Newspaper reports say congestion on the Jhonghe (中和) Intersection of National Highway No. 3 (also known as the Formosa Freeway or, confusingly, the “Second Freeway”) will be significantly relieved following the opening of Provincial Highway No. 65 and the Tucheng (土城) Interchange.
The Syuejia (學甲) system in Greater Tainan was opened some time ago, and the Minsyung (民雄) Interchange in Chiayi County and the Tongluo (銅鑼) Interchange in Miaoli County will open soon. These projects are gradually forming a “convenient” system of an interchange every 2km or 3km. One can imagine how many people will be induced by this “convenience” to quit using public transport and drive their cars instead.
It is becoming more convenient to drive one’s car, and this has led to a fall in passenger volume on public transport. The companies that run public transport services have to make a profit too. When passenger numbers fall, so does their performance, so naturally they lose interest in running this kind of business. Service becomes less frequent, and this gives rise to a vicious circle as people are further deterred from using mass transit. As a result, the use of private cars grows rapidly.
At first glance, the government has succeeded in creating a convenient and wide-reaching round-island transport network, but at this rate how can Taiwan manage to cut its carbon emissions?
Another example of how policies are going backward is this year’s decision to halt services on the high-volume and highly efficient Kaohsiung Harbor railway. The authorities have decided to dismantle the railway line, which connects directly with the harbor, and convert it into a container-truck road.
How much cargo can a goods train carry, compared with road transport? Which one is more environmentally friendly, and how much more so? Any sixth-grader could tell you the right answer. So why on earth is the government abandoning an environmentally friendly railway, with its high transport volume — especially considering that this railway was already electrified — and replacing it with heavy trucks that will rumble through the streets of Kaohsiung, spewing black fumes wherever they go?
The authorities are also using the fact that the Kaohsiung mass rapid transport (MRT) system is underused to justify delaying construction of MRT networks in other places, but they have failed to thoroughly review the problem and create a well-integrated transport service.
How then are we going to get more people to ride on the Kaohsiung MRT? For example, people can hardly be expected to get off at the Cingpu MRT Station, which is not located near housing or shops, and then figure out their own way of reaching their destination.
The government should plan MRT systems and mass transport networks for all major conurbations. It should encourage city dwellers to get into the habit of using public transport. Among other things, this would help cut carbon emissions.
Beyond that, the government should plan branch railway lines that can offer an alternative to road transport. For example, a branch line could be built between the Fangliao (枋寮) railway station in Pingtung County and Kenting. That would allow people who want to visit Kenting to get there by fast and convenient rail transport and it would relieve the congestion that clogs the roads leading to Kenting on weekends and holidays.
The area around Kenting is a national park. Enabling people to go there by environmentally friendly and low-carbon means of transport would ensure that this scenic area remains well conserved and unharmed by human activity.
Teng Chih-chung is a director of the Railway Cultural Society, Taiwan
Translated by Julian Clegg
A Chinese diplomat’s violent threat against Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi following her remarks on defending Taiwan marks a dangerous escalation in East Asian tensions, revealing Beijing’s growing intolerance for dissent and the fragility of regional diplomacy. Chinese Consul General in Osaka Xue Jian (薛劍) on Saturday posted a chilling message on X: “the dirty neck that sticks itself in must be cut off,” in reference to Takaichi’s remark to Japanese lawmakers that an attack on Taiwan could threaten Japan’s survival. The post, which was later deleted, was not an isolated outburst. Xue has also amplified other incendiary messages, including one suggesting
Chinese Consul General in Osaka Xue Jian (薛劍) on Saturday last week shared a news article on social media about Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi’s remarks on Taiwan, adding that “the dirty neck that sticks itself in must be cut off.” The previous day in the Japanese House of Representatives, Takaichi said that a Chinese attack on Taiwan could constitute “a situation threatening Japan’s survival,” a reference to a legal legal term introduced in 2015 that allows the prime minister to deploy the Japan Self-Defense Forces. The violent nature of Xue’s comments is notable in that it came from a diplomat,
Before 1945, the most widely spoken language in Taiwan was Tai-gi (also known as Taiwanese, Taiwanese Hokkien or Hoklo). However, due to almost a century of language repression policies, many Taiwanese believe that Tai-gi is at risk of disappearing. To understand this crisis, I interviewed academics and activists about Taiwan’s history of language repression, the major challenges of revitalizing Tai-gi and their policy recommendations. Although Taiwanese were pressured to speak Japanese when Taiwan became a Japanese colony in 1895, most managed to keep their heritage languages alive in their homes. However, starting in 1949, when the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) enacted martial law
“Si ambulat loquitur tetrissitatque sicut anas, anas est” is, in customary international law, the three-part test of anatine ambulation, articulation and tetrissitation. And it is essential to Taiwan’s existence. Apocryphally, it can be traced as far back as Suetonius (蘇埃托尼烏斯) in late first-century Rome. Alas, Suetonius was only talking about ducks (anas). But this self-evident principle was codified as a four-part test at the Montevideo Convention in 1934, to which the United States is a party. Article One: “The state as a person of international law should possess the following qualifications: a) a permanent population; b) a defined territory; c) government;
RSS