Japan is reeling from the powerful earthquake that struck the Noto Peninsula in Ishikawa Prefecture on Monday afternoon. Apart from tsunami warnings, the thing people most worried about when the quake hit was whether nearby nuclear power plants were safe. After all, if another disaster like the 2011 disaster at the Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plant were to reoccur, the results would be unthinkable.
It is wise to learn from others’ experiences. Taiwan and Japan both lie along the Pacific Ring of Fire and face the same risk of tectonic plate dislocation, and are riddled with major and minor geological faults. In other words, the natural disasters that threaten Japanese nuclear power plants are equally applicable to Taiwan.
However, Japan is more than 10 times the size of Taiwan, so even in the case of the Fukushima nuclear disaster, residents of the region were able to disperse elsewhere. What about Taiwan? Taipei and New Taipei City have a combined population of nearly 10 million, most of whom live less than 30km from the two nuclear power plants located on the north coast. If they ever needed to evacuate, where would they go? In Taipei’s Neihu District (內湖) traffic is gridlocked at rush hour five days a week, so how could people leave if everyone tried escaping all at once?
Anyone who buys real-estate knows they should choose the location with care and try avoiding having nuclear facilities in their backyard. There is nothing unusual about Taipei property prices of more than NT$1 million (US$32,241) per ping (3.31m2). Goodness knows how many people’s life savings and wealth are tied up in their homes. If any more nuclear power plants are built in northern Taiwan, it would just increase the risk of property prices in the region being reduced to nothing overnight. Who could afford to take such a gamble?
If such a nuclear power plant were truly completely safe, as some people would have us believe, then why are top officials and the wealthy not willing to live next door to one? Why have mayors and county commissioners never scrambled to buy such property? You do not need to be an expert — common sense would tell you why, and it would also tell you why Taiwan is in no position to build any more plants.
Huang Wei-ping works in public service and has a master’s degree from the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University in the US.
Translated by Julian Clegg
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
RSS