Compared with many other nations, the Taiwanese government has reacted with admirable speed and efficiency to the outbreak of a new coronavirus in China, starting with the establishment on Jan. 20 of a Central Epidemic Command Center (CECC), before the nation began a week-long break for the Lunar New Year holiday.
It also pushed through the Special Act on COVID-19 Prevention, Relief and Restoration (嚴重特殊傳染性肺炎防治及紓困振興特別條例) in record time: The bill was submitted to the legislature on Thursday last week, lawmakers approved it on Tuesday and President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) signed it just hours later.
One key reason might be that the people in the nation’s top three posts — Tsai, Premier Su Tseng-chang (蘇貞昌) and Vice President Chen Chien-jen (陳建仁) — were all members of the former Democratic Progressive Party administration during the SARS outbreak in 2003, with Chen, an epidemiologist by training, serving as minister of health, and were quick to recognize that a crisis was developing.
Yet like many other governments, Taiwan was caught unprepared by the immediate and widespread public demand for masks and disinfectants, forcing it to step in not only to help produce masks, but to implement a rationing system.
However, the government’s commitment to the free flow of information, with daily CECC news conferences and social media posts, has helped keep the public informed about the spread of the virus, travel alerts, entry restrictions and new policy measures — a sharp contrast to Beijing’s efforts to restrict access to information and the use of Chinese Communist Party propaganda departments to focus coverage on uplifting stories and stress that the party’s leaders have everything under control.
Beijing has also tried to shape the same narrative internationally, spoon-feeding data to an increasingly tame WHO, leading Xinhua news agency on Monday to trumpet that a 25-member WHO team on a nine-day tour of the country had hailed China for playing “a critical role in protecting the international community, buying precious time for countries to adopt active prevention and control measures, and providing them with worthwhile experience.”
Famed Chinese epidemiologist Zhong Nanshan (鍾南山) even told a news conference this week that the virus had peaked in China and the outbreak should be under control by April, before suggesting that it might not have originated in China after all.
Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs Commissioner in Hong Kong Xie Feng (謝鋒), in an opinion piece published yesterday in the New York Times, continued to promote this pretense, writing that Beijing “has kept the public informed with daily updates, and has solicited the people’s suggestions and complaints via the Internet and social media platforms,” adding that “it has been highly responsive to public opinion.”
That is certainly not the view of many people in or outside China, or of the South China Morning Post team, who on Thursday published a special investigative report into the outbreak, titled “How Disease X, the epidemic-in-waiting, erupted in China.”
The CECC’s efforts have not always been smooth, and there are lessons that can be learned, for future crises or to be implemented now.
The daily press briefings are admirable, but have sometimes created more confusion, as policy measures are announced in broad strokes, with details left to be worked out later.
The announcements on mask rationing, paid parental leave, the closing of a class or a school if a student is confirmed to have COVID-19 and a temporary ban on medical personnel traveling abroad raised more questions than answers — especially among local government officials who have to comply with the evolving measures.
It has also not helped that the answers to some of those questions have also changed daily. There is truth to the maxim that the devil is in the details.
It might be worth taking an extra day, or two, to work out all the details before announcing something as drastic as a travel ban for doctors and nurses, or starting consultations earlier with groups organizing major sports events or pilgrimages.
The past few months have seen tremendous strides in India’s journey to develop a vibrant semiconductor and electronics ecosystem. The nation’s established prowess in information technology (IT) has earned it much-needed revenue and prestige across the globe. Now, through the convergence of engineering talent, supportive government policies, an expanding market and technologically adaptive entrepreneurship, India is striving to become part of global electronics and semiconductor supply chains. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Vision of “Make in India” and “Design in India” has been the guiding force behind the government’s incentive schemes that span skilling, design, fabrication, assembly, testing and packaging, and
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
As former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) wrapped up his visit to the People’s Republic of China, he received his share of attention. Certainly, the trip must be seen within the full context of Ma’s life, that is, his eight-year presidency, the Sunflower movement and his failed Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement, as well as his eight years as Taipei mayor with its posturing, accusations of money laundering, and ups and downs. Through all that, basic questions stand out: “What drives Ma? What is his end game?” Having observed and commented on Ma for decades, it is all ironically reminiscent of former US president Harry
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.