PFP Chairman James Soong (宋楚瑜) has criticized the epidemic prevention measures implemented by President Chen Shui-bian's (陳水扁) government as inappropriate. He says that rather than going on like this, "it would be better to just hand over power sooner rather than later. We would be happy to take over and help the public solve their problems."
These are powerful words. They carry the compassion of the bodhisattva Ksitigarbha, who promised to save all sentient beings, and the lofty sentiment of Hsiangyu the Conqueror, who proudly said he would "take anything that could be taken." It is like saying that "the people's wishes are always in my heart" and promising to bring the people of Taiwan out of Egypt, like a modern Moses.
If a leader can come forward and settle the chaos, I am certain that a majority of the Taiwanese people, now suffering from the physical threat and mental panic brought by the SARS virus, is willing to follow him, her, it or Him. We will all follow a mighty leader, be it Soong, Wu Yi (
The question is if any one of all these bad apples, sages and heroes have the intelligence and abilities required to take on the responsibility of telling the public in simple, straightforward language that "I can lead you out of this misery, and this is how I'll do it." Over the last month, we've seen far too many people brave enough to say the first part of this sentence, or the second part, but very few people dare connect the two. Why? Because very few people dare utter such irresponsible words.
The PFP's medical authority, Chang Chao-hsiung (
We shouldn't comment on Chang's and Ma's differences of opinion based on political motives, since both of them probably have their professional reasons. But unless someone is able to resolve this difference, no politician will be qualified to say that he would be "happy to take over sooner rather than later and help the public solve their problems."
In a praiseworthy effort, Chang has introduced an enzyme-linked immunoassay (ELISA) reagent from China to his old hospital, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, for use in SARS screening tests. Chang then held a news conference together with the superintendent of the Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital to explain how the hospital adopted high-quality measures in its battle against SARS.
Just a few days later, however, that quality image was ruined by reports about an outbreak of SARS within the hospital.
Would it be right to say that Chang has been covering up the shortcomings of his old hospital? Maybe an even more important lesson is that there are limitations to our abilities and knowledge and that no one is omniscient and omnipotent.
People are neither omniscient nor omnipotent. Because we will make mistakes, social regulation and criticism is necessary. Those providing this regulation and criticism should also reflect on the fact that they are neither omniscient nor omnipotent.
Soong said there is a public consensus behind Taiwan's participation in the World Health Organization (WHO), and that "it's just like all of us having to eat. Do we need a referendum on that?" This makes sense.
When Academica Sinica member Chen Chien-jen (陳建仁) took over as director-general of the Department of Health, the public looked forward to him applying his respected professionalism toward quickly containing the SARS epidemic. The government, however, sent him to Geneva to play the martyr at an already doomed meeting.
Such a move could of course be both discussed and criticized. But if a political leader said that the public consensus behind Taiwan's participation in the WHO is "just like all of us having to eat," without telling those starving where the food is and how to eat it, wouldn't that just be so much hot air?
After the 921 earthquake, Soong said with regret that rescue and reconstruction efforts would have been much better if the provinicial government hadn't been scrapped. "If" is not the first word people struck by a disastrous earthquake or an epidemic need to hear.
All you ambitious, responsible and able political leaders, please tell a suffering people how you will lead us out of our misery. Show us the way, and you will have our support and be welcome to take over this very instant.
Ku Er-teh is a freelance writer.
Translated by Perry Svensson
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
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.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath