The damage caused by Typhoon Sinlaku and the way it was handled has once again made Taiwan look like a backward nation. The TV images of people who lost family members because of the typhoon have been very upsetting. Although typhoons are scary, what is even scarier is the way the public has lost sight of the reason why the storm wreaked so much havoc, and why the government has been unable to prevent these problems.
Taiwan may have experienced an economic miracle, but we have also seen tragedies brought on by natural disasters. Having just passed the ninth anniversary of the 921 Earthquake in 1999; we are still destroying the land that we live and rely on. Conserving energy and reducing carbon emissions are a main focus of the government.
By the time these policies reach the various ministries, however, they have become fragmented, disconnected technical ideas devoid of a comprehensive vision or complementary measures. At a time when an emphasis is being placed on reviving the economy and increasing domestic demand, more damage will be done to our environment as a result of unfettered construction.
Increased investment means private companies are developing more environmentally sensitive areas. Whether it be the mudslide that crushed the Fengchiu Tunnel or the collapsed hotels that had been built on riverbeds at the Lushan Hot Springs Area in Nantou County, these incidents should encourage the public to take a closer look at the real reasons for these environment-linked tragedies and methods to prevent their reoccurrence.
The key to the issue lies in how we look at fundamental solutions, such as land preservation legislation and attempts at eliminating problems at the source.
The Fengchiu Tunnel is a prime example — after the New Central Cross-Island Highway was completed, the lack of complementary measures and land-use controls meant that environmentally sensitive areas of the region became overdeveloped. Given the softer soil caused by earthquakes in this area, this section of road was under threat from landslides.
Reconstruction should have focused on a fundamental solution to the factors causing the problems. However, road construction authorities are restricted by law to doing temporary work on the slopes immediately adjacent to landslides and falling rocks.
The blinkered vision of senior authorities prevents them from taking a comprehensive approach to dealing with the fundamental issue: mountainside development.
The deaths caused by the massive landslide at the Fengchiu Tunnel resulted from the tunnel being built to provide temporary shelter from rock slides and landslides because it wasn’t possible to solve the real reasons for the landslides.
The recent typhoon disaster increased the danger level of 40 dangerous river bridges. The support pilings of the Wuxi Bridge in Taichung County, which was built in 2001, have already been exposed. The problem with these bridges isn’t the way they were built. It is that the 921 Earthquake and illegal gravel mining have changed the course of some rivers. This is a problem that can only be solved through interministerial coordination.
Another case of inappropriate development arises from national land planning and complementary local development measures. A prime example of questionable development is the dozens of hotels that have been built alongside riverbeds, often blocking large parts of the river. Flooding triggered by the recent typhoon led to the collapse of several buildings illegally erected in rivers, revealing developers’ greed and an almost total disregard for the government.
Taiwan’s plan for the next 100 years should focus on sustainable development. Using a comprehensive approach, the government should look at the environmental protection issues important to each city and county and the strong points of each of these places. It should then manage demand, rather than allowing unbridled development aimed at “increasing domestic demand.” This is the only way to solve the current crisis.
Teamwork and controls at different levels of government is the only way to set up a framework for comprehensive environmental protection. Without such a framework, the development of partial emergency measures and piecemeal technological developments will do nothing to protect the environment or human life.
Next year will be the 10th anniversary of the 921 Earthquake. Perhaps Taiwan will choose collective amnesia and continue with unbridled development. But every disaster is a reminder of Mother Nature’s power.
Environmental protection has become trendy in recent years and the National Land Restoration Act (國土復育條例) was established at a critical juncture. The act is now instrumental in protecting the environment. The draft national land planning act is also aimed at helping create a balanced ecology. However, the government’s fixation on saving energy and reducing carbon emissions has made ministries forget that sustainable development is the goal. There are many environmental protection policies and mechanisms in place and these should continue to be promoted, regardless of which political party is in power.
Development and environmental protection need not be in direct opposition. Given Taiwan’s topography and geology, however, development needs to be regulated in order to ensure sustainable development and protect lives.
As people question who is responsible for improving our environmental situation, perhaps environmental ideas that have long been politicized will again win favor. Environmental legislation should be completed at the appropriate time and everyone in Taiwan should try to do something for the sustainable development of the country.
Hochen Tan is chairman of the Taiwan Ecological Engineering Development Foundation.
Translated by Drew Cameron
A response to my article (“Invite ‘will-bes,’ not has-beens,” Aug. 12, page 8) mischaracterizes my arguments, as well as a speech by former British prime minister Boris Johnson at the Ketagalan Forum in Taipei early last month. Tseng Yueh-ying (曾月英) in the response (“A misreading of Johnson’s speech,” Aug. 24, page 8) does not dispute that Johnson referred repeatedly to Taiwan as “a segment of the Chinese population,” but asserts that the phrase challenged Beijing by questioning whether parts of “the Chinese population” could be “differently Chinese.” This is essentially a confirmation of Beijing’s “one country, two systems” formulation, which says that
“History does not repeat itself, but it rhymes” (attributed to Mark Twain). The USSR was the international bully during the Cold War as it sought to make the world safe for Soviet-style Communism. China is now the global bully as it applies economic power and invests in Mao’s (毛澤東) magic weapons (the People’s Liberation Army [PLA], the United Front Work Department, and the Chinese Communist Party [CCP]) to achieve world domination. Freedom-loving countries must respond to the People’s Republic of China (PRC), especially in the Indo-Pacific (IP), as resolutely as they did against the USSR. In 1954, the US and its allies
Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi arrived in China yesterday, where he is to attend a summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) and Russian President Vladimir Putin today. As this coincides with the 50 percent US tariff levied on Indian products, some Western news media have suggested that Modi is moving away from the US, and into the arms of China and Russia. Taiwan-Asia Exchange Foundation fellow Sana Hashmi in a Taipei Times article published yesterday titled “Myths around Modi’s China visit” said that those analyses have misrepresented India’s strategic calculations, and attempted to view
When Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) stood in front of the Potala Palace in Lhasa on Thursday last week, flanked by Chinese flags, synchronized schoolchildren and armed Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) troops, he was not just celebrating the 60th anniversary of the establishment of the “Tibet Autonomous Region,” he was making a calculated declaration: Tibet is China. It always has been. Case closed. Except it has not. The case remains wide open — not just in the hearts of Tibetans, but in history records. For decades, Beijing has insisted that Tibet has “always been part of China.” It is a phrase
RSS