On Feb. 25, Premier Jiang Yi-huah (江宜樺) announced the government’s intention to settle the matter of construction of the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant in Gongliao District (貢寮), New Taipei City (新北市), through a referendum. A lot of discussion has ensued, with most Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) members supporting the referendum proposal..
President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) has said that holding a referendum on whether to suspend construction of the plant could put an end to the controversy about the plant’s construction, so it will not keep weighing the nation down. Evidently, there has been a subtle shift in the KMT’s position on this issue.
Criticisms of the referendum proposal have been focused on technical aspects of the existing Referendum Act (公民投票法), such as the threshold for passing a referendum being too high, that the proposed wording of the referendum is unfair and that no national referendum has ever been passed.
Critics say that the government has ulterior motives for proposing a referendum at this time. They say the Referendum Act should be amended to lower the vote threshold, because only then can the result reflect public opinion and be regarded as an endorsement of government policy.
The KMT has agreed not to increase the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant’s budget or install fuel rods before the proposed referendum is held, but this apparent display of goodwill is open to interpretation.
One reading of the KMT’s pledge is that the party thinks there is no harm in conceding a little at this stage, because the threshold is set so high that the referendum cannot possibly pass, in which case it is almost certain that construction of the plant will continue. Cabinet ministries and departments also have the advantage in terms of resources.
The KMT may think it can concentrate its forces on this main battlefield to annihilate the anti-nuclear camp and settle the matter once and for all.
Although this interpretation would explain the overnight U-turn in the Ma administration’s attitude to holding a referendum, the prelude to the referendum battle has only just started. There are still plenty of things that could happen, so it is too early to predict with certainty who will be the winner.
The KMT’s legislative majority gives it control over legislation, so it can refuse to amend the law. It can also set the wording of the referendum, put out biased information and persuade members of the public who have qualms about stopping construction at the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant not to vote in the referendum, which would likely cause it to fail. It appears, that the KMT has a well-thought out plan, making it an easy victory for the party.
In comparison, the oppostion appears to be in a state of disarray, with groups and individuals doing as they see fit. How can they work together? Who is going to lead such a movement? There is no clear answer to these questions at the moment. It is little wonder that so many defeatist voices have been heard. The questions are how politically mature Taiwanese are, and how determined and capable are the civic groups.
A referendum on the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant should be seen as an opportunity to stimulate social forces. As the initial confusion begins to clear, civic groups should be getting ready to convene a national conference on the proposed referendum.
The proposal will test whether public policy issues can rise above the pan-blue and pan-green political rivalry.
Citizens, are you ready to fight?
Ku Chung-hwa is a board member of Citizen Congress Watch.
Translated by Julian Clegg
Minister of Labor Hung Sun-han (洪申翰) on April 9 said that the first group of Indian workers could arrive as early as this year as part of a memorandum of understanding (MOU) between the Taipei Economic and Cultural Center in India and the India Taipei Association. Signed in February 2024, the MOU stipulates that Taipei would decide the number of migrant workers and which industries would employ them, while New Delhi would manage recruitment and training. Employment would be governed by the laws of both countries. Months after its signing, the two sides agreed that 1,000 migrant workers from India would
In recent weeks, Taiwan has witnessed a surge of public anxiety over the possible introduction of Indian migrant workers. What began as a policy signal from the Ministry of Labor quickly escalated into a broader controversy. Petitions gathered thousands of signatures within days, political figures issued strong warnings, and social media became saturated with concerns about public safety and social stability. At first glance, this appears to be a straightforward policy question: Should Taiwan introduce Indian migrant workers or not? However, this framing is misleading. The current debate is not fundamentally about India. It is about Taiwan’s labor system, its
On March 31, the South Korean Ministry of Foreign Affairs released declassified diplomatic records from 1995 that drew wide domestic media attention. One revelation stood out: North Korea had once raised the possibility of diplomatic relations with Taiwan. In a meeting with visiting Chinese officials in May 1995, as then-Chinese president Jiang Zemin (江澤民) prepared for a visit to South Korea, North Korean officials objected to Beijing’s growing ties with Seoul and raised Taiwan directly. According to the newly released records, North Korean officials asked why Pyongyang should refrain from developing relations with Taiwan while China and South Korea were expanding high-level
Japan’s imminent easing of arms export rules has sparked strong interest from Warsaw to Manila, Reuters reporting found, as US President Donald Trump wavers on security commitments to allies, and the wars in Iran and Ukraine strain US weapons supplies. Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi’s ruling party approved the changes this week as she tries to invigorate the pacifist country’s military industrial base. Her government would formally adopt the new rules as soon as this month, three Japanese government officials told Reuters. Despite largely isolating itself from global arms markets since World War II, Japan spends enough on its own