The latest controversy sparked by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) government’s handling of the nation’s bid to join the Beijing-led Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) again raises serious questions about President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) competence, or lack thereof, as head of state.
Haste, flippancy and a complete disregard for communication with the legislature and the public have seemingly become the trademark of the Ma government when it conducts solemn issues of national importance. “Terrified” is a major understatement of the state of wariness many Taiwanese are feeling.
Touting that Taiwan would stand to benefit from joining the AIIB and that its participation would also help the nation’s role in regional economic development, Minister of Foreign Affairs David Lin (林永樂) on Tuesday evening confirmed that the government sent a letter of intent at 7pm that day — the deadline for interested parties to apply for founding membership of the proposed regional bank.
Time is of the essence when handling critical matters of national importance, so — if Taiwan joining the AIIB is as significant as Ma has said — why wait until the last day to submit the letter of intent?
As early as October 2013, China proposed establishing a regional infrastructure finance bank, while in October last year, a number of nations, including Singapore and India, signed a memorandum of understanding with China in Beijing in support of the proposed bank.
However, no word about the AIIB was ever mentioned by Ma or officials from his government until late last month.
Not only was there no sight of any task force set up by the government to assess the matter, Mainland Affairs Council Minister Andrew Hsia (夏立言) told legislators on Tuesday that prior to Monday this week, no inter-ministerial meeting was held by the Cabinet to deliberate the issue.
Furthermore, on March 20, Premier Mao Chi-kuo (毛治國) even said that the government would not discuss the issue until June, when the AIIB clarifies its organizational structure and regulations.
Yet, just as it took KMT Legislator Chang Ching-chung (張慶忠) a mere 30 seconds last year in the legislature to attempt to ram through a proposed version of the cross-strait service trade agreement, this time all it took was half a day for the Ma government — following a national security meeting held on Monday evening — to suddenly decide that Taiwan would submit a letter of intent to the AIIB on Tuesday.
In other words, the government’s decisionmaking process and its results are extremely hasty and flippant, and lack any kind of prior communication with the legislature and the general public.
For example, Mao said Taiwan would pledge to invest about US$200 million in the bank. Where will the money come from? In what capacity will Taiwan take part in this proposed bank? What substantial benefits will there be for Taiwan? All these are questions the government cannot answer.
Not to mention how the government said it submitted the letter to the proposed bank via China’s Taiwan Affairs Office (TAO). As the TAO is an agency run by China’s State Council that handles what Beijing considers “internal matters,” that the government used this channel to submit the application is no doubt self-degrading.
The casual and self-humiliating manner in which Ma and his administration are handling the matter shows how Ma treats governance as a joke.
After this blatant demonstration of incompetence, how can Ma expect Taiwanese to have confidence that the government under his lead can safeguard the nation from harm?
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
Ursula K. le Guin in The Ones Who Walked Away from Omelas proposed a thought experiment of a utopian city whose existence depended on one child held captive in a dungeon. When taken to extremes, Le Guin suggests, utilitarian logic violates some of our deepest moral intuitions. Even the greatest social goods — peace, harmony and prosperity — are not worth the sacrifice of an innocent person. Former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁), since leaving office, has lived an odyssey that has brought him to lows like Le Guin’s dungeon. From late 2008 to 2015 he was imprisoned, much of this