On March 17, former DPP chairman Lin I-hsiung (林義雄) and members of the Nuclear 4 Referendum Initiative Association held a sit-down protest in front of the Executive Yuan. They demanded that the government hold a referendum on the fate of the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant in next year's presidential election. Lin's protest has once again brought the anti-nuclear issue into the spotlight.
In Britain, the issue of nuclear energy is no longer political but economic, rarely evoking agitation in society or political confrontation. Large-scale, anti-nuclear protests are now rarely organized because keeping the environment nuclear-free has become a consensus among the people. Vote-minded politicians also refrain from mentioning the construction of nuclear power plants because they want to bury the issue. The trend is similar in other European countries. Take Germany's recent election for example. The Green Party owed its remarkable success to the party's anti-nuclear and environmental-protection positions. The anti-nuclear movement has clearly become a trend worldwide.
After she came to power in the 1980s, then British prime minister Margaret Thatcher vigorously promoted the privatization of state-owned industries. The position of our ruling party's policy is the same: "The government will give the work to the people if they can do it." These days, Britain suffers disastrous consequences in some areas of privatization. British Energy is a vivid example. After privatization, the company was on the verge of bankruptcy due to the inappropriate handling of energy problems. Its stock price fell to rock bottom.
Many of the shares were annuity-based investments for the privatization of British Energy. Because energy problems affect the people's livelihood, the British parliament allocated large budgets each year to subsidize such privatized industries. Due to the disposal problems of nuclear waste materials, the British government, on Sept. 26 last year, urgently provided ?50 million (NT$2.72 billion) and the act led to a heated debate in the parliament.
The safety of nuclear energy was no longer the subject of debate. Rather, how much more tax money will the government spend to subsidize British Energy for handling nuclear waste materials? How will they handle the many nuclear power plants that will soon be decommissioned? How will they handle the large tract of nuclear-contaminated land that will be unlivable for hundreds of years?
Although Britain has more than 50 countries in its commonwealth, the British people generally have a golden-rule understanding. They dare not recklessly dump nuclear waste materials in another country. Should the British government implement a policy of dumping nuclear waste materials while Europe is getting more nuclear-conscious, it will be difficult for the ships carrying nuclear waste materials to escape the human shields of Greenpeace. Obviously, nuclear energy is no longer an inexpensive option.
Lin has always taken the road that few people tread, hoping to open up a pure land for the Taiwanese. I cannot help but admire Lin, who led the masses under the hot sun to advocate for a nuclear-free homeland. From authoritarianism to democracy, Taiwan has repeatedly followed in the footsteps of advanced countries. Some of the policies such as universal healthcare, pre-school education and stipends for seniors are mostly modeled after Britain. In light of the issue of nuclear energy in Britain, our government officials should take the long-term interest of the Taiwanese people as a starting point and should leave a nuclear-free homeland for future generations and it cannot bear possible consequences of nuclear accidents or alarm.
Yen Shang-yung is an assistant professor at Feng Chia University.
Translated by Grace Shaw
The Chinese government on March 29 sent shock waves through the Tibetan Buddhist community by announcing the untimely death of one of its most revered spiritual figures, Hungkar Dorje Rinpoche. His sudden passing in Vietnam raised widespread suspicion and concern among his followers, who demanded an investigation. International human rights organization Human Rights Watch joined their call and urged a thorough investigation into his death, highlighting the potential involvement of the Chinese government. At just 56 years old, Rinpoche was influential not only as a spiritual leader, but also for his steadfast efforts to preserve and promote Tibetan identity and cultural
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Former minister of culture Lung Ying-tai (龍應台) has long wielded influence through the power of words. Her articles once served as a moral compass for a society in transition. However, as her April 1 guest article in the New York Times, “The Clock Is Ticking for Taiwan,” makes all too clear, even celebrated prose can mislead when romanticism clouds political judgement. Lung crafts a narrative that is less an analysis of Taiwan’s geopolitical reality than an exercise in wistful nostalgia. As political scientists and international relations academics, we believe it is crucial to correct the misconceptions embedded in her article,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
RSS