On Thursday, the Taiwan Professional Civil Engineers Association released its report on the flooding
of Sanchung City, suggesting that the Taipei City Government's Department of Rapid Transit Systems and MRT contractors share responsibility for the disaster.
But let's cut to the chase. Taipei Mayor Ma Ying-jeou's (
It makes sense for political appointees to take political responsibility. This is in no way inconsistent with the Control Yuan's investigation of administrative flaws -- they are different processes of accountability.
The flooding resulted from Taipei City's poor supervision and caused significant losses to almost 20,000 households. As a political appointee, Department of Rapid Transit Systems director Chang Chi-teh (
The Control Yuan will inspect the Tungan pumping station in Sanchung on Monday and clarify which parties are to be held responsible. So Chang will probably be investigated next week, and thus Ma's announcement that he would transfer the case to the Control Yuan for investigation was redundant. Is Ma in fact trying to avoid discussion of Chang's possible responsibility as a political appointee? Is he trying to extend the battlefront so that Chang has more room to maneuver?
Mayor Ma said he would wait for reports to be submitted before punishing officials. Seven days have passed since then, and now Ma says he will await the results of an assessment by the Control Yuan. Such vacillation points to a city government that does not take its responsibilities seriously.
Compare this to the situation in Kaohsiung when a residential block was damaged due to subsidence caused by construction of the MRT system there. The director of the Department of Rapid Transit Systems resigned immediately. This not only reinforced the idea that political appointees should take responsibility, but also showed that Mayor Frank Hsieh (謝長廷) is someone who will not shield the negligent. In this way a government can maintain public confidence.
Ma has missed two opportunities to display courage and resolve. His actions in this affair have further damaged his leadership. In 2001, when Typhoon Nari hit the country, Ma's government failed to respond in time, which resulted in extensive flooding throughout the city. This was one of the more difficult obstacles that Ma had to overcome in his re-election campaign.
Now, with tens of thousands of people suffering significant financial loss, Ma will surely find that when he steps outside his safe-haven electorate of Taipei City and runs for higher office, a political price will be paid for his behavior.
A response to my article (“Invite ‘will-bes,’ not has-beens,” Aug. 12, page 8) mischaracterizes my arguments, as well as a speech by former British prime minister Boris Johnson at the Ketagalan Forum in Taipei early last month. Tseng Yueh-ying (曾月英) in the response (“A misreading of Johnson’s speech,” Aug. 24, page 8) does not dispute that Johnson referred repeatedly to Taiwan as “a segment of the Chinese population,” but asserts that the phrase challenged Beijing by questioning whether parts of “the Chinese population” could be “differently Chinese.” This is essentially a confirmation of Beijing’s “one country, two systems” formulation, which says that
“History does not repeat itself, but it rhymes” (attributed to Mark Twain). The USSR was the international bully during the Cold War as it sought to make the world safe for Soviet-style Communism. China is now the global bully as it applies economic power and invests in Mao’s (毛澤東) magic weapons (the People’s Liberation Army [PLA], the United Front Work Department, and the Chinese Communist Party [CCP]) to achieve world domination. Freedom-loving countries must respond to the People’s Republic of China (PRC), especially in the Indo-Pacific (IP), as resolutely as they did against the USSR. In 1954, the US and its allies
Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi arrived in China yesterday, where he is to attend a summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) and Russian President Vladimir Putin today. As this coincides with the 50 percent US tariff levied on Indian products, some Western news media have suggested that Modi is moving away from the US, and into the arms of China and Russia. Taiwan-Asia Exchange Foundation fellow Sana Hashmi in a Taipei Times article published yesterday titled “Myths around Modi’s China visit” said that those analyses have misrepresented India’s strategic calculations, and attempted to view
When Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) stood in front of the Potala Palace in Lhasa on Thursday last week, flanked by Chinese flags, synchronized schoolchildren and armed Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) troops, he was not just celebrating the 60th anniversary of the establishment of the “Tibet Autonomous Region,” he was making a calculated declaration: Tibet is China. It always has been. Case closed. Except it has not. The case remains wide open — not just in the hearts of Tibetans, but in history records. For decades, Beijing has insisted that Tibet has “always been part of China.” It is a phrase