Ever since Taipei Mayor Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) took office, many of his major policy announcements have caused controversy, and the problem lies in his administrative team’s lack of historical and cultural knowledge.
The west area gateway project can be considered an example. The question of whether to demolish the former city council chamber or to preserve the building’s facade highlights the city government’s lack of respect for history. In addition to the city council chamber from the 1960s, the old Taihoku Prefecture Hall from the 1910s — which later became the Control Yuan — as well as the old Executive Yuan and Taipei City Hall (台北市役所) from the 1940s are also situated on the same intersection. These old public buildings, on different corners of the intersection, represent the city during three eras, separated by two or three decades. Despite that, the city government has rashly defined the 1960s chamber as “ugly and immature modern architecture” and is planning to tear it down.
Another example is the plan to build a plaza at the North Gate (北門). The design can be described as stars surrounding the moon, putting the gate in the spotlight. The city government is changing traffic routes for the design and proposing the demolition of surrounding buildings that it believes are not worthy of being preserved, thus promoting a plan that represents what designers think of as beautiful.
There is a gap between designs and the city values that is taking shape among the public, who have realized that the century-old Mitsui Warehouse (三井倉庫) is just as important as the gate. If it is possible to make the gate a point of focus, why should the century-old Japanese building not enjoy equal treatment?
Kuo-Kuang Motor Transportation Co’s Taipei West Bus Station (台北西站) has been the city’s public transport gateway ever since the establishment of the Directorate General of Highways (公路總局). The six-decade-old station is famous for its fan-shaped waiting area. Many Taipei residents are still angry over the demolition of the old Taipei Railway Station, which was built in 1941 and demolished in 1986, less than 50 years later.
How can they ignore Ko’s proposal to tear down the city’s oldest bus station, which has existed for over 60 years? If Kuo-Kuang really wants to protect its property, it should apply for a cultural heritage review to have the station listed as a cultural heritage site.
Such historical misunderstandings on the city government’s part are also rife in plans to renovate a sewage system built during the Japanese colonial era. The plan to renovate the Liu Gong Canal using Seoul’s Cheonggyecheon Stream as a blueprint is not a bad idea, but the problem is that the sewer system — which is now covered by Xinsheng S Road — is not the Liu Gong Canal. No one would blame the city government for making this historical mistake if it simply wanted to restore the canal to what it looked like in the 1940s, but saying that it will restore the Liu Gong Canal is very questionable. It would be better to say that it would build a new “Ko gong canal” (柯公圳) named after Ko, so he can leave his name behind.
Incorrect historical references create incorrect historical interpretations. Based on such historical imagining, the city government has fabricated a historical discourse. Urban designers might be proud of it, but they have created a false historical context and then used it to generate a postmodern urban vision. No wonder the great vision is beset with difficulties.
Hung Chih-wen is a professor of geography at National Taiwan Normal University.
Translated by Eddy Chang
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
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
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath