After the Sunflower movement protesters left the legislative chamber, former Democratic Progressive Party chairman Lin I-hsiung (林義雄) announced that he was going on a hunger strike. Lin said the government is using devious means to override public opinion and called on the public to take action to force the authorities to halt construction of the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant in Gongliao District (貢寮), New Taipei City.
Lin started his hunger strike on Tuesday, drawing the public’s focus again to the abolition of nuclear power, which is another issue that has a direct influence on the nation’s continued existence.
The cross-strait service trade agreement and nuclear power issues are reflections of an authoritarian government’s shallow understanding of the values of the public, while it continues to deny wider public participation by inviting experts to closed-door meetings to discuss issues. The government keeps repeating that it is governing in accordance with the law, but in addition to not facilitating a solution, its approach is endangering the nation.
Using nuclear power as an example, the administration of President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) is issuing heartfelt guarantees that it will meet the very highest security standards. Speaking to lawmakers during a question-and-answer session in the legislature, Premier Jiang Yi-huah (江宜樺) said that the government has established measures and that he felt “very confident that we will be able to avoid a repetition of the Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plant disaster in Taiwan.”
While admitting that Taiwan is very likely to suffer composite disasters consisting of typhoons, earthquakes and even a nuclear disaster, Jiang insisted that the government is prepared, and that if disaster struck, it would evacuate the residents of Taipei and New Taipei City to central and southern Taiwan, adding that the military bases and gymnasiums in these areas can hold 1 million people.
At first glance, it would seem as if Jiang has a strategy for responding to a composite disaster, but on closer inspection, it is only a superficial solution of providing temporary homes for disaster victims. Other than stuffing people into a few houses, the government does not have other measures to deal with post-disaster problems, such as environmental cleanup and restoration, damaged farmland, social loss and psychological trauma — issues that continue to besiege Fukushima residents three years after the disaster.
Jiang talks about these issues — which could spell the end of Taiwan — with the same ease and simplicity as Ma talks about deer antler velvet.
Disaster prevention planning does not simply involve evacuation routes and housing; it also involves public disaster prevention awareness, drills, local government preparedness, execution, active cross-departmental coordination and cooperation across a network of social organizations. In other words, administrative preparation for disaster prevention planning does not only consist of high-tech experts writing reports and bureaucrats discussing the plans, it requires the participation of the affected people from every sector of society giving thorough consideration to every single aspect of the disaster prevention arrangements.
Perhaps the public should challenge all the candidates in the year-end seven-in-one elections by asking them some questions. What will they do if a composite disaster were to strike their area (which the premier has said is very likely)? How will they prepare for such a disaster or carry out post-disaster reconstruction? Will the government leaders of non-affected areas be willing to accept refugees from the disaster areas? And how are they going to work with the central government in carrying out its plans and arrangements?
If these candidates cannot, or are unwilling to, answer these questions, voters have no reason to believe that response plans for nuclear power accidents are nothing but empty talk and that in the end, people around the country would all be victims of the lack of political accountability.
Seeing the Ma administration’s arrogant disregard of public opinion and ignorance of national risks, Lin started his hunger strike at the Gikong Presbyterian Church — which was converted from his family home after his mother and twin daughters were murdered there on Feb. 28, 1980 — to bring public attention to the issue of nuclear power.
Even more worrying are the government’s reckless policies, disregard for the law, complete lack of credibility and inability to reflect on its actions and admit its mistakes. Just as in the case of the service trade agreement, the government’s only solution is to manipulate numbers and claim that it is following the law. The result will also be the same: intensifying social conflict and waste.
Only by converting the social force that is spreading through society into political pressure will it be possible to ensure political accountability, save democracy and secure a sustainable future for Taiwan.
Tu Wen-ling is a member of the board of Taiwan Democracy Watch.
Translated by Perry Svensson
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