Resignations have attained outrageous significance since Chen Shui-bian (
Over the past two years, rarely has a week passed when we didn't hear cries for some official to step down. Is it essential or even necessary that officials should consider resigning to assume responsibility, real or perceived, for every little thing that happens?
The Japanese are very quick to take responsibility for the mistakes they make, while the Americans, in contrast, are not. In Japan, for instance, after a civilian airliner crashes, in addition to the airline's CEO, the transportation minister will likely also resign.
However, we seldom hear about a US official stepping down to take even political responsibility unless asked by his superior to do so. For example, no senior US official has yet resigned to take responsibility for the failure to avert the Sept. 11 attacks.
Is the Japanese political culture more advanced than the American one? The answer is obviously "no." More so than the Japanese, the Americans are inclined to investigate first rather than sweep the case under the rug after the resignation of an official alleged to be responsible. This is the reason US President George W. Bush appointed Henry Kissinger to head the investigation of the terrorist attacks on the US.
Late in 2000, while serving as vice premier, Yu Shyi-kun resigned to take responsibility for the Pachang Creek tragedy. Yu was subsequently praised for his noble act. While his resignation spared the Chen administration from continuing criticism for the failure to save these four lives, Yu set, in my opinion, a bad example.
In the first place, the local authorities in Chiayi County were more to blame for the tragic failure than the central authorities in this particular case. Second, Yu's action seemed to have raised the expectation that every time there is a political blunder, real or otherwise, there is an outcry for the heads of officials, the higher the better.
In November, for instance, critics in the media and political circles demanded that a number of high officials should resign for various reasons. These included top representative to the US Chen Chien-jen (
If Taiwan is to have political stability and maturity, critics must not be so quick to demand that high officials step down. It is unreasonable to expect the officials of any administration to be faultless.
When a political mistake is made, it is better that the official involved, in most cases, be allowed a chance to learn from the mistakes. More importantly, frustrated officials should not readily yield to pressure for their resignations, let alone volunteer to resign. If necessary, create a commission for investigating the case thoroughly. Without facts, how is it possible to learn anything from the experience?
In short, if it is not transformed, the existing culture of resignation will not only continue to make the people of Taiwan look foolish, but will also have a significant negative impact on the nation's progress in general.
Chen Ching-chih is professor emeritus of history at Southern Illinois University at Edwardsville, Illinois.
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers