Greenpeace China is in the process of opening a Taiwan office. While saying that Greenpeace China will not issue opinions on political issues, a representative said the Taiwan office would be subordinate to the Chinese office and that one’s position on Taiwanese independence would be a consideration when interviewing applicants.
Thanks to its public relations skills, Greenpeace International is probably the world’s best known environmental protection organization. It has clashed with Japanese whalers on the high seas to protect whales and tracked international transports of toxic waste. It has sneaked into and closed down coal power plants and hung banners from chimneys. In 1985 the French secret service sank the organization’s boat The Rainbow Warrior in New Zealand to stop it from interfering with nuclear arms tests in the South Pacific. This fearless pursuit of its goals is admired by many who want to protect the environment.
In the past, shared ideals have led the Taiwan Environmental Protection Union (台灣環境保護聯盟) to cooperate with Greenpeace International in protests against nuclear power and the handling of nuclear waste. It has shared the Taiwanese environmental protection experience with other countries, and feels strongly that it is only through solidarity and mutual help that weaker groups will be able to protest against the inequalities created by the existing political and economic system. That is why we are very happy to see international environmental protection organizations set up offices in Taiwan. Greenpeace China’s plan to open up an office in Taiwan, however, raises many concerns.
Greenpeace opened an office in Hong Kong in 1997, and in 2002 it set up an office in Guangzhou, Guangdong Province. Over the years, the activities of the Chinese branch have differed vastly from what people might expect: It has focused on opposing genetically modified foods and promoting renewable energy. On issues where Greenpeace International has clashed with other countries, such as nuclear safety, nuclear pollution, nuclear waste treatment, industrial pollution, toxic waste, over-development, excessive logging and so on, Greenpeace China has done nothing. Did Greenpeace China show any concern for possible leaks of radioactive materials during the great earthquake in Sichuan Province in 2008 or the recent deadly earthquake in Qinghai? No.
I find it hard to believe that the introduction of genetically modified foods is the most serious problem facing an industrializing country like China, and I also find it difficult to believe that China does not suffer from the environmental issues afflicting other countries. Could it be that Greenpeace has chosen to accommodate the Chinese government and decided to remain silent on highly controversial, highly sensitive issues? Is this the result of some kind of agreement? Could it be that Greenpeace China is not only neglecting China’s massive environmental problems, but that it is also accommodating the Chinese state apparatus in declaring that Taiwan is part of China? Doesn’t making one’s view on Taiwan’s independence or unification with China a criterion in the employment process mean that Greenpeace has chosen to prioritize politics and abandon everything else?
Too many organizations in Taiwan place politics above all else, and this has created a climate where it is very difficult to maintain a calm tone in public debate. We certainly don’t need yet another organization claiming to work for the protection of the environment to come to Taiwan and further complicate our environmental protection efforts.
Gloria Hsu is a professor at National Taiwan University’s Department of Atmospheric Sciences and former chairwoman of the Taiwan Environmental Protection Union.
TRANSLATED BY PERRY SVENSSON
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
US President Trump weighed into the state of America’s semiconductor manufacturing when he declared, “They [Taiwan] stole it from us. They took it from us, and I don’t blame them. I give them credit.” At a prior White House event President Trump hosted TSMC chairman C.C. Wei (魏哲家), head of the world’s largest and most advanced chip manufacturer, to announce a commitment to invest US$100 billion in America. The president then shifted his previously critical rhetoric on Taiwan and put off tariffs on its chips. Now we learn that the Trump Administration is conducting a “trade investigation” on semiconductors which
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then
RSS