Typhoon Krathon made landfall in southwestern Taiwan last week, bringing strong winds, heavy rain and flooding, cutting power to more than 170,000 homes and water supply to more than 400,000 homes, and leading to more than 600 injuries and four deaths.
Due to the typhoon, schools and offices across the nation were ordered to close for two to four days, stirring up familiar controversies over whether local governments’ decisions to call typhoon days were appropriate.
The typhoon’s center made landfall in Kaohsiung’s Siaogang District (小港) at noon on Thursday, but it weakened into a tropical depression early on Friday, and its structure was further dissipated by mountainous topography the same day.
Work and classes were canceled in southern Taiwan on Tuesday, in all cities and counties in the nation on Wednesday and Thursday, and only in Kaohsiung, Pingtung County and a few mountainous areas on Friday.
However, on Wednesday and Thursday, the local governments of Taipei, New Taipei City, Keelung and Taoyuan jointly called typhoon days despite the regions having only intermittent bursts of heavy winds and scattered showers, leading some to question or criticize the decision to cancel school and work.
Chinese-language Formosa News in a report estimated that the economic cost per day of a national shutdown was about NT$31.5 billion (US$986 million) per day, not including losses from the stock market shutdown.
The report also cited Lin Por-fong (林伯豐), chairman of the Third Wednesday Club, the membership of which is limited to the top 100 firms in each business sector, as saying that many factories have to continue operating on typhoon days, meaning workers would be paid extra, so “the decision of calling typhoon days off must be made carefully, not only for political considerations.”
Lin’s remark triggered mixed responses on social media. Some agreed with his concern about companies’ extra expenditure, while others criticized the companies for prioritizing profits over safety.
However, some said the mayors in northern Taiwan’s decision to call a typhoon day was motivated by politics, to endear themselves with city residents and secure potential votes.
The mayors of the four cities said their decision was based on the CWA’s weather forecast and they acted out of precaution to protect people’s safety.
The CWA was also criticized by many people for their “inaccurate” forecasts.
In response, the CWA on Friday said autumn typhoons are more difficult to predict, but its forecasts were as scientifically accurate as possible and updated every three hours.
It also said that Typhoon Krathon was “rare.” It is the first typhoon in 47 years to make landfall in Kaohsiung and had the longest ever interval — four days and four hours — between the release of a sea warning and when the typhoon made landfall.
Voicing a different opinion, Fubon Group chairman Daniel Tsai (蔡明忠) on Friday said typhoon days off also contributed to the economy, as department stores, karaoke bars and movie theaters in northern Taiwan were filled with people, and allowed people to rest and restore their homes, so company owners should be more tolerant.
As Taiwan experiences an average of three to four typhoons each year, controversies about whether local governments’ decisions to call a typhoon day are politically motivated or simply based on scientific data would likely continue.
However, the discussions would be more constructive if they went beyond the simple dichotomy of “right or wrong,” and instead focused on how to scientifically improve forecasts and minimize damage, especially as extreme weather events would become more frequent or intense due to climate change.
China badly misread Japan. It sought to intimidate Tokyo into silence on Taiwan. Instead, it has achieved the opposite by hardening Japanese resolve. By trying to bludgeon a major power like Japan into accepting its “red lines” — above all on Taiwan — China laid bare the raw coercive logic of compellence now driving its foreign policy toward Asian states. From the Taiwan Strait and the East and South China Seas to the Himalayan frontier, Beijing has increasingly relied on economic warfare, diplomatic intimidation and military pressure to bend neighbors to its will. Confident in its growing power, China appeared to believe
After more than three weeks since the Honduran elections took place, its National Electoral Council finally certified the new president of Honduras. During the campaign, the two leading contenders, Nasry Asfura and Salvador Nasralla, who according to the council were separated by 27,026 votes in the final tally, promised to restore diplomatic ties with Taiwan if elected. Nasralla refused to accept the result and said that he would challenge all the irregularities in court. However, with formal recognition from the US and rapid acknowledgment from key regional governments, including Argentina and Panama, a reversal of the results appears institutionally and politically
Legislators of the opposition parties, consisting of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), on Friday moved to initiate impeachment proceedings against President William Lai (賴清德). They accused Lai of undermining the nation’s constitutional order and democracy. For anyone who has been paying attention to the actions of the KMT and the TPP in the legislature since they gained a combined majority in February last year, pushing through constitutionally dubious legislation, defunding the Control Yuan and ensuring that the Constitutional Court is unable to operate properly, such an accusation borders the absurd. That they are basing this
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) was on Monday last week invited to give a talk to students of Soochow University, but her responses to questions raised by students and lecturers became a controversial incident and sparked public discussion over the following days. The student association of the university’s Department of Political Science, which hosted the event, on Saturday issued a statement urging people to stop “doxxing,” harassing and attacking the students who raised questions at the event, and called for rational discussion of the talk. Criticism should be directed at viewpoints, opinions or policies, not students, they said, adding