Worth of Equator Principles
To be more socially responsible, Cathay United Bank’s board of directors signed the financing of international environmental norms — the Equator Principles — a few months ago. Cathay United Bank, the first Taiwanese bank to apply the Equator Principles, now implements the rules in banking business.
It assesses the following principles when analyzing a corporate banking loan: review and categorization, environmental and social assessment, applicable environmental and social standards, environmental and social management system and Equator Principles action plan, stakeholder engagement, grievance mechanism independent review, covenants, independent monitoring and reporting, and reporting and transparency. These key factors help bankers find the right loan target.
In the past, bankers giving loan would only consider the profit of fee and interest, neglecting the environmental and social welfare factors. This created a lot of side effects, including environmental pollution and undesirable externalities, which could potentially hurt future generations.
To address long-term social welfare issues, banks, as the rally point of capital and information, should help society to make good choices through the allocation of loans and by following the Equator Principles. If that happens, people might have brighter, safer and more sustainable futures.
Roger Chen
Chiayi
Complexities of burn care
It is unfortunate that some organizations have chosen to criticize decisions made related to the care of burn patients from the Formosa Fun Coast (八仙海岸) fire (“TMA urges respect for burn decisions,” July 16, page 2). Having spent a number of years caring for burn victims in critical condition at a large burn center, I think I can understand where they are coming from. I believe the root cause is frustration. It is frustration with a course of treatment many do not understand very well, and that not all hospitals are equipped to accept or treat these patients.
Burn care is not a simple process. In fact, it is one of the most complex courses of treatment. Not only does it involve the visible injury, but then there are the sometimes hidden inhalation injuries that can be devastating. Along with it comes associated insults to the vascular system and cardiac system, among others. It is not simply a one system injury and decisions on treatment by doctors and nursing staff change daily, even hourly, based on changes in patient response and physical status. It is not a “one size fits all” injury and the sad truth is that while a victim with 70 percent burns might survive, it is possible for a patient with 30 percent burns to succumb to such injuries.
I have seen hospitals completely overwhelmed by seemingly small numbers of burn patients. True, this most likely occurs in smaller communities, but without a staff trained in the acute phase and daily care of the burn patients, most hospitals are pushed to the limit. Initial physical assessment, calculation of a burn percentage and fluid resuscitation requirements, and placing of intravenous lines and catheters can be done in any emergency department. Then there are the specialized studies. It is all rapid response.
Does Taipei have a need for a dedicated burn treatment center? I believe so. How large should it be? That is for the medical community to determine, not politicians. I applaud the reaching out to Japan for assistance and peer review of treatment given to date. There are facilities that would be happy to assist in helping to train staff in the acute, daily and rehabilitation phases of burn care. For the physicians, there are any number of avenues for them to obtain training. In the facility in which I worked, there were always several visiting doctors who were there, for varying amounts of time, for training in both acute and day-to-day burn care.
I would ask that people try to be a bit more patient and understanding before they leap to judge the care these patients are getting. Everyone associated with this disaster is doing their best to alleviate the suffering of the many victims. I wish only the very best for both families and hospital staff.
Tom Kuleck
Taichung
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS