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.
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
US President Donald Trump created some consternation in Taiwan last week when he told a news conference that a successful trade deal with China would help with “unification.” Although the People’s Republic of China has never ruled Taiwan, Trump’s language struck a raw nerve in Taiwan given his open siding with Russian President Vladimir Putin’s aggression seeking to “reunify” Ukraine and Russia. On earlier occasions, Trump has criticized Taiwan for “stealing” the US’ chip industry and for relying too much on the US for defense, ominously presaging a weakening of US support for Taiwan. However, further examination of Trump’s remarks in
It is being said every second day: The ongoing recall campaign in Taiwan — where citizens are trying to collect enough signatures to trigger re-elections for a number of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators — is orchestrated by the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), or even President William Lai (賴清德) himself. The KMT makes the claim, and foreign media and analysts repeat it. However, they never show any proof — because there is not any. It is alarming how easily academics, journalists and experts toss around claims that amount to accusing a democratic government of conspiracy — without a shred of evidence. These
China on May 23, 1951, imposed the so-called “17-Point Agreement” to formally annex Tibet. In March, China in its 18th White Paper misleadingly said it laid “firm foundations for the region’s human rights cause.” The agreement is invalid in international law, because it was signed under threat. Ngapo Ngawang Jigme, head of the Tibetan delegation sent to China for peace negotiations, was not authorized to sign the agreement on behalf of the Tibetan government and the delegation was made to sign it under duress. After seven decades, Tibet remains intact and there is global outpouring of sympathy for Tibetans. This realization