The government on Tuesday issued a presidential alert via mobile phone networks after China launched a satellite into orbit, with its launch vehicle passing over southern Taiwan.
The alert has been criticized for a number of reasons, including the anxiety it caused, the mistranslation of its content into English and the lack of useful instructions on what actions to take.
It was argued on social media that the alert was made to warn the public about possible falling debris from the launch vehicle. This was likely inferred from the Chinese text, which read: “If you encounter any unknown objects, report the sighting to police or fire personnel” (若發現不明物體，通報警消人員處理).
The window to warn the public was narrow — the rocket would have passed over Taiwan within 15 minutes of launch — but authorities could have determined which counties the rocket would most likely pass over and could have given some useful advice.
If falling debris was a concern, the alert could have instructed people to stay indoors for a certain time. Such information would also have been pertinent to English speakers.
Some might question why an alert was issued for this satellite launch and not for five other ones last month — especially the one on Dec. 10 when the launch vehicle similarly passed over Taiwan proper. Some international media reports have suggested that the alert was election-related. If that is the case, then why were no alerts issued when Chinese balloons were detected over Taiwan in recent weeks?
Authorities need to define a clear set of procedures for instances of Chinese objects flying over Taiwanese airspace and indicate what actions the public should take. Alerts such as the one on Tuesday serve no purpose and risk causing public unrest.
Perhaps the most egregious mistake in Tuesday’s alert was its mistranslation of “rocket” as “missile.” The Ministry of National Defense has issued an apology, but steps should be taken to ensure such an error does not recur. Rocket launches are routine and no cause for concern, while a missile launch could be a deliberate act of war. The translation also referred to the launch as an “air raid.” There was no attack on Taiwanese soil, and the launch vehicle had already left the atmosphere at the point the rocket crossed over the nation. One might question why the alert was translated in the first place if the target text offered no useful information.
Meanwhile, with Chinese incursions into Taiwanese airspace on the rise — in the form of drone and fighter jet maneuvers, and balloon flyovers — it seems apt for the authorities to conduct drills in public schools and recommend them for private companies. Drills could focus on the locations of shelters, how to take cover in the event of an air raid, and how to stay protected against blasts. Taiwan does hold annual drills in the form of the Wanan air defense exercise, but only officials practice useful techniques during the exercise such as seeking shelter, crouching down low and covering ears and eyes to limit the impact of blasts. Meanwhile, the public does nothing during the exercises except staying off the roads to avoid fines.
The Wanan exercises, like Tuesday’s alert, seem to be cases of officials simply going through the motions. Drills and alerts mean nothing if they do not ensure the public’s safety in the event of an attack. Oversight by an independent body might be helpful in adopting more effective early warning and disaster-prevention procedures.
Opposition candidates seized on the media attention surrounding Tuesday’s alert to criticize the government, but the issue should not be politicized, as it concerns everyone in Taiwan.
Efforts are needed to determine what actions by China should trigger an alert to the public, what information needs to be conveyed in Chinese and English, and what the public needs to do.
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (傅?萁) has caused havoc with his attempts to overturn the democratic and constitutional order in the legislature. If we look at this devolution from the context of a transition to democracy from authoritarianism in a culturally Chinese sense — that of zhonghua (中華) — then we are playing witness to a servile spirit from a millennia-old form of totalitarianism that is intent on damaging the nation’s hard-won democracy. This servile spirit is ingrained in Chinese culture. About a century ago, Chinese satirist and author Lu Xun (魯迅) saw through the servile nature of
Monday was the 37th anniversary of former president Chiang Ching-kuo’s (蔣經國) death. Chiang — a son of former president Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), who had implemented party-state rule and martial law in Taiwan — has a complicated legacy. Whether one looks at his time in power in a positive or negative light depends very much on who they are, and what their relationship with the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is. Although toward the end of his life Chiang Ching-kuo lifted martial law and steered Taiwan onto the path of democratization, these changes were forced upon him by internal and external pressures,
In their New York Times bestseller How Democracies Die, Harvard political scientists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt said that democracies today “may die at the hands not of generals but of elected leaders. Many government efforts to subvert democracy are ‘legal,’ in the sense that they are approved by the legislature or accepted by the courts. They may even be portrayed as efforts to improve democracy — making the judiciary more efficient, combating corruption, or cleaning up the electoral process.” Moreover, the two authors observe that those who denounce such legal threats to democracy are often “dismissed as exaggerating or
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus in the Legislative Yuan has made an internal decision to freeze NT$1.8 billion (US$54.7 million) of the indigenous submarine project’s NT$2 billion budget. This means that up to 90 percent of the budget cannot be utilized. It would only be accessible if the legislature agrees to lift the freeze sometime in the future. However, for Taiwan to construct its own submarines, it must rely on foreign support for several key pieces of equipment and technology. These foreign supporters would also be forced to endure significant pressure, infiltration and influence from Beijing. In other words,
RSS