It was a bitterly hot day in July, and even at four in the afternoon the sunshine was debilitating. The Association for Promotion of a Referendum on the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant, led by Lin Yi-hsiung, former chairman of the Democratic Progressive Party, first gathered at noon in 228 Peace Park, after which they marched to the Office of the President. Thirty minutes later-the original plan for a "sit-in" protest having been canceled-the final curtain tranquilly came down on a quiet revolution in favor of a public referendum on the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant (4NPP). The office of the president greeted the protesters with the utmost courtesy, and their manifesto was received personally by Secretary-General to the President Chiou Yi-jen. The police also kept their distance; in contrast to some past social movements, this time there were no barriers, cages, or large police detachments to maintain order.

Such a peaceful denouement to the long struggle was made possible when President Chen Shui-bian announced on June 13, at the National Conference on a Nuclear-Free Homeland, that a referendum would be held on the 4NPP before March of next year.

In contrast to the peaceful anti-nuclear declaration made before the presidential building, the conference appears in retrospect to have been much more combative, as a result of the very different views expressed by participants.

The evolution of the concept of a nuclear-free Taiwan has been closely tied to the proposed 4NPP. Taiwan's anti-nuclear movement was born in 1987 with local protests in Kungliao Rural Township in Taipei County, the proposed site for the plant. Anti-nuclear activism helped consolidate Taiwan's environmental forces, and became a leading indicator of the success of the environmental movement. The anti-nuclear movement also worked parallel with the then-opposition Democratic Progressive Party. Under the leadership of Lin Yi-hsiung, the Association for Promotion of a Referendum on the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant began an island wide "1000-mile march." Beyond the question of the plant itself, they also called for the longer-term goal of a nuclear-free homeland.

It was a serious blow to anti-nuclear activists when the Legislative Yuan approved funding for construction of the 4NPP seven years ago. These activists and the DPP responded by becoming determined to totally revolutionize energy policy and public opinion. In the 2000 presidential election, the DPP won the office of the presidency, and to fulfill its campaign promises, conducted a reevaluation of the 4NPP and subsequently announced the suspension of its construction.

This move, however, provoked a major constitutional crisis, pitting the president against the opposition-controlled legislature.

There were a number of points of controversy about the decision to halt the project. For one thing, work on the 4NPP had been going on for four years, and more than NT$40 billion had already been invested. Moreover, the unilateral suspension of construction raised questions of compensation for foreign contractors. In addition, it was widely believed in the business community that cancellation of the 4NPP could affect economic development.

Ultimately, the constitutional crisis was resolved when the Supreme Court issued its interpretation No. 520, the upshot of which was that construction of the 4NPP was to be resumed.

The DPP administration, showing respect for the constitutional structure, did indeed restart work on the plant. Nonetheless, anti-nuclear activists remained unwavering in their demand for a referendum on the plant. Moreover, both governing and opposition parties endorsed the ideal of a nuclear-free homeland as a long-term goal, with the executive and legislative branches reaching formal agreement on this point on October 13, 2001. In 2002, the Legislative Yuan formally codified a nuclear-free homeland as a strategic objective when it passed the Environmental Basic Law. In September of the same year, the Executive Yuan established the Commission for Promotion of a Nuclear-Free Homeland, and in May of 2003 completed a draft for the Statute for Promotion of a Nuclear-Free Homeland. The June 2003 conference at which President Chen made his announcement was intended to further consolidate public opinion around this idea. Persons from a wide variety of backgrounds were invited to express their views on issues like the concept, values, and mechanisms of a nuclear-free homeland; on citizen participation, education, and information distribution; and on the draft statute.

Yet, despite the consensus on a nuclear-free homeland in the long term, in fact there is still a sharp division between pro- and anti-nuclear voices in Taiwan. In the eyes of anti-nuclear activists, the government must cancel the 4NPP if it means to be serious about a nuclear-free homeland; to advocate a nuclear-free homeland but construct a nuclear power plant would be absurd. But given that more than NT$100 billion has already been invested in the 4NPP, many people advocate continued construction. In fact, if you look at public opinion polls taken over the years, never has the number of citizens opposed to the 4NPP surpassed one half of those polled.

That being said, given the close relationship between the DPP and the anti-nuclear movement, the government could not ignore the views of anti-nuclear activists. So it was no surprise that President Chen made his announcement about holding a public referendum on the 4NPP on the eve of the completion of the 1000-mile march. But this decision opens a whole new can of worms, because it raises questions about a possible referendum on Taiwan independence or national status.

As for the Conference on a Nuclear-Free Homeland itself, because President Chen had indicated beforehand that he would make a major announcement about a referendum, some invited scholars concluded that there would be little possibility of serious debate, and so did not attend. At the meeting, pro- and anti-nuclear advocates went at it tooth and nail, while outside the site, employees of Taiwan Power Company held their own protest, stating that cancellation of the 4NPP would be against the company's interests and a violation of the rights of its employees. After President Chen's announcement that a referendum will be held before next year's presidential election, the US and European chambers of commerce in Taiwan both stated that the referendum scheme, by creating uncertainty about the 4NPP, is a serious blow to foreign investor confidence.

The nuclear power referendum, along with recent efforts to promote a referendum on Taiwan's entry into the World Health Organization, have created the appearance of government and opposition parties competing to see who can prove themselves more supportive of the referendum idea. This is despite the fact that even today there remains no legal basis for holding referenda, a fact which casts doubt on whether or not a nuclear power referendum will be binding. Right now the Executive Yuan is planning to issue a set of administrative regulations to provide the basis for public referenda of a consultative, non-binding nature. But administrative regulations cannot replace proper legislation produced through democratic processes. Although a referendum itself can be seen as the ultimate expression of democracy, unless the law is amended soon, simply taking shortcuts and implementing the administrative regulations could cause anti-nuclear forces to lose the legitimacy that comes from democratic action, which could lead to a constitutional crisis down the road.

Beyond the technical questions surrounding the referendum, of even greater importance to the future of nuclear power and a nuclear-free homeland is the problem of a comprehensive energy policy. As the president stated in his conference address: "Demand for energy in Taiwan is rising faster than economic growth, while the structure of energy use is very imbalanced. High-energy-consuming industries use more than 30% of total energy, but generate only about 5% of GDP. This indicates that we still have a great deal of room for improvement in saving energy and increasing efficiency in its use."

In the past Taiwan placed excessive importance on fossil fuels and nuclear energy, and created a monopoly of electrical power supply, thereby excluding opportunities for development of renewable sources of energy. Thus the President emphasized, "In the future we should, acting through liberalization of the power market and various subsidy measures, increase incentives for diversification of sources of energy."

To get to the heart of the matter, Taiwan's energy policy has long been turned upside down. Little effort has been devoted to fundamental aspects like reducing energy use, increasing efficiency, and developing renewable energy sources. This is the real problem behind the 4NPP controversy.

The world entered the age of nuclear power in the 1950s, and the energy crises of the 1970s led to a spate of construction of new plants and increased dependence on nuclear power in many countries. But in the 1980s, there were successive nuclear accidents in the US, USSR, and Japan, and no country had come up with a genuine solution to the problem of nuclear waste. Local opposition began to grow, and nuclear power became highly controversial. The idea of "sustainable energy development" has since come to be increasingly accepted. Under this trend, countries are not only trying to develop clean energy sources, but many are re-assessing their nuclear programs and drafting schedules for retiring their nuclear power plants.

In Taiwan, the turbulent waves of anti-nuclear activism have been calmed for the moment by the government's promise of a referendum on the 4NPP. However, while it is certain that next March's referendum will be a focus of public attention, whether citizens can give attention to those issues that really matter most in the long run to a nuclear-free homeland-energy policy, social justice, and environmentally friendly lifestyles-will be the real test of whether Taiwan can show itself to be a progressive and civilized nation.

There is a broad consensus in society on the ideal of a "nuclear-free homeland." But that does not mean there is agreement on whether or not to abandon construction of the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant, since vast sums of money have already been sunk into the project. The photo shows employees of Taiwan Power Company demonstrating in favor of construction of the plant outside the "Conference on a Nuclear-Free Homeland" in June. (photo by Hsueh Chi-kuang)