Seven days after Typhoon Morakot wreaked havoc in southern Taiwan, President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) finally realized how serious the situation is and called a national security meeting. The government’s slow and disorganized response to the disaster has angered victims and stirred criticism across the political spectrum and from the international community.
Ma’s Cabinet ministers may hold doctorate degrees, but they have failed the test this time, with Minister of the Interior Liao Liou-yi (廖了以) and local government heads busy blaming each other while the military “awaited orders” to join rescue efforts.
As commander-in-chief of the armed forces, Ma should have ordered well-trained and equipped military forces to start rescue work a week ago, but instead only called the national security meeting after the Ministry of Foreign Affairs had sparked public discontent by declining offers of assistance from abroad.
The nine directives Ma issued at the national security meeting contain too many empty words. Ma’s call for a special act for post-disaster reconstruction is necessary to secure sufficient funds, but it is nothing new. No presidential order is required to set up a post-disaster recovery committee, either, since it is already required under the Disaster Prevention and Protection Act (災害防救法). Restoring communication and transportation in disaster areas and providing real-time information to victims are also critical to disaster relief, but the government has done poorly in these areas.
Ma thinks the central government’s emergency response apparatus is satisfactory and has called for improvements at the local level and for outdated equipment to be replaced. The main reason for the disorganized relief efforts, however, is precisely the incompetence of the Central Emergency Operations Center. As an ad hoc structure, it has no accumulated experience. It failed to establish unified command at central and local levels and to ensure efficient coordination and communication between the ministries. Resources have not been used quickly and effectively.
Information on the extent of the disaster and what kinds of aid are required was collected by the media faster than government departments.
The typhoon, landslides and floods have awakened the government to the importance of land and water management. Ma has called for a series of public hearings to be held before a draft national land planning act is put forward, seemingly unaware that a proposal was already drawn up years ago, but could not be enacted because of opposition from Ma’s own Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). It remains to be seen whether Ma can finally get this proposal passed when he takes up the post of KMT chairman.
Typhoon Morakot has fully exposed Ma’s weak character, his indecision and lack of empathy with victims on the front line. His crisis management skills have proved inferior to those of former president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝), former Taiwan provincial governor James Soong (宋楚瑜) and even former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁). Ma’s weak leadership and the Cabinet’s tardy response have wiped out respect for the government just as villages were swept away by the flood.
Despite all its failures, the government seems to think that its emergency response has been quick and sufficient, but that is not how it looks to the public. The KMT’s luck has run out. When local government elections are held at the end of this year, voters will surely snap Ma and his party out of their complacency.
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS