Just six days after Premier Jiang Yi-huah (江宜樺) demanded that Cabinet officials “take an iron fist” to environmental problems, Minister of the Interior Lee Hong-yuan (李鴻源) on Thursday vowed to close all unlicensed lodgings in “high-risk” disaster-prone areas of Cingjing (清境), Nantou County.
The mountainous area, with its cool air, hiking trails and fruit farms, has become a popular getaway spot for weary urbanites in recent years, and 134 guesthouses and bed-and-breakfasts now dot the landscape around Cingjing Farm (清境農場).
According to Lee, only four of those establishments are actually operating legally and those that are not will soon feel the long reach of Taipei bureaucrats, with “no room for negotiation.”
Since these lodgings did not spring up overnight like mushrooms after a rain, this sudden interest by the ministry and other Cabinet agencies appears more of a cover-your-rear-end move than a measured response to the environmental damage and safety issues created by such retreats.
It is clear what prompted this outpouring of governmental concern: the release of, and public reaction to, director Chi Po-lin’s (齊柏林) stunning documentary Beyond Beauty: Taiwan From Above (看見台灣). The film has broken national box office records since it opened on Nov. 1 and triggered renewed debate over the environmental cost of the nation’s decades-long drive for development.
Executive Yuan Deputy Secretary-General Chien Tai-lang (簡太郎) said on Friday last week that Cabinet ministries and agencies have been divided into five teams to work on 16 major issues highlighted by the film, including illegal gravel and sand mining, the build-up of sediment in reservoirs, land subsidence, excessive hillside development and polluted rivers. The teams were told to present an initial report to Jiang within one month. However, Chien said the government “will take a holistic approach and not just focus on the 16 problems.”
Yet just two weeks earlier, the Cabinet was steaming ahead with its draft for regional development, the “National Regional Plan,” which would relax regulations on land use, allow small-scale industrial parks to be established without an environmental assessment and streamline application and review procedures for major projects. Critics say the proposal would ease restrictions on development in reservoir areas, farmland and active fault zones.
All of the environmental damage shown in the film has occurred under the noses of government officials, including those whose job it is to monitor and protect this nation’s mountains, forests, rivers and coastal areas. Yes, the aerial viewpoint of the film makes it easier to grasp the extent of the damage that has been wrought on this land, but the erosion of mountainsides, deforestation, unrestrained building of hotels and guesthouses and pollution of rivers and seashores can easily be seen from the ground.
The government continues to prioritize development, an imperative that will be difficult to reconcile with the newfound zeal for conservation. It is not so much a question of how long this latest reform drive will last, but whether the fat cats will win out as they have in the past.
Opposition is already being heard in response to the outcry created by the film and Jiang’s “iron fist” call. Owners of some of the Qingjing guesthouses have reportedly asked the government not to “mislead” the public based on the documentary.
That is like shooting the messenger. There is nothing “misleading” about Chi’s film. He has just made it more difficult for government officials — and the public — to ignore the cost of unchecked development and slap-on-the-wrist punishments for companies that damage the environment.
Chi won the Golden Horse award for Best Documentary on Nov. 23. He deserves a medal for his unflinching wake-up call.
President William Lai (賴清德) recently attended an event in Taipei marking the end of World War II in Europe, emphasizing in his speech: “Using force to invade another country is an unjust act and will ultimately fail.” In just a few words, he captured the core values of the postwar international order and reminded us again: History is not just for reflection, but serves as a warning for the present. From a broad historical perspective, his statement carries weight. For centuries, international relations operated under the law of the jungle — where the strong dominated and the weak were constrained. That
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of