In an advanced democracy, leadership is more about the power to persuade and bargain than to dictate and manipulate.
Recent cases in East Asia have shown that popular leaders are enjoying shorter and shorter honeymoon periods after taking office. The decision by President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) to replace Premier Liu Chao-hsiuan (劉兆玄) with Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) secretary-general Wu Den-yih (吳敦義) over the government’s poor handling of Typhoon Morakot is a good example of this political cycle.
Ma is following in the footsteps of other Asian leaders by making mistakes such as failing to honor a promise to bring the economy back on track. If Ma had not raised voters’ expectations that he could achieve a growth rate of 6 percent, US$30,000 in per capita income and an unemployment rate of 3 percent, they would not feel so frustrated and regretful for voting him into office.
Furthermore, the Ma administration has been preoccupied with China-centric policies while overlooking government efficiency and discipline. The incompetent and inefficient response to the typhoon therefore cost Ma a premier and a Cabinet.
Will replacing the premier and most members of the Cabinet restore Ma’s declining domestic support? Can the new team of Premier Wu and Vice Premier Eric Chu (朱立倫) rebuild public confidence?
The Cabinet reshuffle was the only option for Ma if he wanted to survive the reminder of this term. But if the rationale was to pave the way for two sets of local elections, voters will punish the president for his political miscalculation.
What exactly went wrong with Ma’s leadership? In most cases, it is his attitude. Ma continues to highlight the 58 percent of the vote that he received at the last presidential election and has tried to use this to push through China-leaning policies without legislative oversight or considering criticism by the opposition. The Liu Cabinet’s slow and arrogant response to the typhoon also reflected a serious lack of connectedness with the needs of ordinary people.
Moreover, Ma and his Cabinet failed to use their authority to persuade the public on key issues and avoided consulting the opposition. Even with the KMT government controlling the executive and legislative branches, Ma needs to better utilize reconciliation to bridge social division and establish domestic consensus, particularly on cross-strait policy.
The efficacy of persuasion determines whether Ma should be aggressive or conciliatory in advancing major policies. Should he forge ahead boldly or focus instead on incremental change? Is it time to run up the flag and charge, or to mediate differences and attempt to move to a consensus step by step? Should he listen more to what voters are saying or concentrate exclusively on his agenda?
Ma should rely more on “issue” rather than “image” to build domestic support. Especially with bold initiatives, leaving voters behind is not an act of leadership but of self-indulgence and arrogance. Hence, the inability to strike a balance between foreign, cross-strait and domestic policies demonstrates weakness in the Ma administration.
In contrast to the Liu Cabinet’s academic background and bureaucratic thinking, the appointment of Wu and Chu reflects Ma’s desire to rely more on experienced, campaign-capable politicians. Wu and Chu developed their political skills in the rank and file, local government, the legislature and top posts in the KMT. Both are considered potential successors to Ma. Chu especially could be Ma’s running mate in 2012.
But if the new arrangement is solely aimed at strengthening Ma’s credentials through “pork barrel” politics and “black gold” political skullduggery to capture local elections to be held in a few months, Ma and the Wu Cabinet will be punished.
The public is more politically savvy and dispassionate over government performance and responsiveness than some might think. Ma and his new Cabinet must therefore bend their knees and lower their voices. A leader who indulges his personality, whether angry or conciliatory, at the expense of the public mood is guilty of hubris.
Liu Shih-chung is a visiting fellow at the Center for Northeast Asian Policy Studies at the Brookings Institution in Washington.
On May 7, 1971, Henry Kissinger planned his first, ultra-secret mission to China and pondered whether it would be better to meet his Chinese interlocutors “in Pakistan where the Pakistanis would tape the meeting — or in China where the Chinese would do the taping.” After a flicker of thought, he decided to have the Chinese do all the tape recording, translating and transcribing. Fortuitously, historians have several thousand pages of verbatim texts of Dr. Kissinger’s negotiations with his Chinese counterparts. Paradoxically, behind the scenes, Chinese stenographers prepared verbatim English language typescripts faster than they could translate and type them
More than 30 years ago when I immigrated to the US, applied for citizenship and took the 100-question civics test, the one part of the naturalization process that left the deepest impression on me was one question on the N-400 form, which asked: “Have you ever been a member of, involved in or in any way associated with any communist or totalitarian party anywhere in the world?” Answering “yes” could lead to the rejection of your application. Some people might try their luck and lie, but if exposed, the consequences could be much worse — a person could be fined,
Xiaomi Corp founder Lei Jun (雷軍) on May 22 made a high-profile announcement, giving online viewers a sneak peek at the company’s first 3-nanometer mobile processor — the Xring O1 chip — and saying it is a breakthrough in China’s chip design history. Although Xiaomi might be capable of designing chips, it lacks the ability to manufacture them. No matter how beautifully planned the blueprints are, if they cannot be mass-produced, they are nothing more than drawings on paper. The truth is that China’s chipmaking efforts are still heavily reliant on the free world — particularly on Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing
Keelung Mayor George Hsieh (謝國樑) of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) on Tuesday last week apologized over allegations that the former director of the city’s Civil Affairs Department had illegally accessed citizens’ data to assist the KMT in its campaign to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) councilors. Given the public discontent with opposition lawmakers’ disruptive behavior in the legislature, passage of unconstitutional legislation and slashing of the central government’s budget, civic groups have launched a massive campaign to recall KMT lawmakers. The KMT has tried to fight back by initiating campaigns to recall DPP lawmakers, but the petition documents they
RSS