Global Voices » I-fan Lin

Taiwan: When News is Sold to the Chinese Government

I-fan Lin — Thu, 24 May 2012 07:14:23 +0000

In recent years, more and more Taiwanese media workers have been worried that press freedom has been eroding since the lifting of martial law in 1987. In fact, Taiwan's ranking in Freedom House's Annual Press Freedom Report has been regressing since 2008.

In addition to the “embedded marketing” practice which cloaks advertising as news and makes journalistic articles less reliable, the mainland China government has extended influence on the Taiwan public sphere through news industry acquisitions.

Influence of mainland China

On May 7, 2012, a public hearing was held because the Want Want China Times group plans to acquire the second largest cable television system in Taiwan. Since Taiwanese businessman Tsai Eng-Meng purchased the media group in November 2008, China Times, one of the most influential newspapers in Taiwan, has made a subsequent change in editorial policy [zh] in the direction of softening criticism of the Ma administration, Beijing, or improvements in cross-strait ties.

Image from Reject China Times Facebook Campaign Page

More than 50 social science and journalism professors in Taiwan signed up to the ‘Reject China Times' campaign [zh] in February 2012, in response to Tsai's interview with the Washington Post, in which he claimed that the June 4 Massacre (Tiananmen Square) did not happen.

The campaign statement pointed out that:

事實上，《中國時報》自蔡先生入主後所展現許多「積極排除不利中國言論」之「自我審查」事例，早已引起知識界的嚴重質疑。蔡先生以其在中國所取得之資本，搖身成為台灣媒體集團大亨後，在華郵所發表之為中國打壓民主、踐踏人權種種極權行徑擦脂抹粉的荒謬言論，更印證了我們對於中國企圖透過直接間接掌控我國媒體，操縱台灣公共輿論與市民認知的憂慮。

In fact, since Mr. Tsai purchased China Times, a large number of “self-censorship” incidents to “erase words that are critical of China” have taken place and the knowledge community has been very critical of such practice. Mr. Tsai obtains his capital from China and has turned into a media tycoon. His interview in the Washington Post which praised the authoritative mainland Chinese government is repressive towards the development of democracy and human rights in China. Such ridiculous comment has also proven our worries that the Chinese government has control over Taiwanese media, our public opinion and our citizens' rights to truthful reports.

The further expansion of Want Want China Times from printed media to cable television has undoubtedly alerted many Taiwanese. In fact in the recent public hearing, Tsai admitted that he had received money from the mainland Chinese authorities to publish “news” that propagates a positive imagine of mainland China. However, his defence was that “embedded marketing” has been a common practice in Taiwan and there is no reason to stop China Times from doing it.

Journalism Professor Chang Chin-hwa pointed out that such political advertisement is a potential threat to national security (via a report from ‘Reject China Times‘ [zh] campaign website:

張錦華教授亦憂心地提醒，不僅是我國政府在「買新聞」，連「中華人民共和國的政府」也在台灣買新聞，並促使監察委員吳豐山提出調查報告加以指摘，在這個事件中，「中國時報就是主犯」！旺旺中時收了錢以後，它自己賣新聞不算，它竟然去跟其他的報紙「幫中國政府買新聞」！在監察院的糾正報告中，即指出這種行為不僅影響新聞專業，更已提昇至危及「國家安全」的層次。

Professor Chang Chin-hwa is worried and reminds the public that “not only our government is buying news, now the People Republic of China (PRC) is buying news in Taiwan”. She urged the Control Yuan member Frank Wu to start an investigation and condemn such practices, “in this incident, the China Times is the prime suspect. Want Want China Times takes the money, however, it not only sells its own news, but helps other newspapers to sell their news! The Control Yuan has already pointed out [in 2010] that such practice has affected the professionalism in journalism and posed threat to our national security.”

Embedded marketing

For years, the issue of “embedded marketing” has been criticized by many media workers. Back in 2010, an experienced journalist Dennis Huang (黃哲斌), quit his job on the China Times and launched an online protest [zh] against embedded marketing:

從昨天起，我離開了工作十六年又五個月的《中國時報》。我越來越難獨善其身、越來越難假裝沒看到，其他版面被「業配新聞」吞噬侵蝕的肥大事實，新聞變成論字計價的商品，價值低落的芭樂公關稿一篇篇送到編輯桌上，「這是業配，一個字都不能刪」。然後，它們像是外星來的異形，盤據了正常新聞版面，記者努力採訪的稿件被擠壓、被丟棄。記者與主管被賦予業績壓力，不得不厚著面皮向採訪對象討預算、要業配。

Yesterday I left China Times, where I have worked for 16 years and 5 months. It is more and more difficult to focus on my personal interests and pretend not to see the ugly truth that the embedded advertisement (cloaked as news) gradually invades more and more pages in the newspapers. News becomes a kind of good that we can calculate its value by counting the number of words. Trashy news releases are sent to the editors one by one, and the editors are told, ‘this is embedded marketing and we cannot change any word in it.’ Later, they invade the pages for ‘real’ news like aliens, and those articles written by hard-working reporters are shortened or thrown away. Both reporters and their supervisors are given the responsibility for selling news, so they need to ask the interviewees shamelessly for budgets and embedded marketing.

我更相信，「人生總有非賣品」。例如，讀者的信任；例如，專業判斷與良知；例如，自己的人格與報社的信譽；例如，寫或不寫的自由權利。業配新聞破壞了這一切，奪走了這一切，它以每字一、兩百元的代價，將新聞變成廉售的開架商品。

I believe that there is something in your life not for sale. For example, the trust of my readers, professional judgment, my conscience, my integrity, the reputation of a newspaper company, and the freedom to decide whether to write or not. However, the embedded marketing destroys all of them and takes them away. It makes news a piece of cheap merchandise on a shelf.

在各種業配新聞中，公部門以納稅人的辛苦錢收買媒體，最是可議，我常說，「政府左手伸進我們的口袋，拿錢賄賂媒體，然後將右手伸進我們的腦袋」…政府不努力為政策辯護、不努力作民間溝通，現在連文宣廣告都懶得做，直接砸錢買新聞，這是一種最最混蛋加三級的媒體控制。

In various kinds of embedded marketing, the most arguable one is government sponsored news. The government pays the media with taxpayers' hard earned money. I like to put it like this: ‘the government puts its left hand into our pocket to get the money to bribe the media, and then it can extend its right hand into our brain.’ …[By doing so] the government does not need to defend its policy or communicate with the citizens. Now the government is so lazy that it does not want to write its own propaganda. They just need to buy up the news. This is the most tedious and obscene kind of media control.

Taiwan: Could the Future Be Nuclear-Free?

I-fan Lin — Wed, 16 May 2012 01:26:41 +0000

Since the nuclear disaster at Fukushima in March 2011, 53 out of the 54 nuclear power plants in Japan have been shut down for security checks. On May 5, 2012, the proportion of Japan's energy supplied by nuclear power reached zero for the first time in 42 years, following the shut down of Tomari’s Unit 3 in Hokkaido. Although the Japanese government is currently seeking to restart some nuclear power plants, local representatives still have serious concerns regarding their safety.

In Taiwan, many people have also started talking about the possibility of moving towards a nuclear-free future. The Taiwan Environmental Protection Union [zh] is optimistic about the nuclear-free movement in Japan, as quoted in Coolloud.org:

日本從去年311之後，國內核電廠陸續關閉，至今尚未發生缺電問題，如果可以熬過今年夏天不需核電，日本將真正進入無核國家。

After the earthquake of March 11, 2011, the nuclear power plants in Japan have been shut down one by one. So far they have not had any problems with electricity shortages. If they can survive this summer without nuclear energy, Japan could really become a nuclear-free nation.

Anti-nuclear energy protest in Taipei, March 11, 2012. Photo contributed to this post by James Yang under CC: BY-NC-SA

Su Huan-Chi, a candidate for chairperson with the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), also stated [zh] in Plurk, a popular social media website in Taiwan, that:

如果我當黨主席，一定先推動核四北北基宜四縣市地方公投廢核四！

If I were elected as the Party chairperson, I would campaign for a referendum to stop the four nuclear power plants in Taipei city, New Taipei city, Keelung and Yilan.

Nevertheless, not everyone is so optimistic about the nuclear-free development in Japan. bluesystem [zh] is worried how far Japan can go after shutting down all their nuclear power plants:

廢核絕對可以推! 只要不影響經濟下滑. 不過這真的會很拼…

Of course we can campaign for a nuclear-free Taiwan - as long as this move does not make the economy worse. However, this will be difficult.

核能的問題不只是使用其它能源來替代, 而是「能源自主性」的問題. 一旦重要的能源來源被別國控制, 那這個國家等於廢掉一樣! 這問題要怎麼解決? 除非能源自主率能提高吧~…那大家都廢核, 請問天然資源是不是大家一起搶? 假設台灣也搞廢核的話,能源來源方面搶得贏中國跟日本嗎?

The issue at stake regarding the use of nuclear power is not only about finding alternative energy. It is a matter of ‘energy autonomy’. If the major energy source is controlled by other countries, this country is doomed! How can we solve this problem? Only if we can increase our energy supply can we campaign for nuclear-free living. Are we ready to compete for natural energy resources? If Taiwan shuts down all our nuclear power plants, can we outbid China and Japan in the competition of energy resources?

Anti-nuclear energy protest in Taipei, April 30, 2011. Photo contributed to this post by James Yang under CC: BY-NC-SA

Despite the aforementioned worries, thousands of Taiwanese people protested against nuclear power on March 11, 2012, the first anniversary of the earthquake in Japan. Shuchuan, an independent environmental reporter, explained [zh] why she thinks Taiwan can and should give up nuclear energy:

福島核災打破核能安全神話，只要一次災害就足以毀掉所有。…我們還有選擇時，沒有理由不去思考任何不必使用核能發電的可能性。

The Fukushima nuclear power plant accident destroyed the myth of nuclear safety. We see that one accident can destroy all we have…We have no reason not to think about the possibility of giving up nuclear energy when we still have a choice.

以台灣目前核電佔總發電量不到兩成，但備載容量卻超過25%的情況下，廢不廢核並不是「能不能」的問題，而是「決心」。

In Taiwan, the proportion of electricity supplied by nuclear power is less than 20%, but our spare capacity is more than 25%. Under this condition, nuclear-free is not an issue of ‘can or cannot’, it is an issue of determination.

台灣政府還預估未來用電要再成長38%，只要不歸零思考、不檢討自己的浪費行為、不思索更聰明的用電方式，發再多電都不夠用。

The Taiwanese government estimates that we will need 38% more electricity in the future. If we do not go back to to the fundamental problem and review our energy consumption pattern and use electricity in a smarter way, there will never be enough for us even if we manage to generate more.

過去一年台灣政府已有改變，馬總統宣布核一、二、三使用年限到期不再延役，這是一個進展。然而對於核四依然繼續投入經費不願放手，核廢料無能力處理，卻一再強調核安的可以控制。然而，福島核災近在眼前，繼續說「核能安全」也已經沒有意義、且完全沒有說服力，終歸而言，台灣政府對核災還是沒有覺悟。

In the past year, the Taiwanese government has changed. President Ma claimed that our first, second, and third nuclear power plants would not extend their operations after reaching their shelf life. We have made some progress. However, the government is not willing to give up the fourth nuclear power plant and is throwing more money into it. The government does not know how to deal with the nuclear waste, but they keep claiming that they can promise the safety of nuclear power plants. Nevertheless, when we think of the Fukushima nuclear power plant accident, we can see that this is nonsense and it is not convincing to talk of the ‘safety of nuclear power plants’. In the end, the Taiwanese government does not seem aware of the possibility of nuclear disasters.

而這個歸零思考，理應是站在「廢除核電」的基礎上，重新去思考其他的能源方式，而如果其他的能源暫時無法完全取代，我們應該如何節能，以因應發電不足的情況。也就是說，思考自己的侷限，然後做出改變。

We should support the fundamental standpoint of a ‘nuclear-free Taiwan’ and explore the use of alternative energy. If we do not have enough alternative energy to replace all the nuclear-derived electricity we are using now and in the near future, we need to reduce our usage of electricity to avoid shortages. In other words, we need to think about our limits and make the change.

This post was sub-edited by Jane Ellis.

Taiwan: Indigenous Tao People's 30 Year Nuclear ‘Nightmare'

I-fan Lin — Fri, 11 May 2012 04:43:35 +0000

After Japan's Fukushima nuclear accident last year, more and more Taiwanese have started to become aware of the problems caused by nuclear power plants. One of the most serious issues is nuclear waste on Orchid Island, where the Tao people have lived for generations.

In December 30, 2011, a group of Tao people went to Taipei to protest against [zh] the nuclear waste storage facility situated on the Orchid Island in front of the presidential building. However, the president did not respond to their protest.

Another protest took place on February 20, 2012, with more than 500 Tao people demonstrating [zh] in front of the nuclear waste storage facility on the island due to concern over radioactive isotopes detected outside it and their anger with the owner company Taiwan Power's unfulfilled promise to store the nuclear waste elsewhere.

Jessie Tai from Wired Taiwan explained why [zh] Taiwan Power failed to keep their promise and move the nuclear waste out of the Orchid Island by the end of 2002:

因為核廢料處理最終場址的選定程序過於漫長，以及把核廢料運往國外處理的計畫失敗。

It takes a long time to find another place for long-term nuclear waste storage, and the original plan to ship the nuclear waste abroad failed.

A reporter from Taiwan New Talk listed the Tao people's demand [zh]:

首先，已經完成核廢桶檢整的貯存場應立即遷出蘭嶼；其次，蘭嶼將不續租土地給台電放置核廢料，已造成污染之土地必須進行除污與活化；第3，政府部門與台電應對核廢料貯存在蘭嶼的錯誤政策進行檢討，並重新與達悟族人談判後續賠償事宜，以彌補多年來達悟民族因核廢料所損失的健康。

First, the packed nuclear waste should be moved out of Orchid Island immediately; second, Orchid Island will not be leased to Taiwan Power company for nuclear waste storage anymore, and the contaminated land should be restored and revitalized; third, the government and Taiwan Power company should review their mistaken policy of putting nuclear waste on Orchid Island, and they should discuss with the Tao people about compensation for any health problems caused by the nuclear waste storage facility.

Some Tao people have also joined the political party and are pressuring the government through the legislature [zh], according to Jessie Tai's report from Wired Taiwan:

在農曆年前的大選中，提倡環保的綠黨為了強調其反核立場，將長期推動反核運動的達悟族單親媽媽希婻瑪飛洑列為該黨不分區立委名單第一人，綠黨雖然後來並未達到政黨票5%的國會門檻，但在蘭嶼卻創紀錄地拿下35.7%的政黨票，突顯出蘭嶼人長久以來的不滿，以及對自身家園環境的隱憂。

In the national legislative election held this January, to emphasize their anti-nuclear stance, the Green party, which has advocated environmental awareness, made Sinan Mavivo, a single mother from the Tao aboriginal group, the first candidate in their list of legislator-at-large seats. Although the Green party did not win more than 5% of the votes to have any legislator-at-large seat, the Green party won 35.7% of the votes on Orchid Island. This new record shows the anger the Tao people have had for a long time and their worries for their homeland.

Below is a documentary produced by Taiwan Indigenous TV on the history of the nuclear waste problem on Orchid Island:

Here is selected translation of the video script:

0′18″: To the Tao people of Orchid Island, the scene of first shipment of nuclear waste in the harbor of the Orchid Island in 1982 is a 30-year-long nightmare.

4′24″: On February 20, 1988, Tao people protested against the nuclear waste storage facility. Twenty four years ago, on a rainy day, the residents of Orchid Island angrily gathered together in front of the nuclear waste storage facility. They shouted their slogan loudly, “I love Orchid Island, and I do not want nuclear waste.” The Tao people's protest against nuclear waste started from that moment.

4′53″: On June 1, 1995, the Tao people were angry about the Taiwan Power company's plan to build six new nuclear waste storage trenches. There were protests against nuclear waste in Orchid Island and Taipei at the same time.

5′19″: (Former President Chen Shui-Bian said on TV): Our policy about nuclear waste on Orchid Island is very clear. We will move all the nuclear waste out of Orchid Island before the end of 2002. We will give the beautiful island back to the Tao people.

5′40″: The township magistrate of the Orchid Island asked, “Did the people on Orchid Island produce this nuclear waste? Who produced it?” The crowd answered, “Taiwan.” The township magistrate asked, “Do we use the electricity generated by the nuclear power plants?” The crowd answered, “No.” The township magistrate said, “Do not give others what you do not want. Chen Shui-Bian should eat this”.

6′44″: In 1996, the nuclear waste storage facility was full. There are more than 97,000 barrels of nuclear waste [in it]. However, Taiwan Power company still planned to ship more nuclear waste to Orchid Island. The Tao people were mobilized to surround the harbor. At last, the ship of nuclear waste was blocked in the waters off the small island. That ship returned to Taiwan. No more nuclear waste has been shipped to Orchid island.

7′36″: Breaking news: there are radioactive isotopes, Cobalt-60 and Caesium-137, [evident] outside the nuclear waste storage facility on Orchid Island. Although the Atomic Energy Council said the amount of radioactive isotopes is far below the standard, researchers found these radioactive isotopes are from the nuclear waste storage facility.

8′28″: Looking at this photo, you can see what happened in the nuclear waste storage trenches in the past 30 years. This is horrifying. As a mother, when I look at the photo, I think our health may be seriously threatened. I cannot stop yelling. In the past 30 years, in last year, we Tao people have kept yelling. We are yelling for help.

9′09″: What you throw in front of our houses will make the Tao people die and become extinct. You are talking about increasing the compensation. I am sorry. Can you tell Mr. Ma Ying-Jeou what you just said? The only thing we ask for is the removal of nuclear waste from Orchid Island.

Taiwan: A Family's Forced Eviction Casts Shadow on Urban Renewal Act

I-fan Lin — Fri, 06 Apr 2012 14:11:57 +0000

The outrageous eviction of the Wang family executed by Taipei City government showed the public how fragile citizens' private rights is in front of the urban renewal projects. More and more, public opinion has urged the Premier, Chong Chen, to revise the current Urban Renewal Act [zh].

Manipulation of resident opinions

Hsieh-Li Wang pointed out that [zh] the current Act allows construction companies to put forward an urban renewal plan even when the majority of the residents refuse to join this project:

Wang's house before demolition. Photo by Flickr User munch999 (CC BY-NC-SA 2.0).

都更條例的大陷阱在此：都更條例第十條第二款規定的「十分之一所有權人同意，再加上土地或建物樓地板面積超過十分之一，即可申請更新」。這是什麼意思？來自五分埔的都更受害戶李昭玫說，「就是只要有錢人或建商想都更，買下幾戶，灌進大量人頭，然後佔多數，就可以開啟都更大門。」李昭玫的社區就遇到幾戶灌進七十多個人頭的個案。

Here is the trap of the Act: according to Article 10 second clause ‘When 10% of the homeowners who together occupy more than 10% of the land agree to join the project, they can apply for urban renewal.’ What does it mean? Chao-Wen Lee, a victim of urban renewal in Wufenpu, said, ‘that means when some wealthy people or a construction company wants to put forward an urban renewal plan, they can buy some apartments or houses in that area and arrange many people to become the shared owners; when these people become the majority of the residents, the door of urban renewal would be opened.’ In Chao-Wen Lee’s community, more than 70 new residents were listed as owners of some apartments.

Based on Article 25 of the Urban Renewal Act, the government is allowed to approve an urban renewal project when 80% of the involved residents agree to join the project [zh]. For those who refuse to join the project, they will be punished with forced eviction executed by the government. Yo-Yu Hsih, a law student criticized [zh] the tyranny of the majority which violates the rights of a minority.

採行多數決同意之目的，無非係要使珍貴稀少的土地資源有效利用，避免在都更劃定範圍內發生少數綁架多數，阻礙都更進行，延滯都市發展。

按多數決同意的制度多有走向多數暴力的風險，其並無法兼顧全體所有權人之利益…目前都更條例第22條第1項僅有多數決原則而無相關保護少數人之制度，如此對少數人甚為不利，恐已違反最小侵害原則。

The original goal of majority decision is to use the limited land resources efficiently. It also prevents cases when the will of the majority is kidnapped by a minority of people who want to obstruct the proceeding of urban renewal and development of a city.

(However) Majority decision may result in tyranny that sacrifices the minority's interest… Currently Article 22, clause 1 of the Urban Renewal Act endorses majority decision without any protection for the minority. This will put the minority in a vulnerable situation and jeopardize their rights. I am afraid this Act has violated the legal principle of minimum encroachment.

A poster outside Wang's houses. It says ‘my house was bought when I was 40, and it was torn down when I was 70.' Photo by Flickr User munch999 (CC BY-NC-SA 2.0).

Government involvement

Hsieh-Li Wang questioned [zh] why the Act allows the government to use police force to serve the interest of developers:

更爭議的是，第三十六條規定，建商可向政府申請，由公權力代為拆除拒遷戶。讓不少專家認為，都更條例的多數決和過度支持建商，有違背憲法對人民財產保障的基本權利.

Article 36 of the Act is most controversial: the construction company can appeal to the government to demolish the houses by force when the residents refuse to be evicted. Many experts believe that the Act, which justifies use of the majority decision mechanism and government's involvement in supporting the developers, has violated the Constitutional protection of citizens’ property rights.

The Taiwan Association for Human Rights demanded a thorough revision of the Urban Renewal Act in accordance with the Constitution. In the Yuan Legislature, legislator Mei-Nyu You urged [zh] the Minister of Interior to revise the current Urban Renewal Act:

今天如果你的房子出租，遇到一個奧客不肯搬走，你能不能用公權力直接把他趕走？…你得要先去法院告他打官司，拿到勝訴後再向法院聲請強制執行，法院還會給他一個緩衝期讓他搬遷，這是尊重人民居住的權利.

Today if you have an apartment leased to a renter who refuses to move out, can you appeal to the public authority to evict the renter?v…You need to sue this renter. If the court rules in your favor, you can apply for a court order. Usually, the court will give this renter a grace period to relocate, and this is how our Constitution protects citizens' right of residence.

今天我的房子好好的，沒有礙到誰，沒有因為交通、安全、房子破舊需重建的問題，完全沒有。只是因為建商看中我的土地，看中我的容積率，就叫我非遷（不可），然後就越過司法權，直接用行政權介入來拆房子，這樣符合程序的正義嗎？

Today my house is in good condition and does not obstruct my neighbors, traffic nor public security. However, once a developer fancies my land and its floor space index, it can force me out of my house (giving me no choice). It can even get around the judiciary and appeal to the public authority to tear down my house. Is there any procedural justice here?

Defending constitutional rights

Torrent criticized the political party's election politics and retreated [zh] to citizen action for defending their constitutional rights:

Graffiti against an urban renewal project. Photo by Flickr User theAthena (CC BY-NC-SA 2.0).

與民眾權益攸關高居憲法總綱後的第二章人民之權利義務，越來越成為其它章節爭奪戰中的口號…台灣社會已經縱容這些人的謊言太久，他們告訴我們只要搶到憲法第四章的總統大位、得到第六章立法權的多數，就能夠自然達到憲法第二章居住權、遷徙權、言論權、生存權、工作權、財產權，但他們永遠都有理由和藉口。

Chapter two of our Constitution defines the rights and responsibilities of citizens, which have been turned into empty slogans through different political campaigns… Our society has connived with these politicians' lies for too long. They told us we can eventually enjoy all the rights described in Chapter two of our Constitution after they [win the election and] become the president based on Chapter four of our Constitution and after they control the majority seats in the Legislature based on Chapter six in our Constitution. Nevertheless, they always have excuses to defer their promise.

所以我們要求改革不正義的都更，保障每一個人民的居住權。這才是寫台灣人民的歷史，才能從龐大的謊言中抗爭出空隙拿回屬於我們的憲法。

This is why we ask to revise the unjust Urban Renewal Act, to protect every citizen’s right of residence. We should take control of our Constitution away from all the lies and write the history of Taiwanese people.

Taiwan: Protect Homeowners Against Forced Demolition

I-fan Lin — Tue, 03 Apr 2012 02:46:19 +0000

About 400 people gathered around the house of the Wang family in Taiwan's capital Taipei early in the morning of March 28, 2012, to protect the family against eviction by the police.

A controversial urban renewal project [zh] has made the Wang's house part of the Taipei city government sanctioned renewal zone under the 2008 Urban Renewal Act [zh], which allows the government to forcibly expel citizens from their own house when 80% of their neighbors agree to sell their land to the developer.

More than 20 communities affected

Supporters gathered in front of the Wang's houses. Image by Coolloud (CC BY-NC-SA 2.0).

After the new Urban Renewal Act was passed, more than 20 communities have been affected [zh], causing intense conflicts between the homeowners and the construction companies. The affected homeowners together jointly set up the Taiwan Alliance for Victims of Urban Renewal [zh] in May, 2010.

In the Wang's case, the developer Leyoung Construction (樂揚建設), of the urban renewal project involved has collected an agreement signed by 38 out of 40 affected homeowners [zh]. While the majority of the affected households were living in apartment building, the Wang family had two independent houses in the district and Wen-Lin Yuan (文林苑), the head of the Wang refused to sell their family property to the developer. The company then turned to the Taipei city government to evict the family and demolish their houses by force.

Since July 2011, the Taiwan Alliance for Victims of Urban Renewal has been protesting for the Wang family, demanding the the Construction and Planning Agency to revise the Urban Renewal Act. They pointed out [zh] that:

為了加速都更不惜動用公權力強行拆屋趕人、掩蓋該案背後爭議、也過度擴充多數決同意都更乃至強拆民宅的正當性。…內政部營建署與台北市都市更新處應負起把關居民生命安全、公平公正都更的責任，而非將制度性問題，化為在地社區居民對立的假象

In order to speed up the urban renewal, the government retreats to police force to evict citizens, covering up the embedded interests and conflicts, justifying the tyranny of the majority in forced eviction… The Construction and Planning Agency of the Ministry of Interior and the Urban Redevelopment Office in Taipei city should take the responsibility for residents' safety and justice in urban development. They should not mislead the public by manipulating the urban renewal problem into conflicts amongst residents living in the same community.

However, the Interior Ministry keeps neglecting the Alliance's demand and the latest conflict arose when the Taipei city government issued the eviction order for the Wang's house on March 19. In reaction to the government's move, the Taiwan Alliance for Victims of Urban Renewal asked their supporters to patrol around the Wang’s house and defend the family against the eviction.

When the Taipei police prepared to forcibly enter the Wang’s house on March 28, hundreds of supporters laid down on the ground in front of it to protect the family. Professor Hua-Chen Liu [zh] was sitting with the Wang family on that day and she described what she saw in the kitchen on the first floor:

在廚房裡的我們，感受到的不是和自己並肩而坐、那種令人興致高昂的同志體溫. 而是兩位老人家，在經歷面臨拆遷的精神折磨，臉上那種無以言喻的表情. 也是兒孫們圍繞著因為犯了高血壓毛病的阿嬤, 輕拍她的肩膀，按摩她的雙臂.
不知為何，阿嬤的頭輕輕地垂了下來. 然後，廚房裡的我們，又站了起來，再一次盡可能地完善我們的防守設備.

In the kitchen, we did not feel the body temperature and heartbeats of the supporters outside the house. What we saw was two old women suffered from the torment of forced eviction, with their indescribable facial expressions. One of the woman, who has hypertension, was surrounded by her children and grandchildren, who kept tapping her shoulders and rubbing her limbs. Somehow she lowered her head. For those who were in the kitchen, we stood up again to perfect our defensive equipment.

However, despite all their preparations, the police crushed the back door easily and the supporters were taken away by the police. Professor Hua-Chen Liu [zh] described the scene:

進不來的聲援群眾想側拍衝進後門的過程, 都被警察以雨傘和大型帆布遮住，無從看到. 一大群警察直接衝過來，沒有人掛名牌. 沒有人解釋基於什麼理由要拖走我們, 沒有任何前言後話，就是動手！

The supporters outside the house tried to take video of the eviction process, but the police blocked the scene with umbrellas and large canvas [sheets]. They could not see anything happening inside the house. A lot of police officers rushed into the house. None of them wore their name tag, and none of them explained why they dragged us away. They just took action without any explanation.

The site had been sealed and the police stopped reporters and citizens from making any record of the demolition process. Media Watch Taiwan [zh] posted an eyewitness report:

現場也有多位民眾以手機、相機、筆記型電腦、平板電腦等工具紀錄。其中一名記者同業表示，看到警方最先以手電筒照射學生拍攝用的手機。後來包括《目擊者》電子報等不同媒體的幾位記者趨前拍攝後，有兩位員警也同樣如法炮製再度干度採訪拍攝。

There were many citizens using their cell phones, cameras, notebooks, and tablet computers to record the process. One reporter noticed that the police had used flashlights to stop students from using cell phones to take photos. They used the same tactics to disrupt other reporters, including the reporters from Media Watch Taiwan from taking photos.

When the police officers entered the Wang's houses, Ping-Yao Li was on the second floor [zh]:

我真的不知道自己身在何處。一樓的警察拿起油壓剪，阿姨往下探頭，發現一樓的傢俱都被往外丟，玻璃都被打破，我們鎖上窗戶，將桌椅抵住大門，圍成圈圈坐在客廳，四面八方傳來各種聲響，警察用力的撞門叫罵。…親愛的人民保母，你們今天讓幾百個學生陷入極端的恐懼，並且帶來無法抹滅的不信任，你們遵從所謂的職務，並且成為財團打手。

It was very chaotic and I had no idea what was going to happen. The police officers on the first floor used the hydraulic cutters to break in. Auntie Wang looked down and saw their furniture being thrown out from the windows. We locked the windows and pushed the table and chairs against the front door. Then we sat in a circle inside the living room surrounded by the horrible sounds of the forced demolition and police curses… Dear nannies of the people, today you brought fear and distrust to hundreds of students by following the orders that equate you to thugs working for the business syndicate.

Supporters surrounded the Wang house. Image by Flickr user coolloud (CC BY-NC-ND 2.0).

After the eviction, professor Hua-Chen Liu reflected [zh] on the brutal process:

我不明白失去自己的家是什麼意思. 非常疲憊、很想睡覺的我，在這個陽光殘酷得白花花的早上, 可以坐上計程車，20分鐘後從口袋摸出鑰匙, 洗個安慰疼痛肌肉的熱水澡.
但是王家呢？
警察拉人的過程裡，他們一直要學生小心，「不要受傷」. 優勢警力把人肉沙包和他們的家俱一件件往外丟時. 他們只來得及抱著父母的遺照和祖先牌位逃出來.
他們今天要睡在哪裡？他們明天要住在哪裡？
在這個都更的龐大魔爪下，明天我會在哪裡？你會在哪裡？

I do not understand what the the meaning of ‘losing one's home’ is. In this cruel sunny morning, I am so tired and sleepy, I can sit on a taxi, go home and take out my keys from my pocket within 20 minutes, then take a bath to relieve my muscle pain.
But how about the Wangs?
When the police officers dragged the supporters away, the Wangs kept reminding the students to be careful and ‘don't get hurt.’ When the police threw the supporters and their furniture out of their house, they only had time to grab the photos of their deceased parents and their ancestral tablets with them.
Where are they going to sleep tonight? Where will they stay tomorrow?
Under the devil’s talon of the so-called urban renewal, can we be certain where we will be ending up tomorrow?

Taiwan: Say No to Ractopamine Tainted American Meat

I-fan Lin — Wed, 29 Feb 2012 09:03:53 +0000

Ractopamine, a leanness-enhancing feed additive, is banned in Taiwan and more than 150 other countries; some shipments of United States (US) beef were banned from entering Taiwan upon discovering traces of ractopamine in meat last year.

However, under pressure from the US government, the newly elected Taiwanese President Ma Ying-jeou is now considering lifting the ban. Taiwanese consumers and farmers are unhappy about such a move and a civic coalition has been established to counteract it.

Additive controversy

Ractopamine was developed by an American pharmaceutical company, Elanco Animal Health, a division of Eli Lilly and Company. It is used in the feeding of pigs, cows and turkeys for improving “feed efficiency” and enhancing “carcass leanness” in meat. The Food Standards Agency, Codex Alimentarius, did not have a consensus on the maximal residual level (MRL) of ractopamine yet. The Codex Alimentarius will continue its discussion on the MRL of ractopamine in July, 2012.

Taiwanese farmer protests against Ractopamine use in 2007. Photo by Flickr User munch999 (CC BY-NC-SA 2.0)

US beef has been one of the most controversial issues in its free trade negotiations with other countries. Recently, Japan has also opened its beef market and allowed ractopamine to be present in the imported meat, but banning the use of ractopamine in domestic pork and beef production.

A similar understanding has taken place between the US and Taiwan under the Trade and Investment Framework Agreement (TIFA) since mid 2000. The US government has been pressuring Taiwan to lift the ban on ractopamine and the restriction imposed on US beef after the outbreak of mad cow disease in 2003.

However, the evaluation of the MRL of ractopamine in 2006 failed to remove ractopamine as banned drug against the background of the social panic raised by the clenbuterol poisoning incidence that happened in China. In 2007, when the government again tried to lift the ban on ractopamine, the then opposing party, Kuomingtang, in Legislative Yuan stood by the country's pig farmers [zh] and stopped the motion.

Don Shapiro from the American Chamber of Commerce in Taipei revealed that the Kuomingtang, under the pressure from the US government, would started to work on lifting the ban on ractopmine again after they won the presidential election in 2012:

The U.S. government by early 2011 was willing to start preparations to resume TIFA talks. Then another obstacle arose when Taiwan rejected some shipments of beef found to contain traces of the leanness-enhancing feed additive ractopamine…Whenever questions were raised last year about finding a solution to the impasse, Taiwan officials responded that nothing could be done before this January’s elections, for fear of sparking protests from consumer and farming groups that could escalate into a campaign issue.

An international academic conference on the additive organized by the Department of Health in April and May 2012, has been criticized [zh] as the government's attempt to educate the public on the safety of ractopamine and create a public consensus on the ban lifting. In reaction to the government's move, more than 20 civic groups, from the consumer, animal rights, environment and agriculture sectors, have formed a coalition [zh] to stop it.

Citizen media reactions

One of anti-US beef corner's concern is about the adverse effect of the additive on human health and food security. Although there are studies showing that the acceptable daily intake of ractopamine is up to 60mg, Taiwanese toxicology expert, Dr. Lin has pointed out [zh] that this level is set for healthy people because the human study of ractopamine is not considered to be complete. For those who have cardiovascular disease, a 6mg acceptable daily intake might still be too much.

Citizen reporter, Cliteir Chen from News Market points out [zh] that the government should not betray people's health for diplomatic consideration:

許多人質疑，瘦肉精開放與否，從來就不是「能不能添加」、「要不要進口」那麼單純的問題，而是被外交、貿易政策綁在一起的複雜問題。但對全民來說，這僅僅就是最單純的食品安全議題，當我們強調飲食回復天然、少吃添加物之際，為何不是維持十多年來「零瘦肉精的」堅持？

Many people believe that the ban lift of leanness-enhancer is not a simple issue. It is connected with trade policy and diplomacy. However, from the perspective of people, this is simply a food security issue. We always advocate for natural and non-additive food, why should we give up our insistence on “no leanness-enhancer” in our food?

即使萊克多巴胺「沒那麼毒」，但不要忘記國人有不吃有毒肉品的權益，這也應是政府的義務。

Even though ractopamine is “not that poisonous”, but Taiwanese should have the right to say no to tainted meat and it is the government's responsibility to keep tainted meat away from its people.

Because the FDA has received a lot of complaints from the pig raisers who fed their pigs with ractopamine, animal rights activists have also joined the debate [zh]:

這種「速養」以換得「快錢」的邏輯，正彰顯出資本主義體制最殘酷的一面。也就是，為了追求最快速、最大量的利潤，可以以動物的痛苦、人類的健康、生存環境的破壞做為代價。…反對美牛，還包括反對這樣的生命態度！

The logic of ‘being efficient in feeding’ in exchange for ‘fast money’ reflects the most cruel part of capitalism. In other words, we allow ourselves to gain profit at the expense of animals' suffering, human’s health, and our environment… One of the reasons for opposing American beef is to say no to such an attitude toward life.

Yu Fu-Ching from News Market reflects upon [zh] modern people's eating habit:

當大家激烈討論「瘦肉精到底有沒有毒」、「瘦肉精安全用量」之際，大家有沒有想過，我們難道不該回到源頭問：為什麼飼養動物需要使用瘦肉精？為什麼人們對肥肉避之唯恐不及？難道肥肉對健康的危害高過萊克多巴胺？過去我們認為肥肉一無是處、是健康危害的想法真正的正確嗎？

When we discuss whether or not leanness-enhancer is toxic or not, or what is the MRL for ractopamine, why don't we ask why farmers feed leanness-enhancer to livestock? Why we are so afraid of fatty meat? Is fatty meat more harmful that ractopamine? Is fatty meat really harmful to our health?

一個簡單的邏輯：吃好的食材，是健康飲食的第一步。蔬果如此，肉品也如此。而什麼是好食材？毫無疑問，天然不添加是構成好食材的第一要件。因此，自然養殖、不使用瘦肉精，呈現天然肥瘦比的肉品，無疑是最佳的脂肪與蛋白質來源。

The logic is simple: the first step toward healthy diet is eating good food. This rule can be applied to vegetables, fruits, and meat. What is good food? Undoubtedly, natural food without additives is most essential. Therefore, the meat from the animals raised naturally without beta-agonists has the natural balance of fat and lean meat. This is the best protein source beyond question.

Taiwan: 2012 Election Sets Example for Mainland Chinese Democratization

I-fan Lin — Fri, 27 Jan 2012 09:32:22 +0000

Taiwan's presidential and legislative election was held on January 14, 2012. Incumbent Ma Ying-jeou of the Kuomintang (KMT) was reelected as President with 51.6% of the vote. Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) challenger Tsai Ing-wen resigned her post as chairperson of the DPP following her election defeat.

Chinese communities around the world were closely watching the results, as Taiwan is the first among the Chinese societies to transition from authoritarian to democratic governance. Many people from mainland China and Hong Kong travelled to Taiwan to observe the political process; they wonder if Taiwan can set an example for the future democratization in mainland China.

Beijing based journalist Mark MacKinnon was surprised by Taiwanese enthusiasm for politics:

As a Beijing correspondent, it's so weird to see and hear people talking and shouting - in Chinese - about politics.

Based on the website of the Central Election Commission, 74.38% of eligible voters casted their votes in 2012. Ma Ying-jeou won reelection with 51.60% of the total votes cast, and Tsai Ing-wen gathered 45.63%.

Taiwan sovereignty

Different from the previous election, the usual Blue (KMT) and Green (DDP) antagonism seems absent, yet Taiwanese sovereignty remains the most critical issue. Karlatheo expressed [zh] expressed her concern after the election:

1月14日，平靜地去投票。與朋友相聚。其實大家並不特別在意哪一黨得勝，但是很在意台灣的主體性是否會失落。…知道中國的因素主宰著這次的選舉，經濟的問題是所有的人都得面對的。…馬總統，請記得您是我們僕人

On Jan[uary] 14, I went to vote peacefully. Then I gathered with friends. We do not care which party won the election, but we do care about whether Taiwan’s sovereign will be kept…We knew the issue of China dominated this election, and everyone needs to face the economic problems… President Ma, please remember you are our servant.

Nathan Batto was also worried about the future of the Taiwan-China relationship after the election:

With a sizeable 70-43 majority in the legislature, Ma Ying-jeou is not going to immediately become a lame duck president. Instead, he probably has enough power to do most of what he wants. He will almost certainly have the power to implement the next stage of ECFA, and it is not out of the question that he could push through the peace agreement that he mentioned during the campaign.

Researcher fellow at the Asian Studies Center at the Heritage Foundation, Dean Cheng, pointed out:

A strong Taiwan, confident in its relationship with the U.S., is key to peace and security in the region. In the weeks before Taiwan’s election, the U.S. Administration suddenly dispatched several senior officials to Taiwan. As it has been almost 12 years since a visit from a sitting U.S. cabinet member, the re-election of President Ma would seem to present an opportunity to demonstrate that this lack of attention has come to an end.

Example for mainland China

Those who could not fly to Taiwan to observe the election watched the news closely. Lele is from China [zh], but she has observed Taiwanese elections for more than a decade:

尽管不是长在台湾生在台湾，也不是亲哪个党派的政治狂热分子，但台湾四年一次的总统大选开票直播，我一定会观看。这已是第四次看到台湾总统大选了。…台湾民主大选制度逐渐走向成熟，不知大陆何时也能向台湾一样走上这一条路？大陆老百姓也有选举国家领导人的权利？

I was not born and have never lived in Taiwan. I am not political fanatic for any party, but I always watch the live broadcast of the election in Taiwan every four years. This is my fourth time watching it… The election system in Taiwan has become mature. When will China step onto the same road as Taiwan? When will Chinese have the right to vote for our leaders.

@darkillzhou [zh] (on Weibo) from China made jokes about the mainland Chinese election when talking to his Taiwanese friend:

刚一台湾朋友结束聊天时对我说，“明天早上我們要去投票了﹐晚上就知道總統是誰了”，我顿时不知如何答复。虽然我们之间的交流没有任何障碍，但在他面前真觉得无地自容。我只好说，“你们太落后了，我们如果明天早上投票的话，今天晚上就知道谁会当选了。。。”

My Taiwanese friend just told me they will go to vote for their president tomorrow morning, and they will know who wins the presidential election by the evening. Suddenly I did not know how to respond. Although our communication was smooth, I felt very ashamed. At the end, I said, ‘You Taiwanese are not efficient. If we mainland Chinese go to vote tomorrow morning, we would know who win the election tonight…’

In Hong Kong, columnist 練乙錚 (Lian Yi-Zheng) talked about [zh] how this election may change the future of China:

台灣的故事，如果只看到七八十年代，那是和大陸到目前為止差不多的，但到了八十年代，故事出現政治拐點，五千年文明古國民主化了。其後發展，大家清楚，要點是：台灣經驗是一個近乎完整的立國經驗。政治上，從極權到民主、從專制到自由；經濟上，從落後到富足，從漁農到包含大量高科技。
台灣在國際上沒有話語權，在全球華人當中的政治比重也很低，但一個內容豐富的「台灣論述」正在積聚力量，吸引着全世界大小角落裏正在徬徨焦慮地尋找精神家園的華人；這次到台灣觀選的陸人港客，便是這個論述的吸收者、傳播者。

What has happened in Taiwan is similar to that in China, if we only look at Taiwan’s history before 1980. In the 1980s, there was a turning point in their politics. Building upon the 5,000-year-old culture, the country became democratic. All of us know the following story: the so-called ‘Taiwan experience’ is similar to an experience of founding a state. Politically, they became democratic after totalitarianism, and now they enjoy freedom after autocracy. Economically, they became wealthy from [being] an undeveloped country, and they have developed hi-tech industry in addition to fishery and agriculture.
Taiwan can hardly speak out on the international stage. On the political stage of Chinese society all over the world, Taiwanese only play a small role. However, the ‘Taiwan proposal’ with a rich content is gaining its energy. This proposal attracts Chinese people all over the world who are anxious to find their spiritual homeland. This time, those people from Hong Kong and mainland China who went to Taiwan to observe this election will absorb this experience and spread it.

In China, 水木丁 pointed out [zh] it is an opportunity for people in China to reflect why they do not think democracy is a choice for China:

我看蔡英文的演讲时，一直在想这个问题，不知道那些持如此论调的人，看到这一场总统选举，会有什么样的说辞，所以美国人英国人可以讲民主，我们不配讲民主？所以连一衣带水的台湾人都可以讲民主，我们不配讲民主吗？全世界都素质高，只有我们素质低，不配讲民主吗？
我看到台湾大选的井然有序，内心感慨，因为我知道这些和我们一样的黄皮肤黑眼睛的同胞们正在学习，他们也曾选错人，也曾走过弯路，发生过闹剧，陷入过绝望，但是他们还是继续选择了这条路，不问自己配不配。我看到他们站在大雨中，胜利的人们和失败的人们，因为有信念，知道自己想要一个怎样的世界，所以也就有希望。我突然想到这个配不配的问题，这世界上貌似没有那个国家的人民，是要先证明自己配民主和自由，才被施舍民主和自由的，想到此岸的人们竟然要怀疑自己到底配不配，这真是羞辱。民主的确是要慢慢来，但绝对不是从证明自己配不配开始。

When I watched Tsai Ing-Wen’s talk, I kept thinking about this question: I do not know what those people will say about this election. Americans and British people can talk about democracy, but we are not qualified for talking about democracy, are we? Now Taiwanese can talk about democracy on the other side of the strait, but we still cannot talk about democracy. Is it true that the people outside of China have higher quality and we do not? Is this why we are not qualified for talking about democracy?
I have some reflections when I saw the election in Taiwan held smoothly. I know these people with yellow skin and black eyes, who look like us, are learning. They had chosen the wrong person. They had taken the detour. There had been a farce. No matter what has happened, they continue walking on the way they choose. They do not ask if they are qualified. I saw them standing in the rain, the supporters of the winning party and the supporters of the losing party. They have their beliefs. They know what kind of world they want. Therefore they have hope. Suddenly I thought about the question of qualification. No citizen in any country in the world is given out democracy and freedom after they prove that they are qualified for democracy and freedom. Thinking about the doubts about our qualification that many of us have, I feel humiliated. Democracy should be realized step by step, but the process should never start with proving us qualified for it.

Encouraged by the observers in Hong Kong, mainland China, and other parts of the world old cat believes [zh] the Taiwanese should be strong and help the democracy movement in China:

在這一次大選中，許多同胞憂慮中國透過讓利、市場力量，軟性影響台灣的選舉，而選前大批企業老闆公開支持九二共識，被視為中國影響的證明。這些憂慮當然很合理，但我們只能單向憂慮嗎？我們不能反向送出我們的魅力嗎？
這是台灣的機會…如果台灣對中國的民主化有貢獻，未來我們才有機會贏得十三億人的同理認同…台灣雖小，卻占有舉足輕重的位置，我們不應該再用逃離中國的心態思考未來。
無論幸或不幸，我們就是站在這個奇異的歷史高點上了，華人的民主典範，也許不是我們設定的目標，但卻是我們實實在在擁有的力量。
不應該辜負這樣的力量。

In this election, many Taiwanese worried about the influence of China on our election through their economic power. Before the election, many heads of big Taiwanese companies supported the so called 1992 consensus in the public. Their actions are considered as the influence of China. These worries are very reasonable. However, are we only able to worry about China? Aren’t we able to attract their eye?
This is an opportunity for Taiwan… If Taiwan contributes to the democratization in China, we may earn the heart of the 13 hundred million people in China… Taiwan is small, but we stand on an important position. We should stop evading China when we plan our future.
No matter if it is lucky or not, we are at the magic point in the history. Being a model of democracy in the Chinese society may not be our goal, but this is the power in our hand.
We should not waste this power.

Taiwan: Nuclear Waste on Orchid Island

I-fan Lin — Thu, 31 Mar 2011 05:33:44 +0000

Nuclear waste is the material that nuclear fuel becomes after it is used in a reactor. It is dangerously radioactive and remains so for thousands of years.

Four years after the first Taiwanese nuclear power plant was built in 1970, the Taiwan Atomic Energy Council decided to dump its nuclear waste at Orchid Island (Lanyu), where the indigenous Tao people (Yami) have lived for generations. More than twenty years have passed, the radioactive waste barrels have eroded with rust and it seems that no one is ready to take care of the problem.

Birds eye view of Orchid Island, Taiwan. Photo taken by Flickr user bambicrow (CC BY-NC 2.0)

There are two nuclear waste storage sites [zh] on Orchid Island. Every week, boats from Taiwan bring the radioactive waste to Orchid Island dumping 45,000 barrels of waste on the beautiful island annually.

These nuclear waste storage sites have changed the fate of Tao people forever. In a campaign page [zh] on the public television website, Tao people demanded that the government return a peaceful childhood to their children:

民國六十九年核廢料從台灣漂洋過海到蘭嶼，從此以後，伴隨著蘭嶼小朋友長大的，除了飛魚、迷你豬，還有核廢料桶。

Since nuclear waste was sent to Orchid Island from Taiwan by boat in 1980, the children of Orchid Island have grown up with flying fish, mini pigs - and barrels of nuclear waste.

According to an in-depth report [zh] Tao people were ignorant of the construction of nuclear waste site:

當年貯存場地施工的時候，鄉民根本不知道是在建核廢料貯存場。當時的鄉長江瓦斯甚至不懂中文！少數鄉民聽施工的人說是正在蓋「罐頭工廠」，今天運送廢料的專用碼頭被說成某種軍事用途的港口……。

While it was under construction [in 1979], none of us knew it is for nuclear waste storage. At that time our village chief could not even understand Chinese. Construction workers told some of the villagers that they were building a “Can Food Factory” while the pier for landing nuclear waste was said to be a military harbor…

When the Tao people finally learned the danger of nuclear waste in 1987, they began to protest against the nuclear waste and the battle has been going for more than 20 years. In 1995, they announced the “Declaration of expelling the nuclear waste demons” [zh]:

雅美族，全球只有三千人，一個吟詩的民族，一個和平的民族，我們不願意再以我們族人的血肉之軀去作為台電核能人體實驗的對象。

Tao people are an ethnic group with only 3000 population in the whole world. We are poets. We believe in peace. We can no longer accept the Taiwan Power Company treating our bodies like guinea pigs.

Below is an excerpt of a documentary ‘The borderland‘ [zh]. It shows the life and culture of Tao people on Orchid Island and this video clip from 1:20 to 2:58 shows some precious historical photos about Tao people's protest against the nuclear waste storage sites in 1987:

On December 31 2002, Tao people managed to terminate the contract with the Taiwan Power Company. However, the Taiwanese government has no plan to remove the nuclear waste from the Island. The next round of battle for Tao people since then has been to press the government to solve the waste problem.

Below is special coverage of the nuclear waste problem in Orchid Island. The reporter interviewed the environmentalists, government and protesters, but not a single party could provide a viable solution to the problem:

In 2008, 26 years after the first barrel of nuclear waste was stored on Orchid Island, the government finally took action to conduct a thorough security inspection of these nuclear waste barrels. According to a local news report reposted in the Orchid Island e-news website [zh], the result was worrisome. The inspectors assigned by the Taiwan Atomic Energy Council found out that:

首座開蓋檢整的壕溝貯放的四千多桶核廢料全部鏽蝕，部分廢料桶甚至已開膛剖肚。

All 4000+ barrels in the first inspection were eroded by rust. Some of the barrels have been eroded to the extent that there are big cracks cutting across the iron shells.

核廢料桶禁不起蘭嶼高溫潮濕和高鹽分的惡劣環境，八十一年起陸續出現鏽蝕。

Since 1992, these nuclear waste barrels have been eroded by the high temperature, high humidity, and high salinity environment of Orchid Island.

Who should take care of the nuclear waste? Who should be responsible for the nuclear waste? Where should the nuclear waste go? Blogger Annpo pointed out [zh] that the problem of nuclear waste cannot be neglected in the review of energy policy in Taiwan, in addition to the safety of nuclear power plants [zh]:

當年，國家發展重工業，需要大量電力，今日國家依然要大力發展，生產更多需要被消化被解決的問題，發展之後留下的都是「債」。債，誰要還？誰來還？要不，根據用電統計，用電量最多的地區，作為核廢料掩埋場，好不？支持興建核電的，一人抱一桶回家，好不？

In the past, our country had high-energy demand for the development of heavy industry. Today our country still wants to continue this developmental path which will generate more problems that need to be solved some day in the future. There is always ‘debt’ left behind after development. Who will pay for the debt? Should we decide according to the energy consumption rate and ask that the area where people consume most electricity become the new nuclear waste storage site? And ask that those who support the nuclear power plants take home one barrel with them?

Taiwan: Anti-Nuclear Protesters' Lonely Quest

I-fan Lin — Tue, 29 Mar 2011 04:54:13 +0000

A fourth nuclear power plant is currently under construction in Taiwan, in Gongliao town, just 40 km away from the capital Taipei.

In 1988, eight years after the Taiwan Power Company first decided to build the plant, locals in Gongliao held the first meeting of what became their anti-nuclear organization. In 1994, they even held their own referendum [zh], which revealed that 96% of locals were opposed to the plant's construction.

Nevertheless, the government disregarded such opinions and took steps to suppress these voices.

A protest against Taiwan's fourth nuclear power plant in 2010. Image by Alvin Chua (CC BY 2.0).

In 1991 [zh], after protesters put up structures on land planned for the future nuclear power plant, police tried to tear down them down.

10月3日，因警方違反協議拆除棚架並毆打自救會會長引爆激烈衝突，衝進圍籬的箱型車因撞到柱子翻倒而意外壓死一名保警，史稱1003事件。郝柏村內閣趁勢聯合媒體抹黑自救會和支持反核者，開車的反核義工林順源被判無期徒刑、自救會執行長高清南被判十年徒刑。

On October 3rd [1991], there was a serious clash after police violated the previous agreement and tore down the shelves, and hit the president of the anti-nuke [nuclear] organization. A policeman was accidentally killed after one driver hit a pillar and flipped the car. This was later named the 1003 incident. After the accident, the local government instigated media to discredit the anti-nuke organization and their supporters. That driver, Shun-Yuan Lin (林順源), who was a volunteer for the anti-nuke organization, was declared guilty and given a life sentence. In addition, the CEO [Chief Executive Officer] of the organization, Ching-Nan Gao (高清南) was sentenced to ten years in prison.

In 1999, after the Atomic Energy Council approved the license for construction of the fourth nuclear power plant, the government revoked the fishery rights [zh] of locals in Gongliao without notice. Locals refused the compensation [zh] offered by the government and went to the Executive Yuan to protest against this decision.

憤怒的漁民把經濟部逕自撥給漁會的兩億多元補償金支票立刻退回，集結到立法院門前高喊：「還我漁業權！」「我們要給子孫代代吃，不是要給我們吃而已！」

After the Ministry of Economic Affairs sent compensation checks to local fishing organization, angry fishermen sent the NT$ [New Taiwan Dollar] 200 million (US$ 6.78 million) check back. They gathered in front of the Legislative Yuan and yelled, ‘Give our fishery rights back!’ ‘We demand that our future generations, not only ourselves, will have something to eat.’

In 2000, these anti-nuclear activists rode a rollercoaster after the Democratic Progressive Party candidate took office. The ruling party decided to suspend the construction of the fourth nuclear power plant. However, because political conflict [zh] between the ruling party and the opposition party could not be resolved, the ‘cancellation’ itself was voided in 2001:

亞洲金融風暴的後座力到2001年在台爆發，佔立法院多數席次的國民黨把經濟衰退的帳「理所當然」地推給核四停建，民進黨則反手把黑鍋推給貢寮鄉民。

Taiwan’s economy was influenced by the Asian financial crisis in 2001. The Kuomingtang, the majority party in the Legislative Yuan, claimed the suspension of the fourth nuclear power plant should ‘reasonably’ be responsible for the economy problems. On the other hand, the Democratic Progressive Party claimed the residents in Gongliao should take the responsibility for the suspension of the power plant.

After more than 20 years of protests against the nuclear power plant, construction has resumed, leaving locals to deal with their own fear without hope [zh]:

「看核電廠距離我家那麼近，當然馬ㄟ驚啊！」坐在澳底仁和宮前看年輕人表演的貢寮老人嘆氣說，但都快要蓋好了，你能拿政府怎麼辦？

The elder sat in front of the temple in Aodi and watched the performance of some young people (from NONUKE). He sighed, ‘Of course I am scared that the nuclear power plant is so close to my home.’ However, the construction is about to finish. What can you do with the government?

In Japan, there are also some lonely protesters opposed to nuclear power plants there. The residents (less than 500) in Iwaishima (祝島) [zh] have protested against the local nuclear power plant for more than 28 years:

儘管平均年齡已65歲，這群阿伯阿母、阿公阿嬤仍不放棄對抗蠻橫的國家機器，「我們不想千年流傳下來的海被污染」。

Although the average of age of these protesters is over 65, these elders have not given up the protest against their outrageous government. They say, ‘The sea has been handed down by our ancestors for thousands of years. We do not want to see it polluted.’

Protest against the fourth nuclear power plant in 2010. Image by Alvin Chua (CC BY 2.0).

After the greatest earthquake in the recorded history of Japan took place this month, there was worry over the type of fuel used in reactor unit 3 of the country's damaged Fukushima I nuclear power plant:

Largely absent from most mainstream media reports on the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster is the fact that a highly-dangerous ‘mixed-oxide' (MOX) fuel is present in six percent of the fuel rods at the plant's Unit 3 reactor.

However, not many people know that six months ago a concern group [jp] formed by Japanese elders (福島老朽原発を考える会) for the Fukushima I nuclear power plant traveled all the way to Tokyo to protest against the Tokyo Electricity Power Company and the use of MOX fuels:

運転開始34年の老朽炉に10年以上前の古い燃料を使うという無茶をするのに、県民への説明は一切なしというのはどういうことか。

They are pushing it far by using old fuel from ten years ago, in a 34-year-old aging reactor, and there no explanation given to the residents of the Prefecture. What is this all about?

止まらぬ燃料漏えいへの対処、電源喪失事故の原因究明、格納容器の耐震強度問題等々、危険なプルサーマルの前に東電には対処すべきことが山積している。東電にプルサーマル炉の運転を任せることなどとてもできない。

Finding a way to stop the continuous fuel leakage, investigating the cause of the power loss incident, solving the issues regarding the earthquake-resistance strength of the containment vessel, etc, the Tokyo Electric Power Company has tons of things to deal with before implementing the plutonium-thermal reactor. It is outrageous to even allow TEPCO to operate a plutonium-thermal reactor.

Roodo blogger Summerlake, after seeing the photos [zh] of the elders' protest in Tokyo, said:

孤單的幾個人站在熱鬧的街頭上，顯得突兀，沒有媒體願意傾聽，沒有社會大眾願意相信，他們微弱而真實的聲音。貢寮鄉親在台北城街頭的身影，突然那麼令人難過。大家在哪裡？

The lonely protesters were standing on the busy streets. They looked so odd in the city. There were no media listening to them. No one willing to believe in their weak but sincere voices. The images of the residents from Gongliao standing on the streets in Taipei city suddenly made me very sad. Where are the other people?

Acknowledgment: Thanks Hanako Tokita for the Japanese-English translation.

Taiwan: Call for Energy Policy Review

I-fan Lin — Thu, 24 Mar 2011 16:43:31 +0000

This post is part of our special coverage Japan Earthquake 2011 and Global Development 2011.

The ongoing Fukushima nuclear power plant incident in Japan has alerted people in Taiwan about the safety of nuclear power plants in their own country.

In order to transform current concern into long term government policy, many netizens are demanding the Taiwanese government conduct a comprehensive review on the country's energy and industrial policy.

Policy paradox

Anti-nuclear rally in Taiwan capital, Taipei on March 20, 2011. Image by Flickr user KarlMarx (CC BY-NC-ND 2.0).

On February 14, 2011, approximately one month before the devastating Japanese earthquake and tsunami, Taiwan's Environmental Protection Administration held a public hearing in which the Bureau of Energy laid out the nation’s energy policy from 2011-2020.

However, environmental groups found the new energy policy violated the consensus [zh] formulated in the “Sustainable Energy Development Guidelines” (永續能源政策綱領) [zh] announced in 2008, as well as the “Statement of National Energy” conference held in 2009.

Contradicting the goals set for the reduction of greenhouse gas by increasing renewable energy and shifting the economy towards lower energy-consumption industry, the new policy supports the development of the petrochemical industry.

The failure to restructure Taiwan's industry creates a paradox for sustainable energy development, as Chia-Yang Tsai (蔡嘉陽) from the Taiwan Environmental Information Center points out [zh]:

工業消耗台灣60％以上的電力，價格又僅是民生用電一半以上，電價結構如此不合理，當然容易造成工業用電的浪費。提高工業用電的電價更可以淘汰高耗能、高汙染的產業，讓台灣的產業結構從根本上轉型，台灣的能源問題才能解決。

Industries in Taiwan consume more than 60% of the [nation's] total electricity, but the price of electricity for industries is cheaper by half than the price of electricity for personal livelihood. Because the price is so cheap for industries, it is easy for them to waste electricity. If we increase the price for industrial electricity, we may be able to eliminate those industries that consume a lot of energy and generate a lot of pollution. After we transform the structure of industries fundamentally, we will solve the energy problems.

An informed choice is needed

Man at an anti-nuclear rally Taiwanese capital, Taipei on March 20, 2011. Image by Flickr user KarlMarx (CC BY-NC-ND 2.0).

As neighbour Japan's nuclear crisis continues, a more comprehensive energy policy review is needed in Taiwan, in particular regarding the development of the country's nuclear energy.

According to the an article [zh] about the high risk of nuclear energy, Yen (焱) expressed concern that the suspension of the nuclear power plants might cause electricity shortages in the country:

如果您接受了缺電的狀況並且可以安撫其他人接受電力不足的現實，就反吧!

If you are ready for electricity shortages and to convince other people to accept electricity shortagea, please go ahead and oppose nuclear power plants.

On the other hand, many netizens insist that even though Taiwanese people may ultimately choose to develop nuclear power, it is important for the public to understand the risks involved before making their choice. Blogger Subing argues [zh] on March 14:

擁核的人該提出理由說服台灣人為什麼大家要為幾家高耗能公司負擔這麼大的風險。

The supporters of nuclear electricity should convince us why we should take risks because of some high energy-consuming companies.

Questioning demand

In fact, upon checking the data released by the Taiwan Power Company, Siro argued [zh] in a forum discussion thread on March 21:

目前台灣的總發電量, 即使在尖峰負載, 也仍有 23.4% 的賸餘…就算現在把三座核電廠全部關閉, 台灣依然沒有立即的電力危機.

23.4% of the present total electricity generation is not even used in the peak demand period … If we suspend the three nuclear power plants, we should not face an immediate electricity shortage.

Siro continued to explain that nuclear energy is neither cheap nor clean:

核廢料處理及核電廠除役都很可能讓核能發電成本遠高於台電宣稱的成本.

The processing of nuclear waste after the suspension of the nuclear power plants may make the cost of nuclear energy higher than the Taiwan Power Company claimed.

Siro goes on to say however, that the process of suspending a nuclear power plant is not easy or straightforward:

我舉我住的澎湖為例, 澎湖舊火力發電廠位置接近市區, 當郊區新發電廠蓋好, 原電廠拆除後, 土地變成價值不斐, 而這一點是核電廠辦不到的..也是台電在計算成本中, 刻意去忽略的. 核電廠因為儲存核廢料, 即使關閉, 也永遠需要管理監控, 更不用說想要遷廠回收土地.

Take Penghu, the place I live, for example, the old thermal power plant was close to the downtown area. When the new power plant in suburb area was built, the old one was torn down. That land was sold for a lot of money. This is never happens to nuclear power plants … This is what the Taiwan Power Company intended to ignore when they calculated the cost. A nuclear power plant also stores nuclear waste. When [a nuclear plant] is suspended, it needs long-term management. It is not possible to remove the plant and use the land again.

The management of the nuclear power plants and nuclear waste is always a potential threat. Tyrone asked in the discussion section of the article on nuclear risk [zh] on March 14:

當中只要有一件事情疏忽是否就能造成核能污染事件. 為何我們要犧牲後代子孫的幸福造就個人的舒適?

If there is any mistake in [nuclear plant] management, radiation pollution takes place. Why do we want to sacrifice our future generation’s happiness for our own comfort?

This post is part of our special coverage Japan Earthquake 2011 and Global Development 2011.

Taiwan: The Reassurance of Nuclear Safety is Not Convincing

I-fan Lin — Mon, 21 Mar 2011 10:13:43 +0000

Following the Fukushima nuclear accident in Japan, there are calls now for a review of Taiwan’s nuclear energy policy, particularly as a fourth nuclear power plant is now under construction.

Lin Tsung-yao (林宗堯), member of the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant Safety Monitoring Committee, has called upon [zh] the Taiwan Power company to do a thorough reevaluation of construction of its fourth nuclear power plant:

核四廠卻是「拼裝產品」…台電發包設計，國內採購制度最常採取低價標…因產品採購時間及品質不一，整個興建工序混亂…目前進入試運轉，也面臨原始顧問公司及「奇異」解約問題，缺乏有經驗的顧問監督。

The fourth nuclear power plant is an assembled plant… The Taiwan Power Company designed the plant itself and contracted out. When it purchased the parts in Taiwan, it usually chose the cheapest ones…Because these parts were purchased at different times and have different levels of quality, the proceedings of construction was a mess…Now test runs have begun, but we see problems like the cancelation of contracts with the original consulting company and General Electric. Therefore, we no longer have experienced consultants and supervision for this plant.

Roodo blogger Evette is also worried about the problems that might occur during assembling of the plant:

我做工業設計的, 各個製造商像日立東芝三菱富士設計圖的小數點進位規格不同是確實的. 而那0.5mm的差別作機構的最清楚. 可以想像核電廠由那麼多上下游工廠出品的組件零件建構在一起, 其中的誤差所造成的後果可不是手機造壞了再造一台那麼簡單!

I am an industrial designer. It is true that producers like Hitachi, Toshiba, Mitsubishi, and Fuji have different rules for decimal point carrying on blueprints. The person who is responsible for machinery structure is very clear about the 0.5 mm difference (among the parts produced by different companies). We can imagine that if a nuclear power plant is assembled using numerous parts generated by many companies, the result of these kinds of errors are not as simple as errors in making cell phones, in which case we can make another cell phone easily.

Despite these safety concerns, Taiwan’s president Ma Ying-jeou has said that [zh] the government has dismissed calls by opposition lawmakers to halt the project, scheduled to go into operation in 2012.

Roodo blogger Summerlake has complained that the government is not responding to professional concerns:

這樣的專業質疑，卻未曾得到重視，反而成為政府公關急著澄清、掩蓋的＂民眾疑慮＂。

The government does not value these professional opinions. On the contrary, they consider these professional opinions as ‘some people’s doubts’ that should be ignored if they can't be clarified.

The fourth nuclear power plant under construction. Photo courtesy of Muhchyng under a Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic license.

On the other hand, when Taiwan’s largest electricity producer and monopoly grid operator, the state-run Taiwan Power Company, was asked what they would do if something like the Fukushima I Nuclear Power Plant accident were to happen in Taiwan, the company said they would take drastic measures to prevent a scenario from worsening. However, blogger Summerlake questions if these so-called ‘drastic measures’ are practical in Taiwan:

而台電和原能會所謂的斷然措施，又怎麼以人民為優先呢？說穿了，頂多就是規劃了一個半徑五公里（頂多十公里）的撤退圈，但是也從來沒有演習或明確實施過，萬一要擴大到二十公里，那就進入大台北範圍，環保團體預估要撤退160萬人，台電和原能會更是從來沒有構想過。到底是怎麼以人民為優先？

How can the drastic measures mentioned by the Taiwan Power Company and the Atomic Energy Council give priority to our citizens? To be straightforward, they will plan an evacuation area for a radius of 5 km (or as far as 10 km). Yet, they never rehears how people in this area are to be evacuated. If a situation does develop and we need an evacuation area with a radius of 20 km, the evacuation area would include Taipei city. If this happens, it is estimated by environmentalists that 1.6 million citizens would take part in the evacuation. If the Taiwan Power Company and the Atomic Energy Council won't consider such a scenario, how can they say they will give priority to our citizens?

台電和原能會言下之意更把核災撤退，當作是暫時傷害，像地震搖過就沒事一樣…可是，核災一旦發生，當地輻射污染可能持續數年，更遑論輻射塵擴散.

What the Taiwan Power Company and the Atomic Energy Council mean is that a nuclear power plant accident can only cause temporary damage like an earthquake. Nevertheless, if there is a nuclear power plant accident, the radiation pollution will persist for many years, never mind the spread of radiation dust.

Observing the responses of the Taiwan Power Company when it faces the questions regarding the safety issues of the fourth nuclear power plant raised by Yoichi Kikuchi,
Chiong-Yue Li concludes with:

台電過度自滿, 核安最大危機.

The complacency of the Taiwan Power Company is the most serious crisis for nuclear safety.

Taiwan: Country's Nuclear Power Plants Are High Risk

I-fan Lin — Wed, 16 Mar 2011 01:44:15 +0000

The explosion of reactors and failure of cooling systems at Japan's Fukushima nuclear power plant after the biggest earthquake in the country's recorded history, has alerted the world how risky nuclear power is.

In Germany, tens of thousand environmentalists took to the street on March 12, 2011, the day after the quake struck in Japan, demanding the government to shift from atomic energy to clean energy. Yet, the threat Germany faces falls far behind Japan and Taiwan; the country is not located in the active earthquake zone, whereas its Asian counterparts are in the Pacific tectonic ‘ring of fire.’

Beach near Kenting nuclear plant, Taiwan. Image by Flickr user impaulsive photography (CC BY 2.0).

Currently Japan has 17 nuclear power plants in its 378,000 square-kilometer territory and three more will be in operation by 2018. Taiwan covers an area of just 36,000 square kilometers, yet has three nuclear power plants and is building a fourth. The density of nuclear power plants is therefore much higher in Taiwan than in Japan, so you can image how Taiwanese feel when they see the disaster unfolding at Fukushima.

High risk

Indeed, the risk of nuclear power plants hit by an earthquake in Taiwan is very high, as 朱淑娟 (Shu-Chuan Chu) points out:

核電廠距離經過金山海岸的「山腳斷層」只有5到7公里。核四廠址5公里內就有6條「非活動斷層」，且貢寮核四廠址的半徑80公里海域內，有70幾座海底火山，其中的11座更處於活火山的狀態。

The first and second nuclear power plants are five to seven kilometers [km] away from the Shanjiao Fault in the Kinshan coastal area. The fourth nuclear power plant is less than five km away from six inactive faults. In addition, within a radius of 80 km of the fourth nuclear power plant, there are more than 70 undersea volcanoes, 11 of them are active.

核一廠耐震設計是0.3g，核二、核三、核四為0.4g，遠不如日本核電廠原本的耐震設計0.6g（g為重力加速度）。日本核電廠為了因應強震，已開始進行耐震強度提昇工程到1.0g，但台灣卻仍無視於地震的威脅。

[In Taiwan] The anti-earthquake design is 0.3g [g = measure of peak ground acceleration] for the first nuclear power plant and 0.4g for the second, third, and fourth plants. They are far weaker than the anti-earthquake design in Japan, which is [typically] 0.6g. Due to its strong earthquakes, Japan plans to have 1.0g anti-earthquake design for new nuclear power plants. Nevertheless, not many people in Taiwan care about the earthquake threat.

Because of the geographical similarities, 菊地洋一 (Yoichi Kikuchi), a Japanese expert in nuclear power plants, warns that nuclear power plants in Taiwan may have similar structure-related problems as those observed in Japan:

台灣的核一、核二廠所用的反應爐與日本都是屬於同一型，而且兩國都是多地震國家，所以在日本發生的問題，台灣不可能會沒有問題。最近的 BWR 型屬使用最高品質的 SUS316L 製造 (材料的質地較軟，因此較不容易產生裂痕的現象) ；各電力公司一再強調，這種材料絕對不會發生裂痕問題。可是實際上它還是發生了，這次日本東京電力公司隱瞞事件(註: 2002年)中也發現，其它的部分同樣也有裂痕。

The nuclear reactors in the first and second nuclear power plants in Taiwan are similar to many nuclear reactors in Japan. Since there are frequent earthquakes in Taiwan and Japan, what has happened in Japan will also happen in Taiwan. The recent design of the Boiling Water Reactor (BWR) has adopted high-quality SUS317L stainless steel as the construction material, which is softer and has fewer cracking problems, and all the nuclear power companies have kept stressing that this material will never develop cracks. In the current accident [Fukushima], we have seen the cracks. In fact, far back in 2002, cracks were found in the BWR in the investigation of the Tokyo electric power company scandal.

To summarize, the nuclear power plants in Taiwan are not immune to the natural forces that destroyed the Fukushima nuclear power plant.

The Fourth Taiwan Nuclear Power Plant. Image by Flickr user Hao-Zhong Wang

Nuclear plant opens in 2011

In spite of all the worries and questions raised by concerned citizens and experts, the Taiwanese government planned to have the fourth nuclear power plant in operation by 2011, as a celebration of the 100th anniversary of the founding of Republic of China. The running of this nuclear power plant was claimed to be delayed after amid calls for a temporary suspension after the Fukushima incident. Nevertheless, a new schedule with safety measures was not revealed, and the construction of this nuclear power plant was not suspended.

In an exchange gathering between Japanese and Taiwanese green activists back in August 2010, some participants alerted [zh] that rushed nuclear construction might lead to future disaster:

台灣只因行政院長一聲令下，就被迫必須趕在明年完工的核四，與發生人類史上最慘烈核安事故的前蘇聯車諾比核電廠，竟然有許多相似之處。

In Taiwan, because of the order of the Executive Yuan [House of Administration], the construction of the fourth nuclear power plant is forced to be completed in 2011. This situation is similar to what happened in the Chernobyl disaster.

1983 年車諾比核電廠已有3座原子機組運轉，而正在興建中的四號機工程進度卻大幅落後，核電廠廠長普力烏哈諾夫不敢表明工程延誤的事實，且適逢12月22日核能工業紀念日，蘇聯政府希望機組能趕在這個國家紀念日完工。於是電廠不計一切手段，變更原本設計及材料，終於趕在當日完工。接下來，竟又省略許多必須的安全測試，趕在隔年3月27日商業運轉。事後，廠長及大半主管獲得表揚及獎金…1986年4月26日，車諾比電廠4號機在機組測試中失控爆炸。

In 1983, there were three nuclear reactors working in the Chernobyl nuclear power plant, but the construction of the fourth reactor was delayed. The head of the plant did not dare to reveal the truth. At the same time, the Russian government hoped the construction of the fourth reactor could be completed before December 22 for the nuclear industry's annual memorial day. Therefore, the plant changed the original designs and materials. They managed to complete the construction on time. Later, they skipped a number of essential safety tests because they were hurrying to let the reactor start running for commercial purposes before March 27, 1984. The head of the plant and most managers there were honored and rewarded for meeting the deadline…In April 6, 1986, the newly built fourth reactor in the Chernobyl nuclear power plant exploded in a operational test.

曾經在2008年爆發擅自變更設計、控制室也曾經被颱風滅頂，如今事故頻傳，卻一樣背負著「上級命令」趕工運轉的核四，真的可以啟動嗎？

In 2008, there was a scandal in the construction of the fourth nuclear power plant in Taiwan because the constructor changed the original design without authorization. Later, the control room was submerged in a typhoon. Recently, the plant has failed in a number of safety tests. Yet the constructors are hurrying to complete construction because of orders from the top. Is this a risk we want to take?

Taiwan: The Allure of Night Markets

I-fan Lin — Tue, 07 Sep 2010 09:08:21 +0000

After sunset in Taiwan, when the stars start to twinkle, night markets are crowded with people from all walks of life. To Taiwanese, night markets are more than mere eating places. In a traditional night market, people eat, shop, and play games at the same time. Taiwanese love night markets, and now the culture of the night market has become a distinctive and precious touristic experience for foreigners visiting Taiwan.

Grace, a Taiwanese in New York City, writes about a visit to Taiwan:

My friends were asking me what I was going to do when I got to Taiwan…knowing my family, I knew we were going to drop off our bags and head straight to the night markets.

However, once upon a time, the “night markets” were much less famous than the “morning markets”. Liang-Lu Han explains:

早晨拜廟之餘再祭祭自己的五臟廟就成了廟口早市的起源。早市因廟口而起，但夜市則依菜市場和交通要道而生…早市的城市性格是農業社會的，日出而作、日落而息，但夜市卻代表了城市的工商業性格，離開土地、家園進入工廠、異鄉的人們，在傍晚之後在都市的街道尋找食物、商品的刺激與慰藉。

In the morning, people went to the temples to pray and then ate breakfast. This is the origin of the temple-front morning markets. The morning markets are close to temples, and the night markets are close to markets and main roads…The morning markets belong to the agriculture society, waking up at sunrise and sleeping at sunset. On the other hand, the night markets represent the industrial and commercial routine in the cities. People leave their land and hometowns for the factories and cities. Then they reward themselves with food and consumption in the evening in the streets.

Night markets keep evolving alongside with the Taiwanese society. A Japanese traveler was amazed by the efficiency of the vendor in the night market:

神業としか思えない包み作業に見入っていると、待ち時間もあっという間サ～。
20人待ちぐらいで10分待ったかな？
番号札もらってあまりの待ち人数に「ゲェッッッ！？」と思っても、次々と出来上がるので心配ご無用。

I stared rapt as they prepared food with what could only be God's hands, and the waiting time passed quickly. There were 20 people ahead of me and can you believe I only stood in line for 10 minutes? When I got my ticket from the machine and counted the number of people ahead of me, I thought “gosh!”. There was no reason to worry, though!

While every Taiwanese loves night markets, the idea of a good night market differs and can be conflicting. Recently, the Tourism Bureau held a nationwide night market competition. According to the event spokeswoman:

The competition aims to select (the night markets) that are the cleanest, the most friendly to foreign visitors, the most interesting, the easiest to stroll through and the richest in culinary diversity.

On the other hand, some people prefer to preserve local culture and do not agree with the evaluation based on these “international standards”. Chensumi says:

找美食菁英來評比夜市，就好像辦部落格文學獎一樣，夜市之所以存在的理由，就是「不需要被美食菁英指指點點就可以靠底層生命力活得好好的」。

Inviting these famous “gourmets” to evaluate night markets is similar to holding a literary award for bloggers. The reason why the night markets can survive is “living with the people but not with the gourmets”.

逛夜市的目的是什麼？就是去擠啊，去吃熱量很高又不健康的比臉孔大的炸雞排啊，吃廉價的豪邁的又會滋滋響的鐵板牛排啊…何況還可以撈金魚打彈珠…你永遠記得禮拜幾晚上，那片空地突然亮起燈泡，穿著拖鞋短褲就可以去吃東西，去玩耍，去看有趣的歐吉桑拍賣喊價。

Why do we want to go to the night market? We want to squeeze around in the crowd. We want to eat fried chickens bigger than our face, which is high calorie and unhealthy. We want to eat the cheap and big and sizzling steak…In addition, we want to scoop the golden fishes and play pinball… Whenever you see the light bulbs turned on in that empty lot, you can dash out with your slippers and shorts to buy food, hang out and see those interesting old ladies shouting out loud the price of their products.

The fried chicken that is bigger than the girl's face. Photo courtesy of koadmonkee under a Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic license.

Chensumi’s article about night markets has attracted a lot of enthusiastic discussions in the comment section. Some people argued that it is not fair to ask the night markets to be as spacious and clean as a restaurant. Maggie said:

我家附近的某塊空地，去年租給許多小攤過來擺夜市，非常空曠，完全不會人擠人，所以不到六個月就全部撤攤。該位美食專家應該很難體會到「人擠人」對於商家的重要性吧。

There is a empty lot close to my house. The landlord rented it to some vendors to hold a night market there last year. The place is very spacious, not crowded at all. As a result, the vendors all left in six months. Those gourmets will not understand the importance of “being crowded” in the night market for the vendors.

Shilin Night Market. Photo courtesy of koadmonkee under a Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic license.

Little babe said:

很多人都提到夜市有髒亂的情形 (人多的地方哪一個不髒?). 但是辦完夜市後呢?還是髒嗎,這就不盡然了吧! 大部分的攤販在營業結束後, 都會清理自己的營業範圍, 隔天去看並不會有髒亂的感覺.

Many people mention that nights markets are dirty and messy (is it possible to keep a crowded place clean?). Nevertheless, after the night markets are closed, will the place remain dirty? No! Most vendors will clean their own lots after they finish the business. The place will not be dirty or messy on the next day.

Stanley talked about how the night market in his hometown changed after becoming a “tourist night market”:

夜市變成了”觀光夜市”後, 雖然這樣可以帶動經濟繁榮, 但相對的在地的味道就會少了很多, 在地人對那個夜市永遠就只能變成回憶了.

Since the night market became a “tourist night market”, it has brought more business and cash, but the local flavor vanished. For the locals, the original night market has turned into memories.

Old pinball game. Photo courtesy of chia ying Yang under a Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic license.

What will the future night markets look like? Miesiao said:

政府介入其實是因為那些夜市店家也很愛期待政府做事,有商機…但這些觀光化的目標應該還是國外旅客,或許可以想更多觀光化的手段,而是不是害怕觀光化…

The intervention of the government is driven by the vendors in the night markets, who want to have more business …The goal is to attract foreign tourists. We may need to diversify our tactics in touristic development instead of being afraid of the trend.

For example, Joe has pointed out that we should discover the distinctive character for each night market:

我喜歡夜市的美食，卻也討厭各地的夜市都長得一個樣子。我覺得，人有不同的樣子，風景有不同的樣子，狗狗有不同的樣子，怎麼夜市卻都同一個樣子呢？其實，更仔細的品味，也許我會發現每一個夜市不同的樣子，不同的個性。

I enjoy delicacies in night markets, but I do not like them to be the same. People, landscapes and even dogs have different outlooks, how would the night markets be the same? If we study them carefully, we will be able to find out each of their distinctive characters.

Recently, to catch the wave of smart phones, the most famous night market in Taiwan (especially amongst foreigners), the Shilin night market, has an iPhone app now.

Writer's note: Thank you to Portnoy for providing some of the information and Tomomi for helping with the Japanese translation.

Taiwan: Let’s go poking around under the rock of ECFA

I-fan Lin — Tue, 24 Aug 2010 03:09:35 +0000

The Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA) between Taiwan and China was signed on June 29, 2010 by the Strait Exchange Foundation and the Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Strait (semi-official representatives for Taiwan and China). Later on August 17, the Legislation Yuan of Taiwan approved this agreement.

The process seems smooth and efficient at the surface, but the story is not simple. Many Taiwanese have poked around under the rock of ECFA and questioned the rationality behind the agreement.

The story of ECFA began two years ago. In 2008, Ma Ying-Jeou, the president candidate of Kuomintang (KMT), was elected as Taiwan’s 12th president. After Ma sworn into office as president, his office proposed to sign CEPA (Closer Economic Partnership Arrangement) with China. platocast explained how CEPA evolved to ECFA:

馬政府一開始說要跟中國簽CEPA…大家一細查，發現全世界只有香港跟中國有簽CEPA，台灣的主權被踐踏至極。馬英九政府怕了，才改成說要簽CECA，大家又發現這換湯不換藥，痛罵馬政府，於是馬英九在二月底一急之下說改簽ECFA。

In the beginning, Ma’s office proposed to sign CEPA with China…After some background check, we found only Hong Kong and Macau signed CEPA with China. Therefore, signing CEPA with China would give away Taiwan’s sovereignty. Due to the blame, Ma’s office changed their mind and proposed to sign CECA with China. However, we found CECA was similar to CEPA and blamed Ma’s office again. At last, President Ma proposed to sign ECFA in Feb (2009).

Although Taiwan’s government started to work on ECFA in Feb, 2009, the contents of ECFA were hidden from the public until it was signed by the Strait Exchange Foundation and the Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Strait in June, 2010. The blackbox process worried the opposition party, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), and they called for a debate about ECFA with the president. Under the pressure, a televised debate between President Ma Ying-Jeou and the chairperson of DPP, Tsai Ing-wen, was held and aired on April 25th, 2010.

blackrain was disappointed that Ma failed to clarify the doubtful points in ECFA that were addressed by Tsai in the debate.

蔡英文的幾個質疑，加深了 ECFA 的可疑程度。例如：
。農產品開放項目將達到六、七百項之多，馬英九完全迴避這部份的補救措施
。馬英九完全不答有哪些產業會受到衝擊，或是他所宣稱的 17 個受影響的產業是什麼，加深了更多人的疑慮
。蔡英文點出馬英九靠攏財團、以及貧富差距的公義問題，馬英九完全無法回答
。蔡英文成功地反擊了馬英九所宣稱的「急迫性」，馬英九無法化解

What Tsai Ing-Wen questioned deepens the doubt toward ECFA. For example
(1) There are 600-700 agriculture products listed in ECFA, but Ma avoided answering if the government has prepared for the impact.
(2) Ma did not answer the question regarding the industries that will be influenced by ECFA or the details of the 17 industries that he claimed will be influenced by ECFA, which deepened many people’s suspicion.
(3) Tsai pointed out that Ma benefits the big firms and ignores the problems of the poverty gap and social justice, but Ma could not answer this question.
(4) When Tsai controverted the urgency (of signing ECFA) claimed by Ma successfully, Ma could not explain.

Later the DPP distributed a video below on YouTube, accusing ECFA, as CEPA, will cause social injustice:

Here is ESWN's transcription of the video:

(Cantonese voice-over)

There are lots of rich people in Hong Kong. Reports speak of the averarge income in Hong Kong, but I don't get it. There are more and more poor people; everybody works longer hours; eight out of ten street sweepers are university graduates; senior citizens have to scavenge in the streets. Actually, is the Chief Executive sent over from Beijing? It does not matter what CEPA is. It can't be a bad thing to let the people of Hong Kong make more money. But it shouldn't be this way. The rich eat shark fin, whereas the poor cannot even have a single vermicelli noodle?

(in written words) After Hong Kong signed CEPA, it has become the city with the largest wealth inequality in the world. We don't want an ECFA that let the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.

Martin oei, who have lived in Hong Kong for more than 30 years, commented on this video,

若然簽了ＥＣＦＡ，今日香港，便是明日台灣，甚至情況會更慘。不少香港人，看完民進黨廣告後，都認為廣告反映了他們心聲，特別最尾一句，為何貧民連粉絲都沒得吃？

If Taiwan signs ECFA, Taiwan will become what Hong Kong is today. Many people in Hong Kong think this video, especially the last words, reflects their feelings: why we poor people do not even have vermicelli noodles to eat?

After the debate, the Taiwan Solidarity Union (TSU) requested to hold a referendum on the question: “Do you agree that the government signs ECFA with China?” However, this referendum was rejected by the Referendum Review Commission.

The decision made by the Referendum Review Commission reminded Taiwanese the problem of having this commission in their government. subing said,

公審會頂多有權力做程序審查，也就是說檢查一下連署人數足不足夠，有沒有作假，該送的文件有沒有到齊…根據台灣的公投法，公投要成案最後大約要87萬人連署，這21個人有什麼資格實質審查87萬人的意願？這根本就是違反民主基本原則，也違憲。

At most, the Review Commission should be only authorized to review the process, e.g., check if the number of people cosigned is enough or if all the documents are submitted…Based on the Law of Referendum, we will need 870000 people to cosign the referendum to pass it. Why do these 21 people (in the commission) have the right to judge the intention of these 870000 people? What this commission did violates the basic rules of democracy and violates our constitution.

Despite the dispute, ECFA was signed by the semi-official representatives for Taiwan and China on June 29, 2010. After the articles of ECFA were finally revealed, they stimulated a lot of discussions. For example, KuanMom criticized the Cross-Strait Economic Cooperation Committee mentioned in article 11,

(ECFA)第11條所成立的「兩岸經濟合作委員會」(*)，完全不受任何台灣立法機關的監督，空白授權給海基海協指定任何人選，全權負責協議的執行、解釋、爭議處理、後續所有協商的速度及廣度。ECFA第11條完全不提該委員會如何組成?對誰負責?由誰授權?受誰監督?經費何來?設置在哪?

(*)雙方成立「兩岸經濟合作委員會」（以下簡稱委員會）。委員會由雙方指定的代表組成，負責處理與本協議相關的事宜。

The 11th article (in ECFA) mention setting up the Cross-Strait Economic Cooperation Committee (*), but it does not mention how the Legislation Yuan of Taiwan can supervise this committee. In other words, the committee members assigned by the Strait Exchange Foundation and the Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Strait without appropriate authorization will handle the execution and explanation of ECFA, the arbitration of disputes, and all the following negotiations. The 11th article in ECFA does not mention how the committee will be organized, who it should be responsible for, where its authorization comes from, who will supervise it, the funding source of it, or the location of it.

(*) Temporary translation of this article based on the available Chinese version: Both sides should set up the ‘Cross-Strait Economic Cooperation Committee’ (abbreviated as the committee). The members of this committee are assigned by both side, and these members will be responsible to the processes related to this agreement.

Despite the dispute, ECFA was sent to the Legislation Yuan. hehe complained about the process,

從媒體上，我們只看到了大肆報導某立委肢體衝突，但真正的暴力，恐怕是整個會議過程毫無程序正義的多數暴力。
坦白說，我個人對於ECFA簽不簽，並沒有太大的堅持，我也相信多數人和我一樣，希望的只是在一個民主程序下、透過多方意見的討論形成共識；縱使不能形成共識，至少也在各種意見可以得到充分表達的情況下，政府可以更周延的考量到不同立場或生存的人，可能受到的衝擊，而得以有好防範措施。
然而，影片中國會決定將ECFA等相關法案（其中牽涉可能數十、上百的法律條文）逕付二讀的過程，不禁令人懷疑，這樣的立法程序，我們還能期待什麼？

From the media, we only see the physical confrontations between some legislators. However, the real violence is the tyranny of the majority in the meeting without any justice.
To be honest, I do not have a strong opinion regarding signing ECFA or not. I believe most people are like me, and what we want is a consensus that is reached by discussions from different perspectives and following the rules in democracy. Even if we cannot reach a consensus, we hope the government can benefit from these discussions and protect those who will be influenced by ECFA.
Nevertheless, in this video, the way ECFA, which may include tens or hundreds of articles, was passed make us doubt that what we can expect with this kind of legislation process.

Well, we all know what will happen if we poke around the rocks–some very nasty things live under rocks.

Taiwan: Rice fields outside the Presidential Office

I-fan Lin — Sun, 25 Jul 2010 05:17:44 +0000

On July 18th, Taiwanese farmers turned the grand boulevard in front of the Presidential Office into rice fields to protest against the Land Expropriation Act.

On June 9th, 20 excavators were sent to take over 28 hectares of rice field in Dapu Borough (大埔), a farming village, to make way for the expansion of Jhunan Science Park. Similar land expropriation stories were heard in other counties.

Some farmers and activists in Dapu pointed out that the land expropriation was illegal and filed an application with the Ministry of the Interior (MOI) to void permission for Miaoli County Government to take over farmland on July 17. At night, they protest in front of the Presidential Office, and residents who are facing a similar situation in Houlong Township (後龍), Miaoli County, Erlin Township (二林), Changhua County, Jhudong (竹東) Township and Jhubei (竹北) City in Hsinchu County and Tucheng City (土城), Taipei County joined in.

After the overnight sit-in, thousands of farmers and activists paved the Ketagalan Boulevard with rice shoots, turned the concrete ground into green field and presented to the public the beauty of agriculture.

The rice seedlings were shipped directly from the farm fields.

Photo courtesy of Edd Jhong.

The farmers started to pave the rice seedlings outside the Presidential building.

Photo courtesy of Edd Jhong.

The Ketagalan Boulevard was transformed into a green field.

Photo courtesy of Edd Jhong.

Ai-Wen Chen (陳藹文), a supporter who joined the overnight protest, explained why she joined the protest.

自從在網路上看到怪手開進農田強行「整地」的那一幕，我就開始擔心，會不會有一天，我家的地也這樣，可能爲了「開發」二字，我就必須獻出，不管我願不願意。這真的不是錢的問題，是我覺得我們應該被尊重。

When I saw the image of excavators rampaging in the rice fields, I started to worry that maybe someday my land will face the same threat. Maybe I will be asked to give up my land no matter I like it or not because of ‘development.’ This is not a matter of money. I think we deserve some respect.

我來到這兒參加守夜行動，夜宿凱達格蘭大道，這次的大會師才知道，原來，受害的不只是農民與農地，許多人的居住地、一些古蹟建築的所在地，都同樣被霸王硬上弓，為了捷運、為了高鐵、為了科學園區、為了工業區…等「開發」的好理由，一個土地徵收條例，所有人都只能用抗爭來表達不願意。只能用抗爭來表達不願意，是我們尊嚴的二度喪失。

I joined the overnight protest and slept on the Ketagalan Boulevard. After talking to other protesters, I learned that not only these farmers’ rice fields, but also some people’s houses and historical buildings were forced to torn down because of the metro, high-speed rail, science parks, industrial parks, etc. Because of ‘development’ and the Land Expropriation Act, what we can do is coming here to protest. When we need to protest to show our objection, we lose our dignity again.

Are you curious about the fate of these rice seedlings?

這些秧苗被在場農民命名為「凱稻」已在行動結束後，被移到台灣各地農村播種，象徵農村生生不息。

These rice seedlings were named ‘Ke-rice’ (its pronunciation in Chinese is the same as the nickname of Ketagalan Boulevard) by the farmers. They were moved and planted in villages across the island to symbolize the never ending cycle of life in rural Taiwan.