China is seeking to meet its targets for saving energy and cutting carbon dioxide emissions by enforcing limits on electricity consumption, suspending production where necessary and even forcing energy-hungry factories to close down altogether. Taiwanese manufacturers are hoping to reap extra profits when these measures push up the prices of products made by such factories.
As controversy rages in Taiwan over whether construction of a coastal industrial complex by Kuokuang Petrochemical Technology Co should be allowed to go ahead, what signals do the actions of the Chinese government send to Taiwan?
In China it is commonplace for the government to use administrative measures to adjust market supply and demand, and neighboring countries are quite used to it. What is surprising this time is that the stated reason for the measures is to cut energy use and carbon dioxide emissions. China’s move is a sharp contrast to Taiwan’s attitude.
The Taiwanese government has never set a target date or an amount for reducing carbon dioxide emissions, and it is hard to imagine it ordering conglomerates to shut down production. If such a thing were to happen, elected politicians would be lining up to complain that if businesses were to suspend work, their employees would have to take unpaid leave and their livelihood would suffer as a result.
As China enforces power consumption limits and orders factory shutdowns, Taiwanese factory bosses who stand to benefit from reduced competition — especially energy-guzzling and high-polluting industries — probably see this as a chance to increase production and make more profit, while pumping out more pollution into Taiwan’s environment.
At the same time they would no doubt seize the opportunity to claim that if they were to build factories in China, they would face the problem of having their electricity supply capped or ordered to suspend operation at any time without warning.
In order to thwart this threat to their profits and to avoid disrupting upstream and downstream supply, they would claim that factories like the planned Kuokuang petrochemical plant should be located here in Taiwan.
What a sorry prospect! For many decades industrialized countries have kept moving their production to emerging countries like Taiwan and South Korea. For a decade or more now they have been moving them to China, Vietnam and other developing countries.
Who would have thought that communist China would limit power supplies to factories or have them closed down on environmental grounds, or that the conclusion drawn would be that it would be better for energy-hungry and highly polluting industries to be located in Taiwan?
If such an idea holds sway, when will Taiwan ever see clear blue skies? When will we ever find a way to maintain economic growth while cutting pollution and carbon dioxide emissions?
The current government has given the green light to many dirty and power-hungry factories since it took office in 2008. If the Kuokuang plant gets the go-ahead as well, there will be no chance of seeing clear skies or environment-friendly growth within the next 20 years.
The truth of the matter is that Taiwan’s market economy is dominated by big businesses. Government agencies are powerless to set annual targets for cutting emissions, never mind enforcing them. Taiwan has for a long time held the prices of water, electricity and oil below those of other Asian countries.
The government would have us believe that this has been done so that the public would not be burdened by rising prices. The true beneficiaries, however, are factories that guzzle water and energy. So in fact Taiwan has been running communist-style price controls for a long time.
Although the Copenhagen Accord was signed last year, with the US and China exerting the strongest influence, hardly anyone believes the UN Climate Change Conference to be held in Cancun, Mexico, later this year, will see any new protocols signed. China’s unexpected move toward making good on its promised targets for energy savings and emissions cuts shows that it means business.
Should Taiwan be happy or worried? If young people in their 20s and 30s are fated to “enjoy” another 20 years of polluted and carbon-dioxide-laden air, will they choose to stay in Taiwan and work for the country’s future or will they look for any chance to pack up and leave?
Liu Chung-ming is a professor of atmospheric sciences at National Taiwan University.
TRANSLATED BY JULIAN CLEGG
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.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing