Anybody who believed the findings of the Control Yuan’s investigation into who was responsible for the infamous decision initially to refuse foreign material aid in the aftermath of Typhoon Morakot will probably also be waiting up on Thursday night hoping to glimpse Santa Claus and his reindeer.
Wednesday’s report — which reads like a student’s excuse for not doing homework — censured the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) for issuing the refusal while putting the blame for the decision to refuse offers of foreign disaster rescue expertise at the feet of Director-General of the National Fire Administration Huang Chi-min (黃季敏), deputy commander of the Central Emergency Operation Center when the typhoon struck.
While Huang may indeed — as has been reported — have suggested that no foreign rescue aid was required, it is stretching the boundaries of belief to suggest that the MOFA then issued a memo to the nation’s embassies and representative offices without getting the go-ahead from a more senior government official.
While former deputy foreign minister Andrew Hsia (夏立言) became the sacrificial lamb over the memo, the real decision maker has managed to remain hidden. This is scandalous as the delay in the arrival of foreign rescue aid without doubt contributed to deaths that could have otherwise been avoided.
The Control Yuan’s investigation and subsequent corrective measures can be seen as the government’s attempt to close the file on the Morakot disaster. They suggest that no government official will actually be held accountable for what was a gross dereliction of duty by government officials on so many different levels.
The government watchdog has once again failed to perform to its remit.
If the Control Yuan was serious about its work and if its members actually felt any remorse for the hundreds of deaths caused by Morakot it should be finding out why — if its conclusions are to believed — such low-level staffers were allowed to make such a crucial decision, impeaching those responsible and making sure that it never happens again. While doing so, it could also investigate why, if Hsia was so negligent in his duties, he was then given a cushy job as the nation’s representative to Indonesia and whether this was a pay off for him taking the fall over the memo.
But one shouldn’t expect too much from the Control Yuan. After all, this was the same body that initially refused to impeach repugnant former Government Information Office official Kuo Kuan-ying (郭冠英), only doing so after a public outcry. This is also the same Control Yuan that found a lowly engineer responsible for the Maokong Gondola fiasco.
While the idea of the Control Yuan has noble ambitions, Taiwan’s fiercely polarized political climate means that those ideals have been corrupted. This is why the Control Yuan sat idle for more than three years after former president Chen Shui-bian’s (陳水扁) nominees were stonewalled by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT)-dominated legislature and why three DPP-affiliated members nominated by Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) were rejected last year.
This is also why the current body and its majority of pan-blue sympathizers cannot effectively deal with accusations of government impropriety, no matter how serious they may be.
Until this problem is remedied, we can look forward to more of the same from the government’s toothless watchdog.
Father’s Day, as celebrated around the world, has its roots in the early 20th century US. In 1910, the state of Washington marked the world’s first official Father’s Day. Later, in 1972, then-US president Richard Nixon signed a proclamation establishing the third Sunday of June as a national holiday honoring fathers. Many countries have since followed suit, adopting the same date. In Taiwan, the celebration takes a different form — both in timing and meaning. Taiwan’s Father’s Day falls on Aug. 8, a date chosen not for historical events, but for the beauty of language. In Mandarin, “eight eight” is pronounced
In a recent essay, “How Taiwan Lost Trump,” a former adviser to US President Donald Trump, Christian Whiton, accuses Taiwan of diplomatic incompetence — claiming Taipei failed to reach out to Trump, botched trade negotiations and mishandled its defense posture. Whiton’s narrative overlooks a fundamental truth: Taiwan was never in a position to “win” Trump’s favor in the first place. The playing field was asymmetrical from the outset, dominated by a transactional US president on one side and the looming threat of Chinese coercion on the other. From the outset of his second term, which began in January, Trump reaffirmed his
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
Despite calls to the contrary from their respective powerful neighbors, Taiwan and Somaliland continue to expand their relationship, endowing it with important new prospects. Fitting into this bigger picture is the historic Coast Guard Cooperation Agreement signed last month. The common goal is to move the already strong bilateral relationship toward operational cooperation, with significant and tangible mutual benefits to be observed. Essentially, the new agreement commits the parties to a course of conduct that is expressed in three fundamental activities: cooperation, intelligence sharing and technology transfer. This reflects the desire — shared by both nations — to achieve strategic results within
RSS