台灣的海洋前景又何在？

 

中國時報 / 2011-06-08 / A16 時論廣場

胡念祖

      六月八日是聯合國「世界海洋日」，今年主題為「我們的海洋：綠化我們的未來」。此一主題看在國民黨政府眼中，或許有些敏感的不當聯想，但細觀聯合國所將舉辦座談會議題：海洋與環境、海洋與社會衝擊（特別針對小型生計型漁業勞動人口）、海洋經濟層面、及海洋與青年（特別針對青年對海洋保育之認知），吾人當有另一層次思考。

      就在世界海洋日前，南海局勢在新加坡所舉行的年度亞洲安全高峰會議（或稱香格里拉對話）中受到高度關注，中共總參謀長陳炳德上將則首度證實大陸正在建造航空母艦，用以面對諸多的海洋問題；同時，台灣漁民勞動人權協會七日在台北美國在台協會前抗議美軍為打擊索馬利亞海盜而誤殺我國籍受難船長。此二事件看似無關，但卻都事關我國的海洋政策思維與作為。

        政府在南海政策上，似有華麗說詞，但無具體作為；在打擊索馬利亞海盜或保護人民生命財產上，外交部不願向美國政府嚴正抗議索賠，漁業署僅以新聞稿消極呼籲「漁民應避免前往索國附近海域作業，在印度洋作業之漁船應提高警覺，船長及船員應注意避免不明船隻接近」，政府拿不出一絲積極作為。這種內、外作為與形象，又如何達成馬總統所要的「藍色革命，海洋興國」？

      政府在海洋上的作為，目前最可誇言的就是明年初設立「海洋委員會」，但若細查該會之組織法草案，吾人實難對其整合、規劃國家海洋政策之能力與前景有太樂觀的期待。

      該委員會雖有就一些特定海洋相關政策領域擁有「規劃、推動及協調」之職權，但組織法中並未賦予執行這些職掌之「權威」。既無像經建會擁有對其他部會機關重大預算項目審議通過之權，亦無像陸委會擁有對其他部會機關涉及大陸事務之政策與措施的准駁之權，再加上在我國政治文化下，「會」低於「部」的傳統認知，以及其他各部實際掌握政策、法令、人事、經費之權，不知海洋委員會又有什麼政策工具得以「規劃、推動及協調」涉及其他部會機關之海洋政策與事務？

      再者，海洋委員會在某些海洋事務上，譬如海洋環境保護、海洋生態保育，必須像陸委會一般，具有「把關」或「踩煞車」的功能，但該會應該還具有振興海洋產業發展、促進國家海洋權益等「興利」的功能。這些功能應如何發揮，在該會的組織法草案中完全看不到應有的法律設計。

      當聯合國與國際社會在關切海洋環境、漁民權益、海洋經濟與下一代之海洋認知時，我國的海洋前景又在那裡？

    　（作者為中山大學海洋政策研究中心主任、中華民國海洋事務與政策協會理事長）

--------------------------------------------------

轉錄網址：http://city.udn.com/62960/4647766

--------------------------------------------------

 

外交部2011-06-10於中國時報回應如下

 

外交部的積極作為

 

章計平／外交部發言人

      針對胡念祖教授〈台灣的海洋前景又何在？〉專文，本人特說明如後。

      政府近年來一再秉持「主權在我、擱置爭議、和平互惠、共同開發」的基本原則，在國家安全會議、外交部等單位成立跨部會小組，隨時掌握南海情勢變動，妥適因應，並積極建立與周遭各國就南海相關議題，如漁業、國際合作等溝通與說明管道；各部會亦加速辦理我南海各項政策措施，俾強化主權。

      而日前「日春財六八號」漁船船長於美國軍艦執行反海盜任務時不幸喪生，外交部在獲訊後第一時間即向美方查證及交涉。為瞭解此次意外發生經過，外交部已三度召請美國在台協會台北辦事處官員來部說明，嚴正要求美方盡速提供有關本案之「調查報告」。美國在台協會高雄辦事處處長官員亦兩度在外交部人員陪同下親赴吳船長住家向家屬表達致哀慰問之意，並遞交吳船長「死亡證明」。另外交部楊部長業已親赴高雄探視吳船長家屬，並捐助慰問金。事實上，本部亦同時就提供家屬合理賠償或撫卹金等節持續與美方交涉。

--------------------------------------------------

本文後經轉譯，於2011-06-12刊登於Taipei Times

 

Maritime council will sink with no powers

 

By Nien-tsu Alfred Hu 胡念祖

Wednesday was June 8, the date designated by the UN as World Oceans Day. This year’s theme is “Our oceans: Greening our future.” On the day, a panel discussion was held at the UN headquarters in New York on the topics of “oceans and the environment,” “oceans and the social impact” (especially on fish workers in the small-scale, artisanal sector), “economic aspects of the oceans” and “oceans and youth” (focusing on young people’s understanding of sea conservation).

Just before World Oceans Day, the annual Asia Security Summit, also known as the Shangri-La Dialogue, was held in Singapore. A lot of attention was focused on the South China Sea situation. China’s Chief of General Staff Chen Bingde (陳炳德) acknowledged for the first time that China is building an aircraft carrier for dealing with various maritime problems.

On the eve of World Oceans Day, Taiwan’s Fishermen’s Labor Rights Association (漁民勞動人權協會) gathered in front of the American Institute in Taiwan to protest about the death of Wu Lai-yu (吳來于), captain of a hijacked Taiwanese fishing boat, who was killed when the US Navy exchanged fire with Somali pirates aboard his vessel.

While seemingly unconnected, both events have a bearing on Taiwan’s ocean policies, thinking and action. The government has some impressive things to say about its South China Sea policy, but it does nothing tangible. It is the same when it comes to fighting Somali pirates and protecting people’s lives and property. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs has not lodged a solemn protest or demanded compensation from the US government for Wu’s death, and the Fishery Administration (漁業署) has merely issued a press release advising fishermen not to operate in waters near Somalia and to be on the alert when fishing in the Indian Ocean. The press release advises captains and crew to try not to let unidentified boats approach them. How does such passivity fit in with President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) declared intention to “make a blue revolution and seek prosperity from the ocean”?

The most praiseworthy thing the government is doing with regard to the sea is setting up a Council of Ocean Affairs (海洋委員會) early next year. However, a closer look at the draft organic law for this department does not give rise to optimism about its ability to integrate and regulate national maritime policy.

Although the council is to be vested with the power of regulating, promoting and coordinating certain areas of policy related to the sea, the draft organic law does not give it the authority to enforce its decisions. Besides, in Taiwan’s political culture, Cabinet-level departments called “councils” hold a lower status than those called “ministries.” Other ministries have practical control over policies, laws, personnel and finance, so it is not clear what political tools the Council of Ocean Affairs will have at its disposal to regulate maritime policies involving other ministries. The council must be able to control certain ocean-related matters, such as protecting the marine environment and ecology, and the authority to call a halt to projects and activities. It should also spur the development of maritime industry and promote Taiwan’s interests at sea. Unfortunately, the necessary legal provisions for these functions are nowhere to be found in the existing draft of the organic law.

While the UN and the international community are focusing on the marine environment, fish workers’ rights, the marine economy and the next generation’s knowledge and understanding of the ocean, Taiwan’s prospects in relation to the sea remain far from clear.

(Nien-tsu Alfred Hu is director of the Center for Marine Policy Studies at National Sun Yat-sen University and president of the Institute of Marine Affairs and Policy.)

TRANSLATED BY JULIAN CLEGG