More than 400 domestic COVID-19 cases have been reported in Taiwan this year, and new daily case counts remain in the double digits.
The CECC on Monday extended a level 2 COVID-19 alert for two more weeks, slightly tightening mask rules, but allowing indoor dining and not imposing gathering limits.
“We need to get on with our lives, so everyone should be responsible for disease prevention and get vaccinated, as remaining vigilant has become the ‘new normal,’” Minister of Health and Welfare Chen Shih-chung (陳時中), who heads the Central Epidemic Command Center (CECC), said on Thursday.
Many people have expressed concerns about increased infection risks as people move about during the Lunar New Year holidays. This could lead to a surge in cases, and some questioned why the alert was not raised to level 3, as the local situation has met last year’s criteria of “having more than three local clusters of infections within one week.”
Responding to public concerns, the center on Thursday released a set of COVID-19 prevention guidelines for the holidays, mainly reminding people to practice personal protective measures, avoid crowded gatherings with strangers, get fully vaccinated, wear a mask and practice social distancing when meeting people.
Chen said that family gatherings are an important part of family relationships, and celebrations can take place as long as people practice preventive measures.
The policies now are much looser than those implemented during the Dragon Boat Festival long weekend in June last year, when the government reduced public transportation and urged people to avoid traveling home.
“Zero COVID is not our goal, but it is our attitude in conducting disease prevention operations,” said Victor Wang (王必勝), deputy head of the CECC’s medical response division and the center’s on-site commander at several large cluster infection sites.
The minister’s mention of the “new normal” seems to suggest that the center is shifting toward a risk mitigation strategy, as eradicating the highly transmissible Omicron variant of SARS-CoV-2 is difficult, and tools to protect people against serious illness and death have become widely available.
Instead of significantly tightening domestic restrictions and imposing fines, the center is asking everyone to assess their risk and shoulder the responsibility of disease prevention.
However, when the CECC emphasizes a rolling review of policies in response to the rapidly changing COVID-19 environment, it can be confusing to the public. Previous criteria for issuing alert levels, conducting mandatory testing and placing contacts under isolation are no longer reliable, and the visions for a “new normal” remain indistinct.
What does it mean when the center is taking a “zero COVID” approach, yet people must prepare to live with the virus? How does the government plan to balance public health and reduce disruption to society? And how do people assess their risk and make the best choices if living with COVID-19 is inevitable?
Aside from reporting the latest daily case counts, contact tracing progress and measures taken to contain the spread of infections, it would be helpful if the CECC offered analytical data from scientific studies on the effectiveness of non-pharmaceutical interventions and the recommended vaccine doses needed to protect people from COVID-19 infection or severe disease.
The government should review its isolation policy and other guidelines that have become less effective in defeating the Omicron variant. It should also inform the public about the nation’s healthcare capacity. These measures along with clear communication would help the public remain relatively safe and live with COVID-19.
The Paris Olympics are over and the five-ringed views of the Louvre, Invalides, Eiffel and Versailles just memories. As a diplomatic historian, my thoughts naturally turn to France! The Olympian of world affairs, the creators of “diplomacy,” Cardinal Richelieu and Prince Talleyrand. But sixty years ago, at the 1964 diplomatic games, Team China bested Team France in a battle of wits in “free-style negotiations” over Taiwan. Paris never recovered. To be fair, in Europe of 1963-1964, France was besieged. She had been ousted from her Asian dominions. She had begun her first nuclear weapons tests just as the United States and
Having the title doctor or the letters PhD after your name carries the connotation of having broad knowledge. In reality, while people with doctoral degrees often possess highly specialized expertise and might be held in high esteem among their peers, they are likely virtually unknown to the general public. In Taiwan, people with doctorates are common, while probably fewer than one out of 100 of them could truly make a name for themselves. Of course, there are exceptions. Those who gain media exposure can easily become well-known, especially if they are involved in politics. However, many fail to live up to
For the past few weeks, the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) and its Chairman Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) have been embroiled in a series of scandals related to irregularities in their presidential campaign financial reporting. These scandals continue to expand as more evidence surfaces, raising more questions about the party’s financial propriety and competency. These irregularities include unusually high spending, allegedly accepting donations from abroad, reporting 97.3 percent of personal donations as “cash,” making large payments to marketing firms with close ties to the party and accounting errors. When the financial irregularities were first reported, the party blamed it on “arbitrary misconduct” by
Over the past few years, especially since the COVID-19 pandemic, there has been a visible change in the EU’s approach to Taiwan. I call this phenomenon European hype about Taiwan. The change is noticeable at both the EU and member-state levels, with parliaments and Central Europe leading the way. The best example is the fact that Taiwan is finally mentioned in various EU documents (a real novelty compared with the past 30 years), in addition to statements by European politicians, an increase in bilateral contacts, a growing awareness of Taiwan’s importance and its contribution not only to European prosperity, but