The tragic landslide on the Formosa Freeway (National Freeway No. 3) took four lives and revived awareness of Taiwan’s difficult geological situation and concerns for a safe living environment.
Statistics show that 340 residential buildings in the greater Taipei area are being monitored because they are located on dip slopes — surface layers of rock and soil resting on underlying solid rock and with the same incline — dip — as the solid rock. The government, however, refuses to disclose the exact location of these buildings because it worries prices would be affected. It says there is no legal foundation for such disclosure because a proposed geology act was not passed 13 years ago. As a result, many people living in hillside properties face uncertainty and fear.
Taiwan’s geological situation is exacerbated by frequent earthquakes, typhoons and torrential rains that have caused many landslides with great loss of life and property. In August 1997, the Lincoln Mansion landslide in Sijhih City, Taipei County, killed 28 people and forced more than 100 families to move, and in August last year, Typhoon Morakot wiped out Siaolin Village in Kaohsiung County. These tragedies are the result of Taiwan’s difficult geostructure and inadequate water and soil preservation.
Taiwan is densely populated and development has destroyed hillsides and blocked rivers. People build houses and roads in places where they shouldn’t in the belief that man controls nature. When disaster strikes, however, nature shows its might. Taiwan needs legislation to regulate environmental preservation and restricts land development.
Thirteen years ago, a week after the Lincoln Mansion landslide, the Ministry of Economic Affairs proposed an act requiring the government to carry out a comprehensive geological survey and make the results public. It also required the delineation of geologically sensitive areas where land development should be restricted. The hope was to establish a system of transparent and open geological information so the public could evacuate potential disaster areas.
The bill passed its third legislative reading, but was then recalled by legislators. One of the reasons given for the recall was that “if the law were used to review and determine which areas should not be developed, that would restrict land development and have a far-reaching impact on the rights and interests of the public.” The national organization for construction and development companies and six branch organizations for technical experts worked hard to block the legislation because of the mutual interests of, and exchanges between, these groups. The legislators recalling the geology act consisted of more than 60 Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators, including current Premier Wu Den-yih (吳敦義) and Changhua County Commissioner Cho Po-yuan (卓伯源).
Thirteen years later, the Formosa Freeway landslide has again highlighted the need for a geology act, and both the KMT and the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) are now calling for rapid action. The question arises, however, whether Wu and the KMT should first apologize for blocking the act and also apologize to the families of the victims of Sunday’s landslide and the public before hurrying to correct the mistake they made 13 years ago.
Does passing a geology act ensure permanent land safety? If the government worries that it would hurt certain groups in the construction industry and therefore is afraid to make public the reasons for disasters and the location of geologically sensitive areas, then this law would merely be a paper tiger.
Not only do we need a geology act, we also need the government to implement it without fearing vested interests in the land development industry.
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with