Two weeks have passed since Typhoon Morakot brought disastrous floods and landslides to southern and central Taiwan. According to the three-stage view of disaster relief, we have now entered the second phase: short-term recovery.
However, many tasks associated with the first phase — emergency rescue — have not been completed. For example, defining disaster zones, exhuming bodies, evacuating the injured and so on. The window of opportunity for most of these tasks has passed. The authorities have come under a lot of criticism for their slow response, and the government’s abilities to handle the disaster are not up to scratch.
Precisely for this reason, as a former government official with experience in several emergency relief efforts, I am duty-bound to remind readers that there is much more to be done. Let’s hope the government can pick up its pace and make up for lost time.
First, the authorities need to speed up recruitment and requisition of personnel and equipment and get them into the disaster zones to carry out tasks such as removing mud and silt, extracting bodies and dead animals, disinfection, drainage and so on. As soon as the weather turns sunny and hot there will be a risk of infection.
Engineers, soldiers, firefighters and health workers need to work as a team. During this period, traffic in and around the disaster zones must be restricted. Other than rescue and relief workers, local residents and relatives, access must be limited to avoid hindering the relief effort.
One effective strategy is cities and counties with plentiful resources “adopting” disaster-hit counties and cities; some media outlets have reported that this has already begun. The local governments can then send in complete task forces, including construction teams, firefighters and medical and social workers, along with equipment and material aid. This would be better than the initial piecemeal approach that has caused headaches for the authorities in disaster-hit counties.
Second, buildings and objects of cultural significance along with the culture, history and memories they carry should be preserved, rather than eradicated by overzealous use of diggers and bulldozers. Many areas that were damaged in this disaster are Aboriginal villages. The Council of Indigenous Peoples and the Council of Cultural Affairs should coordinate to send Aboriginal museum curators, cultural workers and historians into the disaster zones to help with conservation.
Third, relief networks and public services need to be set up in the disaster zones. The authorities need to clarify the identities of the dead and injured and make inventories of damaged property, crops, farm animals and fisheries, factories, shops and so on. Victims should be compensated swiftly through simple administrative procedures that will not add to their worries, and according to uniform criteria as far as is possible.
Fourth, with the new school year fast approaching, orphaned students and those whose schools have been badly damaged or destroyed need to be allocated to other schools and provided with social support. The best way is for the students’ friends or relatives to locate a school for them. Where students have no friends or family, the parents’ association at the new school should adopt them, while their schoolbooks, clothes, lunches and other expenses should be covered by government subsidies.
In the present situation, it would not necessarily be a good thing to relocate all such students to northern Taiwan because relocation far from home entails greater psychological and social costs than finding space in neighboring towns or villages.
The fifth task is the short-term resettling of displaced people. The main thing is to find new homes and help with social reintegration and psychological recovery. The central government and civic groups should assist local governments by making use of resources donated from abroad to construct temporary communities of prefabricated housing in military camps or by renting surplus housing from the private sector.
The authorities also need to arrange for employment counseling, post-traumatic stress therapy, care for the elderly and disabled, medical services and so on. In doing so, the disaster victims’ social organization skills would be put to good use rather than having them rely on the government to handle everything, which could deepen their sense of helplessness.
The sixth component is counseling for relief workers. Soldiers, firefighters, engineers, social workers and volunteers selflessly commit themselves to rescue work in the initial stage of emergency relief. In doing so, however, they are often forced to deal with disturbing experiences such as the sight of dead and even dismembered or rotting bodies and severed limbs. They will need help to recover from any trauma and accumulated stress. Qualified personnel such as psychiatrists, therapists and social workers should be assigned to help them.
The seventh problem is management of donated money and materials. Responsibility for allocation of precious aid and funds donated by the public should be assigned to specific people, otherwise mistakes may result amid the confusion. The current situation, in which there are multiple channels for making donations, lacks central planning and problems are likely to arise.
The eighth task is to start consultations on long-term settlement, which means, above all, rebuilding communities. There is already talk of relocating whole villages, but such suggestions are premature. If these decisions are made too quickly, they may upset the people involved and disrupt the relief effort.
Aboriginal villages have been hit hardest by the typhoon. Their problems should not be seen only from the viewpoint of the majority Han people or according to geographical and engineering criteria alone. Communal, cultural, social and economic aspects need to be considered. The victims themselves must be involved in discussions, rather than have officials and experts decide on their fate behind closed doors, because this is a matter of their lives and livelihoods.
Finally, a long-term recovery plan must be mapped out. Villages have been wrecked, rivers muddied and mountains torn asunder. The road to recovery will be a long one. Preserving and rebuilding communities, collective social healing, soil and water conservation, land-use planning and strengthening structures for disaster prevention and relief are all issues to be addressed, researched and discussed.
Ignorance and arrogance, on the other hand, are the biggest enemies in the process of recovering from a disaster.
Lin Wan-i is a professor in the Department of Social Work at National Taiwan University.
TRANSLATED BY JULIAN CLEGG
Congratulations to China’s working class — they have officially entered the “Livestock Feed 2.0” era. While others are still researching how to achieve healthy and balanced diets, China has already evolved to the point where it does not matter whether you are actually eating food, as long as you can swallow it. There is no need for cooking, chewing or making decisions — just tear open a package, add some hot water and in a short three minutes you have something that can keep you alive for at least another six hours. This is not science fiction — it is reality.
A foreign colleague of mine asked me recently, “What is a safe distance from potential People’s Liberation Army (PLA) Rocket Force’s (PLARF) Taiwan targets?” This article will answer this question and help people living in Taiwan have a deeper understanding of the threat. Why is it important to understand PLA/PLARF targeting strategy? According to RAND analysis, the PLA’s “systems destruction warfare” focuses on crippling an adversary’s operational system by targeting its networks, especially leadership, command and control (C2) nodes, sensors, and information hubs. Admiral Samuel Paparo, commander of US Indo-Pacific Command, noted in his 15 May 2025 Sedona Forum keynote speech that, as
In a world increasingly defined by unpredictability, two actors stand out as islands of stability: Europe and Taiwan. One, a sprawling union of democracies, but under immense pressure, grappling with a geopolitical reality it was not originally designed for. The other, a vibrant, resilient democracy thriving as a technological global leader, but living under a growing existential threat. In response to rising uncertainties, they are both seeking resilience and learning to better position themselves. It is now time they recognize each other not just as partners of convenience, but as strategic and indispensable lifelines. The US, long seen as the anchor
Kinmen County’s political geography is provocative in and of itself. A pair of islets running up abreast the Chinese mainland, just 20 minutes by ferry from the Chinese city of Xiamen, Kinmen remains under the Taiwanese government’s control, after China’s failed invasion attempt in 1949. The provocative nature of Kinmen’s existence, along with the Matsu Islands off the coast of China’s Fuzhou City, has led to no shortage of outrageous takes and analyses in foreign media either fearmongering of a Chinese invasion or using these accidents of history to somehow understand Taiwan. Every few months a foreign reporter goes to
RSS