Given that it was the presidential inauguration, Sunday should have been a joyous occasion, but few felt like smiling. President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) received 51.6 percent of the votes in the Jan. 14 election, handing him a second term in office and yet, even before he was sworn in, many were regretting their decision. Tens of thousands of people took to the streets on Sunday calling on Ma to step down and the media, regardless of political affiliation, are unanimous in their criticism and disapproval of the government’s performance. Premier Sean Chen’s (陳冲) fledgling Cabinet is already in peril, but how have things come to this?
It is true that Ma’s popularity has been this low before — in the first year of his presidency, in fact, following the government’s poor handling of the Typhoon Morakot disaster in 2008. Looking back over how he dealt with things back then and how he is handling the current crisis, it would seem that Ma has not learned from his mistakes. Things that the public and the press were complaining about then are similar to what they are irked with now.
There is something about the way Ma’s personality traits — his elitism, his narcissism, his preoccupation with his public image have conspired to create a distance between him and ordinary folk. Even his “long stay” initiative was mere pre-election political posturing and he was only able to pull it off the first time round. If the initiative had succeeded in closing that distance during his re-election campaign, Ma would have had an easy stroll in the election. As it turned out, he had a battle on his hands.
From the start, Ma has considered himself above anyone else and finds it hard to countenance legislators who are elected by grass-roots voters. In his eyes, the legislature is little more than a cabal of troublemakers.
There are quite a few people with doctorates in Ma’s Cabinet — in fact, it may be one of the world’s most educated, but while the academic credentials are impressive, the current Cabinet’s members are clueless about how the other half live. They are aloof and possessed of grandiose schemes, but lack the ability to implement these schemes and have entirely no sense of how to work as a team. They have too much in common with Ma and are utterly unaware of the system’s potential pitfalls, which explains how they can make ill-considered decisions such as the fuel and electricity price hikes. There was no holding back Minister of Finance Christina Liu (劉憶如) when she got into her head the idea of taxing capital gains on stock transactions, announcing the policy before the sums had been done. Consequently, the government was caught unawares by the public’s anger at the policy.
Even though Ma can see how angry people are, don’t hold your breath: There will be no change on planned price hikes; the relaxing of the ban on US beef imports containing the leanness-enhancer ractopamine will go ahead; the government will still levy its capital gains tax; there will be no shift regarding plans to construct the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant; and the Cabinet will remain unchanged. When all this passes, everything will be as it was before, with little or no consultation or communication on policy. The public will have to do as the government says, as it has no intention of changing course.
Ma would do well to reflect on how previous presidents and administrations interacted with the public. For example, he could look at how former president Chiang Ching-kuo (蔣經國) made himself accessible to ordinary Taiwanese, or how former president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) canvassed the opinions of public think tanks, civic groups and local community leaders and consulted with them on major policy formation.
Ma’s closed-door approach to policy formation is at the root of the crisis facing his administration. From the experience of the past four years, however, it’s not going to be easy to resolve this crisis.
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
Every day since Oct. 7 last year, the world has watched an unprecedented wave of violence rain down on Israel and the occupied Palestinian Territories — more than 200 days of constant suffering and death in Gaza with just a seven-day pause. Many of us in the American expatriate community in Taiwan have been watching this tragedy unfold in horror. We know we are implicated with every US-made “dumb” bomb dropped on a civilian target and by the diplomatic cover our government gives to the Israeli government, which has only gotten more extreme with such impunity. Meantime, multicultural coalitions of US