An oil spill from an unidentified vessel off Green Island (綠島) in Taitung County has caused severe oil pollution. The Environmental Protection Administration said it has information about a suspected vessel and will go through diplomatic channels to pursue it and obtain compensation.
Taking a more pessimistic view of the situation, if authorities take a strong position and issue condemnations only after such events occur, it will not have much effect on the environmental protection of Taiwanese waters.
The difference between this event and previous oil spills is that past events have been the result of ships in distress, where oil or fuel tanks have been damaged.
This time the spill was found, but not the ship from which the oil came. The former situation can certainly lead to massive pollution, but the culprit is present and unable to shirk responsibility.
The current spill is significantly smaller, but the responsible ship has absconded and it could be difficult to hold someone responsible.
Oil spills from ships can be divided into accidental spills and spills occurring during normal operations. Accidental spills are the result of neglect, while the latter are intentional. People are generally more accustomed to accidental spills, which also receive more attention.
Nevertheless, a look at global statistics shows that overall, intentional spills are more common and they cause greater damage.
The automatic identification system, a vessel tracking system developed by the Helsinki Commission in 2005, monitors the movement of ships and is also capable of reconstructing some situations that have caused major incidents.
However, recent research has shown that although this has improved vessel design and safety equipment, major security concerns remain. These concerns can be divided into three main categories: flag state controls, port state controls and human error. These three aspects are closely interrelated and must be addressed together for overall improvements to occur.
Although port state controls were at first seen as a backup for flag state controls, today they are seen as the most important security tool when the port state has fulfilled its responsibilities and inspected ships to guarantee that they comply with regulations in treaties administered by the International Maritime Organization.
However, research has shown that although port state controls are key to improving marine safety, many problems remain. For example, in practice, less than one-quarter of all ships are inspected and there is a vast difference in implementation between nations.
Similar to the Green Island oil spill, aerial patrols have been carried out in other nations over the past 20 years, and while this has brought clear improvements, two big problems remain: determining criminal responsibility and massive spills that slip through the net due to areas and times that are not monitored.
A worrying prospect for Taiwan is that because the international community has made great progress, if enforcement in Taiwan remains comparatively lax, there is a risk that it could become a haven for vessels performing illegal activities — for example, cleaning out residual oil from their oil tanks, a very common occurrence.
The successful use of aerial patrols to crack down on illegal dumping of oil will depend on authorities’ sense of duty, ambition and ability to execute, but it must first be recognized that this is no easy task, in particular considering realistic conditions, such as low visibility at night, bad weather and deciding which areas to monitor.
That is why the main issues will be to find ways to use such patrols effectively and enforce regulations in ways that stop personnel on ships intentionally polluting the ocean.
As is the case with accidental oil spills, the way to resolve these issues is to set up a framework for regional cooperation with neighboring nations.
Hua Jian is an associate professor at National Taiwan Ocean University.
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
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