As for the integration of the Coast Guard Administration within the marine commission: aside from ensuring national maritime security, the Coast Guards' duties include maintaining marine traffic, sea rescues, first aid in disasters and patrolling and protecting fisheries, maintaining fishing resources, environmental protection, conservation, and others -- a broad field. If we could follow the examples of Canada and South Korea and integrate the Coast Guard into the marine department, then the marine policymaking body would have executive force at the same time. This would allow direct implementation of policies, and eliminate the previous problem of miscommunication between various organizations and the resulting inefficiency when marine related issues occur.
If a marine department were established to deal with marine affairs, the control of the seas would be improved. Under the current political climate, the establishment of a marine department, as hoped for by the marine industry and academia, may be better than a marine commission.
Raymond Chen is a student at National Cheng Kong University's Institute of Ocean Technology and Marine Affairs
Translated by Angela Hong
A gap appears to be emerging between Washington’s foreign policy elites and the broader American public on how the United States should respond to China’s rise. From my vantage working at a think tank in Washington, DC, and through regular travel around the United States, I increasingly experience two distinct discussions. This divergence — between America’s elite hawkishness and public caution — may become one of the least appreciated and most consequential external factors influencing Taiwan’s security environment in the years ahead. Within the American policy community, the dominant view of China has grown unmistakably tough. Many members of Congress, as
The Hong Kong government on Monday gazetted sweeping amendments to the implementation rules of Article 43 of its National Security Law. There was no legislative debate, no public consultation and no transition period. By the time the ink dried on the gazette, the new powers were already in force. This move effectively bypassed Hong Kong’s Legislative Council. The rules were enacted by the Hong Kong chief executive, in conjunction with the Committee for Safeguarding National Security — a body shielded from judicial review and accountable only to Beijing. What is presented as “procedural refinement” is, in substance, a shift away from
The shifting geopolitical tectonic plates of this year have placed Beijing in a profound strategic dilemma. As Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) prepares for a high-stakes summit with US President Donald Trump, the traditional power dynamics of the China-Japan-US triangle have been destabilized by the diplomatic success of Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi in Washington. For the Chinese leadership, the anxiety is two-fold: There is a visceral fear of being encircled by a hardened security alliance, and a secondary risk of being left in a vulnerable position by a transactional deal between Washington and Tokyo that might inadvertently empower Japan
After declaring Iran’s military “gone,” US President Donald Trump appealed to the UK, France, Japan and South Korea — as well as China, Iran’s strategic partner — to send minesweepers and naval forces to reopen the Strait of Hormuz. When allies balked, the request turned into a warning: NATO would face “a very bad” future if it refused. The prevailing wisdom is that Trump faces a credibility problem: having spent years insulting allies, he finds they would not rally when he needs them. That is true, but superficial, as though a structural collapse could be caused by wounded feelings. Something
RSS