More than a month after the Chinese tainted milk powder scandal was exposed, Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao (溫家寶) was quoted as saying in an interview with the US journal Science: “We feel distressed about the milk powder incident. We think that although the incident occurred in an enterprise, the government is responsible, especially from the perspective of supervision.”
One wonders if the reason why it took Wen so long to make such remarks to the media was because some facts remain hidden. There also remains some doubt as to whether tthe Chinese authorities are sincere about their intention to address the matter.
In a Western democracy facing a similar incident, the government would usually apologize immediately and begin an investigation, followed by disbursement of appropriate compensation. But after the scandal occurred, only the Sanlu Group and the Shijiazhuang City Government stepped forward to apologize, while Li Changjiang (李長江), head of China’s General Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine, and other officials stepped down. This may have given the impression that the Chinese government lacks sincerity.
The tainted milk powder has sickened more than 50,000 infants in many areas in China and affected Taiwan and many other countries. The level of the officials who have stepped down so far seems insufficient given the seriousness of the matter, nor will it be helpful in providing satisfying answers to the victims. Faced with rising public anger, Wen had to set the tone for the level of official “distress.” Hence his remarks.
More important, however, are the issues of an apology and compensation.
It is a moral and political responsibility for the government to apologize for its mistakes. Since the scandal broke, only company and city officials, no higher-ranking officials, have offered any apologies.
The reason no Chinese leaders at the state level have apologized is that the incident has spread to every corner of the world and become a hot potato, with heavier responsibilities and demands for compensation than they are prepared to deal with. The reason the Chinese government has not officially apologized is to ensure it has enough room to maneuver.
Wen was probably sincere in his remarks and there is a real possibility that the Chinese Communist Party is trying to address the problem responsibly. As such, China should apologize and show a willingness to pay compensation. This is what a powerful and responsible country should do.
It is a legal duty to pay compensation. Chinese tainted milk powder has sickened more than 50,000 infants and killed four children in China. Taiwanese are worried about food safety and many companies have suffered serious losses as a result. The situation is not much different in other countries.
Chinese products have been questioned by people around the world. This is a serious business risk for China. If the Chinese government fails to properly handle the matter, its reputation as “the world’s factory” will be severely challenged. This will also be an extremely heavy blow to overall Chinese economic development.
Wen’s comments before Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Strait Chairman Chen Yunlin’s (陳雲林) visit to Taiwan later this year or early next year have prompted expectations that Chen will show sincere concern for Taiwanese.
An apology by China could go a long way to resolve cross-strait misunderstanding. Why is it so hard to speak up?
Li Hua-chiu is a researcher with the National Policy Foundation.
TRANSLATED BY TED YANG
When Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) sits down with US President Donald Trump in Beijing on Thursday next week, Xi is unlikely to demand a dramatic public betrayal of Taiwan. He does not need to. Beijing’s preferred victory is smaller, quieter and in some ways far more dangerous: a subtle shift in American wording that appears technical, but carries major strategic meaning. The ask is simple: replace the longstanding US formulation that Washington “does not support Taiwan independence” with a harder one — that Washington “opposes” Taiwan independence. One word changes; a deterrence structure built over decades begins to shift.
Taipei is facing a severe rat infestation, and the city government is reportedly considering large-scale use of rodenticides as its primary control measure. However, this move could trigger an ecological disaster, including mass deaths of birds of prey. In the past, black kites, relatives of eagles, took more than three decades to return to the skies above the Taipei Basin. Taiwan’s black kite population was nearly wiped out by the combined effects of habitat destruction, pesticides and rodenticides. By 1992, fewer than 200 black kites remained on the island. Fortunately, thanks to more than 30 years of collective effort to preserve their remaining
After Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) met Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) in Beijing, most headlines referred to her as the leader of the opposition in Taiwan. Is she really, though? Being the chairwoman of the KMT does not automatically translate into being the leader of the opposition in the sense that most foreign readers would understand it. “Leader of the opposition” is a very British term. It applies to the Westminster system of parliamentary democracy, and to some extent, to other democracies. If you look at the UK right now, Conservative Party head Kemi Badenoch is
A Pale View of Hills, a movie released last year, follows the story of a Japanese woman from Nagasaki who moved to Britain in the 1950s with her British husband and daughter from a previous marriage. The daughter was born at a time when memories of the US atomic bombing of Nagasaki during World War II and anxiety over the effects of nuclear radiation still haunted the community. It is a reflection on the legacy of the local and national trauma of the bombing that ended the period of Japanese militarism. A central theme of the movie is the need, at
RSS