When a natural disaster strikes, an analogy is often drawn between a government’s disaster relief efforts and that of its military going to battle. By this analogy, the government lost the battle of Typhoon Morakot.
President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九), as commander-in-chief, must shoulder responsibility.
Ma’s performance was so poor that Beijing and the People’s Liberation Army, which no doubt are scrutinizing his actions in the face of crisis, must be slapping themselves on the back. Never could they have imagined that Ma would be such a poor leader. They must feel that Taiwan would succumb easily to an invasion.
“I exercise strong leadership,” Ma said on Tuesday at a press conference when asked by reporters how he viewed his performance since the typhoon struck on Aug. 8.
A quick glance at poll results published by the media yesterday reveals Ma’s plunging approval rate and the public’s dissatisfaction with the government’s rescue and relief efforts. There is a huge gap between the president’s definition of “strong leadership” and the public’s appraisal.
If the government’s performance in the wake of Morakot is Ma’s idea of “strong leadership,” the public should be very concerned about the government’s capabilities.
Defending his response, Ma said bad weather was the main reason for the delay in the government’s rescue efforts, preventing it from airlifting trapped villagers.
The safety of rescue teams must be taken into consideration, but Ma could have ordered the military to launch other rescue efforts rather than waiting three days.
Surely Ma does not mean to imply that the military cannot handle bad weather. If so, he may have to beg China not to invade during a typhoon.
Within hours of the 921 Earthquake on Sept. 21, 1999, a directive was issued to all military personnel, warning that whoever failed in disaster relief would be dealt with according to military law.
The directive demonstrated the commander-in-chief’s determination and recognized the seriousness of the situation, setting an example that carried over to the troops.
This time around, military personnel were forced to wait for orders, although many soldiers were anxious to get to the disaster zone and help the victims of flooding and mudslides.
A leader’s attitude is important and sets the tone for his subordinates. If a commander seems unconcerned about rescue efforts, what is to be expected of those under him?
It should come as no surprise, then, that Premier Liu Chao-shiuan (劉兆玄) got a hair-cut and Executive Yuan Secretary-General Hsueh Hsiang-chuan (薛香川) was out dining on haute cuisine while the south faced the onslaught of Morakot.
“A competent leader can get efficient service from poor troops, while on the contrary an incapable leader can demoralize the best of troops,” late US brigadier general John Pershing once said — words that Ma should treat as counsel.
Having lived through former British prime minister Boris Johnson’s tumultuous and scandal-ridden administration, the last place I had expected to come face-to-face with “Mr Brexit” was in a hotel ballroom in Taipei. Should I have been so surprised? Over the past few years, Taiwan has unfortunately become the destination of choice for washed-up Western politicians to turn up long after their political careers have ended, making grandiose speeches in exchange for extraordinarily large paychecks far exceeding the annual salary of all but the wealthiest of Taiwan’s business tycoons. Taiwan’s pursuit of bygone politicians with little to no influence in their home
In 2025, it is easy to believe that Taiwan has always played a central role in various assessments of global national interests. But that is a mistaken belief. Taiwan’s position in the world and the international support it presently enjoys are relatively new and remain highly vulnerable to challenges from China. In the early 2000s, the George W. Bush Administration had plans to elevate bilateral relations and to boost Taiwan’s defense. It designated Taiwan as a non-NATO ally, and in 2001 made available to Taiwan a significant package of arms to enhance the island’s defenses including the submarines it long sought.
US lobbyist Christian Whiton has published an update to his article, “How Taiwan Lost Trump,” discussed on the editorial page on Sunday. His new article, titled “What Taiwan Should Do” refers to the three articles published in the Taipei Times, saying that none had offered a solution to the problems he identified. That is fair. The articles pushed back on points Whiton made that were felt partisan, misdirected or uninformed; in this response, he offers solutions of his own. While many are on point and he would find no disagreement here, the nuances of the political and historical complexities in
Taiwan faces an image challenge even among its allies, as it must constantly counter falsehoods and misrepresentations spread by its more powerful neighbor, the People’s Republic of China (PRC). While Taiwan refrains from disparaging its troublesome neighbor to other countries, the PRC is working not only to forge a narrative about itself, its intentions and value to the international community, but is also spreading lies about Taiwan. Governments, parliamentary groups and civil societies worldwide are caught in this narrative tug-of-war, each responding in their own way. National governments have the power to push back against what they know to be