In 2008 I attended the UN Climate Change Conference (COP14) in Poznan, Poland, with Lee Ken-cheng (李根政), founder of Mercy on the Earth (地球公民協會) and a colleague from the Kaohsiung City Government. The conference was disappointing and resulted in little progress. On the last day a group of activists calling themselves 350.org held a press conference. One of them — Ody Morgan from France — wondered how it was that more than a decade after Kyoto Protocol was signed the world seemed to still be treading water on climate change.
Despite the professed commitment to fighting global warming, there had been no reduction in emissions and all people could talk about was trade and this or that mechanism. As she was talking, tears ran down her face. Coming as we do from a high-emitting nation, Lee and I felt pretty ashamed.
In 2009, Mercy on the Earth worked with the Kaohsiung government to oppose the construction of two Taiwan Power Co waste incineration plants in Dalin Township, Chiayi County, preventing an extra 8 million tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions annually. However, if the Kuokuang Petrochemical plant construction proposal, currently in the key review stage, is passed, it would lead to at least 7.3 million tonnes more of carbon dioxide.
How are Taiwanese at COP17 in Durban, South Africa, later this year going to feel facing the international community when our country has an industrial policy of pursuing the development of energy-intensive, high carbon emissions industries? And how will the government account for which side of the fence it has chosen?
At the meeting of the National Council for Sustainable Development (NCSD) last year, three members — Lin Chun-shin (林俊興), Chiang Pen-chi (蔣本基) and Alice Yu (余範英) — spoke about the need to tackle global warming. Chiang, who also serves as convener for the Kuokuang development project’s Environmental Impact Assessment committee, emphasized the importance of formulating a “new strategy,” promoting “new technologies” and creating a “new industry” in the fight against global warming.
The meeting was chaired by Premier Wu Den-yih (吳敦義), who said at the time that he would take into account the opinions voiced by the members. So, would one count Kuokuang Petrochemical as a new industry? What happened to the idea of sustainability?
The developer has announced that it will purchase the carbon credits for the 3.7 million tonnes that will become available after Sinopec closes its fifth naphtha cracker in 2015 and supplement these with a further 900,000 carbon credits purchased from abroad to address the carbon emissions issue.
This approach, using allocated carbon credits to mitigate the addition of a new source of emissions and pollution, blatantly gives an energy-intensive polluter carte blanche to make huge profits. Is this the message we want to give our kids? That the more carbon emissions one makes, the bigger the profits one commands?
On April 8, an amendment to the Air Pollution Control Act (空氣污染防制法) stipulating that anyone who keeps their motorcycle engine idling for more than three minutes when parked is liable for a heavy fine, passed its third reading in the legislature. What I find difficult to understand is how the government can then say it’s fine to have huge factory chimneys belching out pollution 24/7.
Is Kuokuang Petrochemical addressing the problem of global warming, or adding fuel to the fire of an industry on a course that is unsustainable? The answer is self-evident. NCSD, when are you going to deliver on the sustainability you promised us?
Wang Min-ling is deputy secretary-general of Mercy on the Earth, Taiwan.
TRANSLATED BY PAUL COOPER
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