Greenpeace China is in the process of opening a Taiwan office. While saying that Greenpeace China will not issue opinions on political issues, a representative said the Taiwan office would be subordinate to the Chinese office and that one’s position on Taiwanese independence would be a consideration when interviewing applicants.
Thanks to its public relations skills, Greenpeace International is probably the world’s best known environmental protection organization. It has clashed with Japanese whalers on the high seas to protect whales and tracked international transports of toxic waste. It has sneaked into and closed down coal power plants and hung banners from chimneys. In 1985 the French secret service sank the organization’s boat The Rainbow Warrior in New Zealand to stop it from interfering with nuclear arms tests in the South Pacific. This fearless pursuit of its goals is admired by many who want to protect the environment.
In the past, shared ideals have led the Taiwan Environmental Protection Union (台灣環境保護聯盟) to cooperate with Greenpeace International in protests against nuclear power and the handling of nuclear waste. It has shared the Taiwanese environmental protection experience with other countries, and feels strongly that it is only through solidarity and mutual help that weaker groups will be able to protest against the inequalities created by the existing political and economic system. That is why we are very happy to see international environmental protection organizations set up offices in Taiwan. Greenpeace China’s plan to open up an office in Taiwan, however, raises many concerns.
Greenpeace opened an office in Hong Kong in 1997, and in 2002 it set up an office in Guangzhou, Guangdong Province. Over the years, the activities of the Chinese branch have differed vastly from what people might expect: It has focused on opposing genetically modified foods and promoting renewable energy. On issues where Greenpeace International has clashed with other countries, such as nuclear safety, nuclear pollution, nuclear waste treatment, industrial pollution, toxic waste, over-development, excessive logging and so on, Greenpeace China has done nothing. Did Greenpeace China show any concern for possible leaks of radioactive materials during the great earthquake in Sichuan Province in 2008 or the recent deadly earthquake in Qinghai? No.
I find it hard to believe that the introduction of genetically modified foods is the most serious problem facing an industrializing country like China, and I also find it difficult to believe that China does not suffer from the environmental issues afflicting other countries. Could it be that Greenpeace has chosen to accommodate the Chinese government and decided to remain silent on highly controversial, highly sensitive issues? Is this the result of some kind of agreement? Could it be that Greenpeace China is not only neglecting China’s massive environmental problems, but that it is also accommodating the Chinese state apparatus in declaring that Taiwan is part of China? Doesn’t making one’s view on Taiwan’s independence or unification with China a criterion in the employment process mean that Greenpeace has chosen to prioritize politics and abandon everything else?
Too many organizations in Taiwan place politics above all else, and this has created a climate where it is very difficult to maintain a calm tone in public debate. We certainly don’t need yet another organization claiming to work for the protection of the environment to come to Taiwan and further complicate our environmental protection efforts.
Gloria Hsu is a professor at National Taiwan University’s Department of Atmospheric Sciences and former chairwoman of the Taiwan Environmental Protection Union.
TRANSLATED BY PERRY SVENSSON
Elbridge Colby, America’s Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, is the most influential voice on defense strategy in the Second Trump Administration. For insight into his thinking, one could do no better than read his thoughts on the defense of Taiwan which he gathered in a book he wrote in 2021. The Strategy of Denial, is his contemplation of China’s rising hegemony in Asia and on how to deter China from invading Taiwan. Allowing China to absorb Taiwan, he wrote, would open the entire Indo-Pacific region to Chinese preeminence and result in a power transition that would place America’s prosperity
When Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) caucus whip Ker Chien-ming (柯建銘) first suggested a mass recall of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators, the Taipei Times called the idea “not only absurd, but also deeply undemocratic” (“Lai’s speech and legislative chaos,” Jan. 6, page 8). In a subsequent editorial (“Recall chaos plays into KMT hands,” Jan. 9, page 8), the paper wrote that his suggestion was not a solution, and that if it failed, it would exacerbate the enmity between the parties and lead to a cascade of revenge recalls. The danger came from having the DPP orchestrate a mass recall. As it transpired,
All 24 Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers and suspended Hsinchu Mayor Ann Kao (高虹安), formerly of the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), survived recall elections against them on Saturday, in a massive loss to the unprecedented mass recall movement, as well as to the ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) that backed it. The outcome has surprised many, as most analysts expected that at least a few legislators would be ousted. Over the past few months, dedicated and passionate civic groups gathered more than 1 million signatures to recall KMT lawmakers, an extraordinary achievement that many believed would be enough to remove at
A few weeks ago in Kaohsiung, tech mogul turned political pundit Robert Tsao (曹興誠) joined Western Washington University professor Chen Shih-fen (陳時奮) for a public forum in support of Taiwan’s recall campaign. Kaohsiung, already the most Taiwanese independence-minded city in Taiwan, was not in need of a recall. So Chen took a different approach: He made the case that unification with China would be too expensive to work. The argument was unusual. Most of the time, we hear that Taiwan should remain free out of respect for democracy and self-determination, but cost? That is not part of the usual script, and
RSS