Tainan Mayor William Lai (賴清德) recently called for the Presidential Office to be relocated from Taipei to Tainan. During the election campaign, People First Party Chairman James Soong (宋楚瑜) also advocated the relocation of the Presidential Office, although he proposed that it be moved to Taichung.
The relocation of important offices of state is not without precedent. The Taiwan Provincial Government and Taiwan Provincial Consultative Council were both relocated from Taipei to Jhongsing New Village (中興新村) in Nantou County in 1956. Japan in 1868 relocated its capital from Kyoto to Tokyo and Brazil in 1960 moved its capital from Rio de Janeiro to Brasilia.
The relocation of a capital or central government departments is not just about distributing political benefits, an even more important aspect is the creation of a blueprint for comprehensive national development.
Since Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) presidents have been unable to propose a complete strategic territorial blueprint for Taiwan. To date, each and every phase of Taiwan’s land use strategy has simply been a response to the practical needs of the day.
Prior to 1970, apart from land included within the government’s urban planning, any plot of land could be developed as the landowner saw fit. At the time, in order to improve the equalization of urban land rights so that rising land values accrued for the public, half of Taiwan’s urban planning strategies were delineated during the 10-year period between 1970 and 1980.
However, this resulted in skyrocketing real-estate prices in cities that caused rampant speculation on land outside of urban areas. For this reason, beginning in the mid-1970s, the government enacted laws to regulate regional planning and implemented a comprehensive non-urban land usage plan, which introduced usage controls to land outside of urban areas.
In the early 1990s the government started to enact restraints on floor-to-area ratios, which caused a scramble to build high-capacity buildings. Beginning in 2000, the government opened up the free sale and purchase of agricultural land and building countryside villas became a mainstream form of investment.
For three-quarters of a century, land development in Taiwan has lacked a comprehensive national strategy, which has led to construction taking place on land that falls both inside and outside urban planning and provide housing for up to nearly 30 million people.
There is no shortage of land for construction in Taiwan; what Taiwan lacks is a comprehensive national land strategy and balanced regional development.
This month, the government announced the enactment of the National Land Use Planning Act (國土計畫法), which gives the public and the incoming government an opportunity to collaborate on the direction of the nation’s land development strategy. In particular, it is an opportunity to consider the relocation of the Presidential Office, Legislative Yuan, Executive Yuan and other important offices of state, which would have the most potential to spur urban and rural development and re-allocate resources to regions other than Taipei.
The incoming government should convene a body of experts to create a national land development master plan for the long-term. It should involve discussion, free from political bias and based upon factors including local characteristics, geographical conditions, agricultural development, tourism, environmental sustainability, industrial development and regional balance. The result should be a national land strategy for Taiwan that would allow the nation to blossom and benefit from truly sustainable and balanced development.
Alpha Cho is chairman of the China Land Reform Institution.
Translated by Edward Jones
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