Over the past few days, volunteers and Netizens across the nation have turned their compassion into action, serving as rescue workers and searching for typhoon victims and transporting relief aid, or donating money and disseminating rescue and missing persons information via e-mail, Twitter, Plurk, Facebook and other social networking Web sites.
Yet the broadcast and print media continue to be filled with heartrending images of frightened survivors recounting narrow escapes, tearful villages wailing for their missing or dead loved ones and horrifying scenes of villages annihilated by water, rocks and mudslides.
There is only so much that individuals and charity groups can do when a disaster of this magnitude strikes. The most effective resources lie in the hands of the central government, which is the sole organization with the authority to integrate and mobilize rescue operations.
The government so far has rejected offers of material assistance from Japan and the US, with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs saying that Taiwan has “sufficient resources” and that “the disaster relief mechanism is working well.”
President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) has ruled out declaring an emergency decree, stating — perhaps not unreasonably — that existing legislation provides the executive with all the authority and resources that are necessary and that government mechanisms are functioning properly.
Arguments over the reach of the law and the utility of a presidential emergency decree will continue for some time, but for the moment, it is dumbfounding to recall that the president, speaking at the Central Emergency Operation Center on Saturday, shifted responsibility to local governments. He said it was those governments that should act as prime movers in rescue work and that the central government would act as an auxiliary. Given that local governments enjoy no authority to deploy military resources, Ma’s little lecture was as nonsensical as his verbaling of the Central Weather Bureau for failing to predict the enormity of the disaster.
Cabinet Spokesman Su Jun-pin (蘇俊賓) on Sunday said the scope and speed of the central government’s rescue work had exceeded that of the 921 Earthquake almost 10 years ago.
But a cursory comparison suggests this is not the case. Hours after the quake struck on Sept. 21, 1999, the Hengshan Military Command Center ordered the deployment of forces to disaster zones and commenced rescue work. Within a day, more than 15,000 personnel were stationed in quake-ravaged regions and advanced helicopters such as the OH-58D, which carries laser range finders and thermal imaging sensors, were deployed for rescue operations.
How ironic it is that a large number of the nation’s military bases are in southern Taiwan, yet three days after Typhoon Morakot slammed into the area on Friday, the military had deployed a mere 8,500 personnel to stricken areas, and without provision for advanced aircraft.
When disaster strikes, every hour counts. The earlier manpower is dispatched on search and rescue efforts, the more lives can be saved. At a time of disaster, leadership must come to the fore to minimize suffering and financial loss.
Clearly, this has not happened, and this failure will emerge as a profound test of the Ma administration’s credibility.
On Sept. 3 in Tiananmen Square, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) rolled out a parade of new weapons in PLA service that threaten Taiwan — some of that Taiwan is addressing with added and new military investments and some of which it cannot, having to rely on the initiative of allies like the United States. The CCP’s goal of replacing US leadership on the global stage was advanced by the military parade, but also by China hosting in Tianjin an August 31-Sept. 1 summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which since 2001 has specialized
In an article published by the Harvard Kennedy School, renowned historian of modern China Rana Mitter used a structured question-and-answer format to deepen the understanding of the relationship between Taiwan and China. Mitter highlights the differences between the repressive and authoritarian People’s Republic of China and the vibrant democracy that exists in Taiwan, saying that Taiwan and China “have had an interconnected relationship that has been both close and contentious at times.” However, his description of the history — before and after 1945 — contains significant flaws. First, he writes that “Taiwan was always broadly regarded by the imperial dynasties of
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) will stop at nothing to weaken Taiwan’s sovereignty, going as far as to create complete falsehoods. That the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has never ruled Taiwan is an objective fact. To refute this, Beijing has tried to assert “jurisdiction” over Taiwan, pointing to its military exercises around the nation as “proof.” That is an outright lie: If the PRC had jurisdiction over Taiwan, it could simply have issued decrees. Instead, it needs to perform a show of force around the nation to demonstrate its fantasy. Its actions prove the exact opposite of its assertions. A
A large part of the discourse about Taiwan as a sovereign, independent nation has centered on conventions of international law and international agreements between outside powers — such as between the US, UK, Russia, the Republic of China (ROC) and Japan at the end of World War II, and between the US and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) since recognition of the PRC as the sole representative of China at the UN. Internationally, the narrative on the PRC and Taiwan has changed considerably since the days of the first term of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) of the Democratic
RSS