Resignations have attained outrageous significance since Chen Shui-bian (
Over the past two years, rarely has a week passed when we didn't hear cries for some official to step down. Is it essential or even necessary that officials should consider resigning to assume responsibility, real or perceived, for every little thing that happens?
The Japanese are very quick to take responsibility for the mistakes they make, while the Americans, in contrast, are not. In Japan, for instance, after a civilian airliner crashes, in addition to the airline's CEO, the transportation minister will likely also resign.
However, we seldom hear about a US official stepping down to take even political responsibility unless asked by his superior to do so. For example, no senior US official has yet resigned to take responsibility for the failure to avert the Sept. 11 attacks.
Is the Japanese political culture more advanced than the American one? The answer is obviously "no." More so than the Japanese, the Americans are inclined to investigate first rather than sweep the case under the rug after the resignation of an official alleged to be responsible. This is the reason US President George W. Bush appointed Henry Kissinger to head the investigation of the terrorist attacks on the US.
Late in 2000, while serving as vice premier, Yu Shyi-kun resigned to take responsibility for the Pachang Creek tragedy. Yu was subsequently praised for his noble act. While his resignation spared the Chen administration from continuing criticism for the failure to save these four lives, Yu set, in my opinion, a bad example.
In the first place, the local authorities in Chiayi County were more to blame for the tragic failure than the central authorities in this particular case. Second, Yu's action seemed to have raised the expectation that every time there is a political blunder, real or otherwise, there is an outcry for the heads of officials, the higher the better.
In November, for instance, critics in the media and political circles demanded that a number of high officials should resign for various reasons. These included top representative to the US Chen Chien-jen (
If Taiwan is to have political stability and maturity, critics must not be so quick to demand that high officials step down. It is unreasonable to expect the officials of any administration to be faultless.
When a political mistake is made, it is better that the official involved, in most cases, be allowed a chance to learn from the mistakes. More importantly, frustrated officials should not readily yield to pressure for their resignations, let alone volunteer to resign. If necessary, create a commission for investigating the case thoroughly. Without facts, how is it possible to learn anything from the experience?
In short, if it is not transformed, the existing culture of resignation will not only continue to make the people of Taiwan look foolish, but will also have a significant negative impact on the nation's progress in general.
Chen Ching-chih is professor emeritus of history at Southern Illinois University at Edwardsville, Illinois.
The Chinese government on March 29 sent shock waves through the Tibetan Buddhist community by announcing the untimely death of one of its most revered spiritual figures, Hungkar Dorje Rinpoche. His sudden passing in Vietnam raised widespread suspicion and concern among his followers, who demanded an investigation. International human rights organization Human Rights Watch joined their call and urged a thorough investigation into his death, highlighting the potential involvement of the Chinese government. At just 56 years old, Rinpoche was influential not only as a spiritual leader, but also for his steadfast efforts to preserve and promote Tibetan identity and cultural
Former minister of culture Lung Ying-tai (龍應台) has long wielded influence through the power of words. Her articles once served as a moral compass for a society in transition. However, as her April 1 guest article in the New York Times, “The Clock Is Ticking for Taiwan,” makes all too clear, even celebrated prose can mislead when romanticism clouds political judgement. Lung crafts a narrative that is less an analysis of Taiwan’s geopolitical reality than an exercise in wistful nostalgia. As political scientists and international relations academics, we believe it is crucial to correct the misconceptions embedded in her article,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
US President Trump weighed into the state of America’s semiconductor manufacturing when he declared, “They [Taiwan] stole it from us. They took it from us, and I don’t blame them. I give them credit.” At a prior White House event President Trump hosted TSMC chairman C.C. Wei (魏哲家), head of the world’s largest and most advanced chip manufacturer, to announce a commitment to invest US$100 billion in America. The president then shifted his previously critical rhetoric on Taiwan and put off tariffs on its chips. Now we learn that the Trump Administration is conducting a “trade investigation” on semiconductors which
RSS