Many of Taiwan's politicians have watched the movie 13 Days recently, but perhaps none of them have read the book Thirteen Days: A Memoir of the Cuban Missile Crisis, written by Robert F. Kennedy. If they are willing to spend some time reading the book after seeing the movie, they will be able to learn something more.
The Cuban missile crisis occurred almost 40 years ago, and there are innumerable books recording this piece of history. The most factual is definitely Thirteen Days, written by the younger brother of late US president John F. Kennedy. Meanwhile, the one that gives the most comprehensive analysis is Essence of Decision: Explaining the Cuban Missile Crisis by Graham T. Allison of Harvard University. Both books are classics.
Regardless of whether Taiwan's politicians prefer to learn from the movie or from the books, what they need to learn the most from the missile crisis is President Kennedy's policy-making model, especially his methods of crisis management.
Although Kennedy and his confidantes were preeminent figures, they sustained a crushing defeat in the Bay of Pigs incident. When reviewing the matter, they found that the failure mainly resulted from an inappropriate policy-making model, especially because no objections were raised during the decision-making process.
Therefore, when handling the missile crisis, Kennedy completely changed his policy-making style. Some of the most distinguished characteristics are as follows:
First, although Kennedy organized a crisis committee, he avoided presiding over meetings for fear that those holding opposing opinions might hesitate to challenge his viewpoints or refrain from debating their ideas too vigorously.
Second, with or without his presence, all of those involved in policy-making discussions were viewed as equals, regardless of rank or authority.
Third, the Bay of Pigs incident failed because all agreed unanimously, despite whatever difference of opinion they might have had in the policy-making process. However, facing the missile crisis, Kennedy not only made the pro-war members and "doves" challenge each other to correct the other side's posi-tions, but also had a senior Republican act as the "Devil's advocate" to deliberately put forth opposing viewpoints.
Although many factors contributed to the peaceful end of the Cuban missile crisis, Kennedy's policy-making model was undoubtedly the key point. The model does not offer brilliant insights, but it is easier said than done. Heads of states around the world who can actually practice Kennedy's style are few and far between.
In fact, during the 13 days of the missile crisis, Kennedy also read a book to learn how to run a country. The book he read was The Guns of August by historian Barbara W. Tuchman.
In the book, Tuchman says that World War I was triggered by misjudgments and misunderstandings. Tuchman argues that it could have been stopped but was not. During the missile crisis, Kennedy often cited the book as an example and took World War I as a reference point. He said he did not want to make the wrong decisions and later be criticized by historians in a book titled "The Missiles of October."
Leaders of Taiwan's political parties have rarely thought about policy-making models. Even when they do, they are not above one-man or oligarchic policy-making patterns. The so-called collective decision-making model exists in name only. If they can learn a smattering from Kennedy's handling of the 13-day crisis, Taiwan politics would certainly be greatly benefitted.
Wang Chien-chuang is president of The Journalist magazine.
Translated by Jackie Lin
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with