|
Is Ma a politician or a statesman?
Thursday, May 20, 2010, Page 8
James Freeman Clarke, a US minister and author, once said: “A politician thinks
of the next election. A statesman of the next generation.” Echoing this insight
is the recent debate on whether government policies should focus on immediate
gain or long-term vision.
The opposition is drafting a 10-year political program, while the government is
planning to outline its “2020 national vision and strategy.” Both attempt to
claim the mantle of statesman.
The reason lawmakers care so much about the difference between politicians and
statesmen is that they crave everlasting victory, not just temporary electoral
gain. This is a rule of politics that is as immutable as time itself.
Is our current leader a politician or a statesman? We cannot make a final
verdict until the end of his term in office, but it is not difficult to conclude
that this government cares most about winning elections and that such an
approach has resulted in expediency, populist tendencies and a lack of political
ideals and values.
One example is the question of whether Taiwan should retain or abolish capital
punishment. This a very serious issue closely related to the preservation of
social order and human rights. To come to a conclusion not only requires
extensive public debate to forge a consensus, but also improved public education
and as few executions as possible. The government also needs to come up with a
comprehensive package of supplementary measures.
For years both sides of the capital punishment debate have made vociferous calls
to arms and there has been no sign of the two groups moving any closer to each
other.
In dealing with such a sensitive and developing public policy, a mature
government would consider the concerns of each side and promote rational public
dialogue. In contrast, faced with the controversy of a minister opposed to
signing execution orders, President Ma Ying Jeou’s (馬英九) government only made a
bad situation worse.
At first the government hesitated and avoided the issue out of concern for its
human rights reputation, but after a well known TV entertainer — who had had a
family member murdered — threatened a no-vote protest, the government changed
its mind overnight and the justice minister was forced to resign. The new
justice minister then hastily carried out four executions, raising difficult
questions about how the four death row inmates in question were chosen. The
government’s response drew strong criticism, accusations of political
manipulation and condemnation from the EU.
Throughout this whole process, there was nothing to imply that Ma was following
any kind of conviction or thought-out political view. First he appointed a
justice minister who was clearly in favor of abolishing capital punishment and
declined to interfere with her decision not to carry out death sentences as
required by law. Then, to calm voters, he publicly praised Wang Wen-hsieh (王文燮)
for developing the silencer used with rifles during executions when serving as
commander-in-chief of the Combined Logistics Command during Ma’s tenure as
justice minister in the mid-1990s.
Taiwan has long had clear laws stipulating the conditions required for the
government to pay national compensation — including a detailed application
process and rules on how compensation is paid. However, after the recent
landslide on National Freeway No. 3 that resulted in the deaths of four people,
Ma’s promises to “assist” victims applying for national compensation caused a
backlash. This happened because such words immediately brought to mind earlier
promises he made to victims of the collapses of the Fengciuming Tunnel in Nantou
County, Shuangyuan Bridge on Highway 17 which connects Kaohsiung and Pingtung
counties, Provincial Highway 16 during Typhoon Morakot and a makeshift road in
Siaolin Village (小林) in Kaohsiung County. When the victims of those disasters
applied for national compensation, they were turned down despite initial
promises of compensation made by politicians.
This resulted in a public outcry that only died down when the Ministry of
Transportation and Communications caved and promised to reopen the procedure for
national compensation. In light of such flip-flopping, some are now arguing that
the government’s credibility, law enforcement standards and the code of conduct
that supposedly guides the system have vanished. Why? The answer again is that
political hacks value votes above all else.
A plan to assign 25 hectares of land at the 202 Munitions Works in Taipei City’s
Nangang district (南港) to Academia Sinica for the development of a national
biotechnology development park has attracted a lot of attention recently, as has
the plan to use the site’s remaining 144 hectares as a special industrial zone
for Hon Hai Group and other large companies.
These plans were already subject to the urban development review process, but
when well-known author and Ma supporter Chang Hsiao-feng (張曉風) kneeled and
begged him to stop the plan on national television, it seemed to scare our
political leaders, with their overriding concern for image. In point of fact,
opposition legislators and city councilors have been questioning the complex
corporate interest, environmental and urban space issues involved in the
development of the site for more than a year.
The situation would have been resolved a long time ago if those in power had
listened, but the KMT, with its big majority, ignored all protests. When a
cultural personality who supports Ma spoke up, however, an inspection tour of
the area was immediately organized for Chang, as if such a show were sufficient
to cover up the back door nature of the decision making process. This shows how
the vulgarization of our democratic system has really been pushed to new
extremes.
With May 20 just around the corner, Ma has reached the mid-point of his term in
office. Most people probably have their own opinion as to the balance between
political hack and statesman he has exhibited so far. Given this situation, Ma
would do well to think hard about what he hopes to achieve over the next two
years instead of bragging about how he will create another “golden decade” for
Taiwan.
Unfortunately, time is running out. Over the course of the next 22 months, three
major politician-distracting elections are scheduled. Can one really believe
that Ma will stop focusing all his energy on elections and instead show concern
for the well-being of future generations?
|
