On the surface, majority sentiment has favored construction of the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant (核四) in surveys conducted over the years. Polls taken after the government announced that it would stop construction, however, showed that opponents of construction outnumbered supporters by more than 17 percent. Then recent surveys indicated that there is currently more support for construction than for halting construction. On this issue, public opinion doesn't seem to be very consistent.

Particularly in the past, public opinion has been molded by the superior media campaign waged by the KMT government and Taipower (台電). Now, after the new government announced its decision to terminate construction, it has faced the opposition alliance's legislative advantage and a media largely in favor of nuclear power. Pro-nuclear politicians and media power have again taken control of the situation, leaving Taiwan's anti-nuclear movement facing a situation more serious than ever before. Just as the new government was beginning to realize its campaign promise to stop construction of the plant, the vicious political-media machine might actually end up terminating the anti-nuclear movement. This is extremely ironic and painful.

Pro-nuclear politicians and Taipower have always cited public opinion as their basis for action. Actually, not only is popular opinion subject to change, but a closer look at recent surveys makes it very easy to see that public opinion is not so supportive of the plant. In the end, the KMT even agreed that construction of the plant and early decommissioning of the first and second plants would be more practical, and in keeping with the public will. If legislators represent the public will, then the fact that two resolutions in 1986 and 1996 to freeze nuclear power construction were reversed, shows how the improper intervention of political power can twist popular will into "pro-nuclear support." In the opposition alliance, the KMT is currently the majority party. The initially anti-nuclear New Party has also joined the alliance, using the alliance's legislative advantage to hinder efforts to shut down the plant.

In fact, most of the public doesn't have a definite opinion on the issue, hence the volatility of public opinion. The main factor (influencing people's opinions) is government policy. Two surveys conducted last May and September each contained a set of hypothetical questions, such as: "If, in the final analysis, the new government decided to complete construction of the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant, would you support this decision?" and "If, in the final analysis, the new government decided to halt construction of the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant, would you support this decision?"

The results showed that whether construction was resumed or halted, the majority of respondents would support the government's decision. In the May survey, 67 percent of respondents said they would support the government if it decided to continue construction of the plant, while only 14 percent indicated they would not support such a decision. And 52 percent said they would support the government if it decided to stop construction, while only 24 percent responded they would not support such policy.

The situation in the Septem-ber survey was largely the same. The percentage of respondents for and against a decision to continue construction was 63 percent and 19 percent respectively, while the percentage for and against a decision to halt construction was 44 percent to 32 percent respectively.

Why should a single survey produce such seemingly contradictory results? Because most of the public will support the government's decision, whether it chooses to continue or discontinue construction, an example of the "public will" which is well worth noting. These surveys perhaps reflect the fact that, at the time of the polls, most of the public didn't have very strong convictions either way -- unlike politicians, who used the issue as an indispensable tool in their power struggles, adopting pro- or anti-nuclear stances out of political necessity.

Secondly, the majority of the public doesn't feel the immediate effects of policy-making and are unable to predict if any big conflicts will arise. Any uneasiness or even panic reflected in so-called public opinion has been due to the power of politics and the media.

In 1993, a poll asked "Do you have confidence in Taipower's ability to handle a major nuclear accident?" The results showed that respondents who were confident outnumbered those who were not by the very close margin of 42 percent to 37 percent. But it was only in 1993 that the majority of respondents expressed confidence. Beginning in 1994, confidence in Taipower's ability to handle a major accident began to wane. From 1996, the number of confident respondents was around 30 percent, while over 40 percent were not confident. Clearly, in the end, the public didn't have any confidence in Taipower's ability to handle the very thing it most fears -- a nuclear accident.

In the numerous times over the years that surveys concerning the plant have been conducted, all have consistently shown that more than 70 percent of the public thought that construction of the plant should not go ahead without the approval of the residents who would be living nearby.

Upon examination of the process of policy-making and administration regarding construction of the plant, myriad problems arise. Simply stated, it was an unjust decision. The public has never truly supported the opposition's effort to revive the project by taking advantage of the weak government. The power of the "opposition" has been overwhelming, however, bullying local society into powerless submission. It really hurts to see this happen.

Chiu Hei-yuan is professor of Sociology at National Taiwan University.

Translated by Scudder Smith