After being on the receiving end of criticism in Taiwan and in the international press for more than a week, President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) called press conferences for domestic and international media on Tuesday. But they were a disappointment.
Ma said that the process of relocating victims of Typhoon Morakot and rebuilding communities would be long but that he would not shirk his responsibilities. He also said he would show the public that he could do the job, and asked that the public wait before passing judgment.
Reading between the lines, what Ma said was that he would be the judge of what constitutes good performance — disregarding criticism from across political lines and a CNN Internet poll that suggested a commanding majority of voters want him to step down.
Soon after he took office, Ma’s three-pronged election promise of 6 percent economic growth, 3 percent unemployment and US$30,000 per capita income collapsed. He then tried to extend its date of delivery until the end of a second term. It is easy to imagine that he will take the same approach if post-disaster relocation and reconstruction falter.
Ma seems to follow a line of thinking different from that of most people: When he fails, he doesn’t seek to understand where the fault lies; instead, he demands that voters give him another term and “wait to pass judgment at that time.” Keeping the public in suspense in redeeming promises doesn’t make for clever politics. If, “at that time” — the end of a second term — he still hasn’t delivered, what can voters do? He will have completed his constitutionally permitted time in office and can step down with a fat pension and no accountability.
Ma’s most substantive contribution at Tuesday’s press conferences was the announcement of the creation of a national disaster prevention and rescue agency to replace the National Fire Agency and the establishment of disaster prevention and rescue bureaus at the local level. Disregarding the legislative work that this will involve, the creation of this agency is speculative and does nothing to alleviate the present situation.
Even if such an agency were established, it would still fall under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of the Interior, as does the current National Fire Agency, and so the question remains whether the efficiency of disaster work would be improved by boosting the bureaucracy and spending a bigger chunk of the budget.
Much of this is therefore a distraction. Ma and his government — after missing a golden opportunity to handle the disaster relief effort with competence and gain the confidence of the electorate — seem to have no idea how to deal with dilemmas here and now.
Ma’s obstinate approach to problems in the real world, his refusal to issue an emergency decree and his almost superstitious belief that no command system exists to support disaster prevention and rescue meant that the military has been effectively reduced to cleaning up after the fact.
Would the death toll have been as high if Ma had announced a state of emergency and personally directed the rescue effort in his capacity as commander-in-chief of the armed forces?
The answer to this question may be contentious, but what is certain is that Ma spent an inordinate amount of time blaming the death and destruction on the volume of rain, meteorologists, blocked roads, tardy residents who did not evacuate in time and local governments in general. His self-declared approach of listening to the public and helping to solve their problems turned into ignoring the public and complaining about his own problems.
One foreign reporter asked Ma at the international press conference if his leadership was strong enough. With the nation’s future in his hands, and with a possible economic cooperation framework agreement (ECFA) with China on the horizon — which Ma says must be implemented, the sooner the better — there is every reason to be nervous about Taiwan’s future.
Ma’s insensitivity to the general public is a good reflection of what the first lady once said when describing him: “He is never very considerate toward the people around him or family members, and he never shows much concern or care for others.”
Not offending China and advancing unification is, however, always on his mind. When asked by a foreign reporter on Tuesday if China had influenced his decision to refuse foreign aid, Ma didn’t immediately reply.
Moreover, the UN General Assembly meets on Sept. 15, but the government has not asked its allies to submit an application for Taiwan’s admission to the organization and the deadline for this has passed.
Taiwan has struggled for more than 10 years to gain admission to the UN, but now Ma has abandoned the effort. What words can politely describe how the international community will interpret this symbolically poignant act of omission?
It is worth noting that Ma’s decision to abandon the UN bid would have been made prior to Typhoon Morakot, a decision very different in character to that which suspended National Day celebrations in light of the relief effort.
Some in the disaster area might still have had hopes and good expectations of Ma, but his pieces of hollow political theater on Tuesday are certain to turn disappointment into despair. Judging from the press conferences, Ma and his government are at their wit’s end, although the government remains the most important factor in post-disaster reconstruction, a process that will require huge commitments of manpower and resources.
The public must mobilize to monitor government reconstruction efforts to help relieve the suffering of residents in the disaster zone and to prevent a repeat of this tragedy.
TRANSLATED BY PERRY SVENSSON
A response to my article (“Invite ‘will-bes,’ not has-beens,” Aug. 12, page 8) mischaracterizes my arguments, as well as a speech by former British prime minister Boris Johnson at the Ketagalan Forum in Taipei early last month. Tseng Yueh-ying (曾月英) in the response (“A misreading of Johnson’s speech,” Aug. 24, page 8) does not dispute that Johnson referred repeatedly to Taiwan as “a segment of the Chinese population,” but asserts that the phrase challenged Beijing by questioning whether parts of “the Chinese population” could be “differently Chinese.” This is essentially a confirmation of Beijing’s “one country, two systems” formulation, which says that
Media said that several pan-blue figures — among them former Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) chairwoman Hung Hsiu-chu (洪秀柱), former KMT legislator Lee De-wei (李德維), former KMT Central Committee member Vincent Hsu (徐正文), New Party Chairman Wu Cheng-tien (吳成典), former New Party legislator Chou chuan (周荃) and New Party Deputy Secretary-General You Chih-pin (游智彬) — yesterday attended the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) military parade commemorating the 80th anniversary of the end of World War II. China’s Xinhua news agency reported that foreign leaders were present alongside Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), such as Russian President Vladimir Putin, North Korean leader Kim
Taiwan stands at the epicenter of a seismic shift that will determine the Indo-Pacific’s future security architecture. Whether deterrence prevails or collapses will reverberate far beyond the Taiwan Strait, fundamentally reshaping global power dynamics. The stakes could not be higher. Today, Taipei confronts an unprecedented convergence of threats from an increasingly muscular China that has intensified its multidimensional pressure campaign. Beijing’s strategy is comprehensive: military intimidation, diplomatic isolation, economic coercion, and sophisticated influence operations designed to fracture Taiwan’s democratic society from within. This challenge is magnified by Taiwan’s internal political divisions, which extend to fundamental questions about the island’s identity and future
Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) Chairman Huang Kuo-chang (黃國昌) is expected to be summoned by the Taipei City Police Department after a rally in Taipei on Saturday last week resulted in injuries to eight police officers. The Ministry of the Interior on Sunday said that police had collected evidence of obstruction of public officials and coercion by an estimated 1,000 “disorderly” demonstrators. The rally — led by Huang to mark one year since a raid by Taipei prosecutors on then-TPP chairman and former Taipei mayor Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) — might have contravened the Assembly and Parade Act (集會遊行法), as the organizers had