The Economist article on “Ma the bumbler” certainly got plenty of reactions in Taiwan and provided Taiwanese with a new buzzword. Intentional or not, there was more.
The ironic result of this article has been that it did more than suggest President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) is a bumbler: It has exposed and pointed out what really lay at the heart of the current ineptness and incompetency of the Ma administration.
It is not so much what the article suggested, namely, “If it looks like a bumbler, talks like a bumbler and acts like a bumbler, then it is a bumbler.” Nor was it that, “A bumbler by any other name is still a bumbler.” No, what the article revealed was something worse and more deeply rooted.
The article pointed out how the Ma administration continues to operate under placating and image-saving focal constraints. These constraints remain basic elements of its core philosophy, and unfortunately for Taiwan, that philosophy is the antithesis of progress.
At the start of his administration five years ago, Ma gave a seemingly wise yet placating promise. Indicating that his general aim would be to please all sides, Ma gave the first of his three noes. With this benchmark decision, his administration stated it would henceforth guide itself by being defined by negatives.
Thus, it would not seek unification, nor would it seek independence and it would also not use military force to attack the People’s Republic of China (PRC). While the third no was probably put in just for balance, it proved to be humorous and even ludicrous in its attempt to be serious. One finds it hard to imagine that the leaders of the far superior PRC military forces would be quaking in their boots and saying to themselves, “Thank heavens, Ma has declared that he will not attack us.”
For the simple minded as well as those happy to see Ma reveal such a placating nature so openly, these first three “noes” were welcome words.
In effect, Ma was going to please everyone; certainly he could be counted on as someone who would not rock the boat, regardless of any sacrifice for Taiwan’s progress. Instead he would maintain a facade of stability in the realistic, ever-changing world of the imaginary status quo. Ma would do this by “doing nothing.” Even Taiwanese were buffaloed into believing this would bring them progress.
Of course, Ma’s words did not advance the nation. Nevertheless, now one year into his second term and with his approval rating at a dismal all time low, we still find him relying on placating negative mantras.
In working with his strongest ally, the US, Ma, instead of stating how he will build the strength of Taiwan’s half of the alliance, he has resorted to more negatives. In effect, Ma promises that his subordinates will, like him, present the image of “good little boys.”
In dealing with the US, there will be “no surprises, no time lags and no errors.” Those are pleasant but impossible words in the demanding give and take of diplomacy and they certainly do not spell progress by a man who should have Taiwan’s interests and not his image as its top priority. Nonetheless they again show that Ma’s administration has chosen to define itself by negatives.
The wisdom of defining any form of leadership by negatives or even defining the role of any government by negatives can be open to debate.
For Taiwan it is far more important to examine the effect this has on the selection of personnel. People that serve in the Ma administration do not necessarily have to have the best accomplishments in their particular area or field. Instead they will be known by their ability to avoid mistakes in “doing nothing.” In addition to this, of course, will be their loyalty to Ma and his image.
Thus, when the article in the Economist came out, the first evident thing that Ma’s people did was to focus on image control.
All sorts of excuses came out. It was the magazine’s fault for not putting “bumbler” in quotation marks; the media were at fault for misrepresentation and we even had the explanation that bumbler can translate into Mandarin in more ways than one.
No one focused on the o.bvious: that progress was lacking. No, this time image control proved more difficult than Ma’s yes-men anticipated.
Whether Ma is a bumbler is open to question, but more important is the fact that given the method of how his subordinates are chosen, there is a good chance that they will be bumblers in policy development and performance. This is something that even Ma’s own party, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) admits to.
With ample talent in the party, they question why Ma sets such loyalty as well as “do nothing” constraints on those beneath him, especially when he must realize that sooner or later platitudes and promises will not do the trick.
At this point some will object that Ma has made positive, albeit pie-in-the-sky, projections and efforts such as 6-3-3 or the Golden Decade, but as for defining his administration these do not seem to be a place where any want to go.
There is one final factor that becomes clear. Surrounded by image-protecting subordinates who can define performance by “doing nothing,” neither Ma nor his administration know how to work democratically with others, including the Democratic Progressive Party.
Ma lives in a world where he expects compliance and belief in platitudes and promises. If there is failure, his subordinates must fall on their swords.
All well and good for Ma’s image, but as for progress on the national level and a resolution of the many problems facing this fledgling democracy, this is not enough.
So what can Taiwan expect for the next three years? If it continues to define itself by negatives, and the protection of Ma’s image, the future is not that bright.
At best it will bumble along; at worst, those that benefit most from Ma’s placating negativity will seize their opportunity
Jerome Keating is a commentator in Taipei.
Late last month, Beijing introduced changes to school curricula in the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region, requiring certain subjects to be taught in Mandarin rather than Mongolian. What is Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) seeking to gain from sending this message of pernicious intent? It is possible that he is attempting cultural genocide in Inner Mongolia, but does Xi also have the same plan for the democratic, independent nation of Mongolia? The controversy emerged with the announcement by the Inner Mongolia Education Bureau on Aug. 26 that first-grade elementary-school and junior-high students would in certain subjects start learning with Chinese-language textbooks, as
There are worrying signs that China is on the brink of a major food shortage, which might trigger a strategic contest over food security and push Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), already under intense pressure, toward drastic measures, potentially spelling trouble for Taiwan and the rest of the world. China has encountered a perfect storm of disasters this year. On top of disruption due to the COVID-19 pandemic, torrential rains have caused catastrophic flooding in the Yangtze River basin, China’s largest agricultural region. Floodwaters are estimated to have already destroyed the crops on 6 million hectares of farmland. The situation has been
The restructuring of supply chains, particularly in the semiconductor industry, was an essential part of discussions last week between Taiwan and a US delegation led by US Undersecretary of State for Economic Growth, Energy and the Environment Keith Krach. It took precedent over the highly anticipated subject of bilateral trade partnerships, and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) founder Morris Chang’s (張忠謀) appearance on Friday at a dinner hosted by President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) for Krach was a subtle indicator of this. Chang was in photographs posted by Tsai on Facebook after the dinner, but no details about their discussions were disclosed. With
On Sept. 8, at the high-profile Ketagalan security forum, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) urged countries to deal with the China challenge. She said: “It is time for like-minded countries, and democratic friends in the Indo-Pacific region and beyond, to discuss a framework to generate sustained and concerted efforts to maintain a strategic order that deters unilateral aggressive actions.” The “Taiwan model” to deal with the COVID-19 pandemic provides an alternative to China’s authoritarian way of handling it. Taiwan’s response to the health crisis has made it evident that countries across the world have much to learn from Taiwan’s best practices and if