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.
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS