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
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
As former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) wrapped up his visit to the People’s Republic of China, he received his share of attention. Certainly, the trip must be seen within the full context of Ma’s life, that is, his eight-year presidency, the Sunflower movement and his failed Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement, as well as his eight years as Taipei mayor with its posturing, accusations of money laundering, and ups and downs. Through all that, basic questions stand out: “What drives Ma? What is his end game?” Having observed and commented on Ma for decades, it is all ironically reminiscent of former US president Harry