ECFA is carcinogenic
The government recently approved 207 applications (including 192 applications pertaining to industrial products and 15 applications pertaining to agricultural products) for Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA) production site certificates. The industrial products are predominantly petrochemicals, followed by machining and textiles. According to the ECFA, China will allow the import of 557 Taiwanese items, in which petrochemicals are the major items. This means Taiwan will export mainly petrochemical products to China.
The national cancer map for 2008 shows that after the sixth naphtha cracker started operation in 2001, Yunlin County and adjacent Chiayi County have cancer death rates that are 1.23 to 1.53 times higher than the national average (“Say no to proposed Kuokuang project,” Dec. 22, 2010, page 8). The incidence of cardiovascular disease and strokes also clearly increased and carcinogens emitted by the petrochemical industry were found in urine samples of residents near the naphtha cracker.
The proposed Kuokuang petrochemical complex involves building the nation’s eighth naphtha cracker in Changhua County’s Dacheng Township (大城). Unless the proposed project is canceled, residents of Changhua will suffer the same fate as their counterparts in Yunlin and Chiayi.
In addition, ecology in the wetland and flora and fauna in the vicinity will be damaged.
Taiwan should not export petrochemicals to China at the cost of the health and lives of Taiwanese. It is ironic for President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) to order national security-level steps to increase the nation’s birthrate and, at the same time, to promote the construction of the Kuokuang complex that will emit carcinogens to kill Taiwanese. Apparently, the Kuokuang project is to meet Chinese market demand.
Is the ECFA a tool for prosperity in China and death in Taiwan?
Scaling down the project by one-third is not a solution. Complete cancellation is the only solution.
CHARLES HONG
Columbus, Ohio
Playing the blame game
The shooting on Sunday of US Representative Gabrielle Giffords of Arizona was an appalling crime. Yet the insinuation in your front-page piece on Monday that this is somehow Sarah Palin’s fault or the fault of the Tea Party movement is absurd; such a claim is little different from the claim that violence on TV causes violence in real life (“US lawmaker shot in the head, in critical condition,” Jan. 10, page 1).
Yet although it may be absurd, the purpose of slipping it into the subhead and elsewhere in the report is transparently manipulative: To discredit generally conservative or libertarian criticism of big government by tenuous association with the appalling actions of an apparent lunatic.
Yet any honest observer of the numerous demonstrations and events held by the Tea Party movement throughout the last year must admit that US conservatives — even the hardcore constitutionalists — are simply not lunatics calling for the summary execution of politicians. To say such a thing is dishonest; to insinuate it is both devious and dishonest.
MICHAEL FAGAN.
Tainan
Having lived through former British prime minister Boris Johnson’s tumultuous and scandal-ridden administration, the last place I had expected to come face-to-face with “Mr Brexit” was in a hotel ballroom in Taipei. Should I have been so surprised? Over the past few years, Taiwan has unfortunately become the destination of choice for washed-up Western politicians to turn up long after their political careers have ended, making grandiose speeches in exchange for extraordinarily large paychecks far exceeding the annual salary of all but the wealthiest of Taiwan’s business tycoons. Taiwan’s pursuit of bygone politicians with little to no influence in their home
In 2025, it is easy to believe that Taiwan has always played a central role in various assessments of global national interests. But that is a mistaken belief. Taiwan’s position in the world and the international support it presently enjoys are relatively new and remain highly vulnerable to challenges from China. In the early 2000s, the George W. Bush Administration had plans to elevate bilateral relations and to boost Taiwan’s defense. It designated Taiwan as a non-NATO ally, and in 2001 made available to Taiwan a significant package of arms to enhance the island’s defenses including the submarines it long sought.
US lobbyist Christian Whiton has published an update to his article, “How Taiwan Lost Trump,” discussed on the editorial page on Sunday. His new article, titled “What Taiwan Should Do” refers to the three articles published in the Taipei Times, saying that none had offered a solution to the problems he identified. That is fair. The articles pushed back on points Whiton made that were felt partisan, misdirected or uninformed; in this response, he offers solutions of his own. While many are on point and he would find no disagreement here, the nuances of the political and historical complexities in
Taiwan faces an image challenge even among its allies, as it must constantly counter falsehoods and misrepresentations spread by its more powerful neighbor, the People’s Republic of China (PRC). While Taiwan refrains from disparaging its troublesome neighbor to other countries, the PRC is working not only to forge a narrative about itself, its intentions and value to the international community, but is also spreading lies about Taiwan. Governments, parliamentary groups and civil societies worldwide are caught in this narrative tug-of-war, each responding in their own way. National governments have the power to push back against what they know to be
RSS