Those familiar with Taiwan’s political scene will recall the name Yu Wen (余文), a Taipei City Government staffer during President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) stint as mayor from 1998 to 2006. Following Ma’s indictment in 2006 for misusing his special allowance, Yu became a fall guy in some observers’ eyes, serving nine months in jail for failing to keep Ma’s accounts in order.
The term “Yu Wen” has since become part of Taiwan’s political lingo. It refers to a government official or agency that serves as a scapegoat and takes the heat for higher-ups.
Amid the eruption over the government’s decision to lift a ban on US beef and offal, Department of Health (DOH) Minister Yaung Chih-liang (楊志良) appears to be Ma’s latest “Yu Wen.”
A DOH statement on Friday expanding US beef imports generated public anger and infuriated lawmakers across party lines; the latter were seemingly caught off guard by the announcement amid enduring concerns over mad-cow disease.
With all arrows shooting in the DOH’s direction, Ma, in an interview published yesterday, was quick to single out his health minister, saying that Yaung should take responsibility for failing to provide the public with a clear account of the situation.
This makes little sense, as it is extremely unlikely that the DOH has the power to make the final call on issues that stray into areas of diplomatic sensitivity.
A legislative resolution passed in 2006 requires the DOH to report in detail to the legislature before lifting bans on US beef. With DOH Deputy Minister Hsiao Mei-ling (蕭美玲) openly acknowledging on Friday that the DOH announcement violated this resolution, it becomes clear that there must have been a higher authority that compelled the DOH to proceed — despite the inevitable response from the legislature.
That authority could hardly be the Cabinet, judging from Premier Wu Den-yih’s (吳敦義) rather blunt remarks on Saturday. He said: “How could I have the authority to finalize the policy? I didn’t even know the details.” It is also noteworthy that Wu endorsed the 2006 resolution as a legislator.
Factor in diplomatic concerns and it is highly unlikely that the DOH or the premier would have dared to make the “final call” on US beef without a directive from — or at least the blessing of — the Presidential Office and the National Security Council.
Presidential Office Spokesman Wang Yu-chi (王郁琦) on Saturday said the lifting of the beef ban was a “joint decision” in which the government acted in concert. This is hopelessly inconsistent with Ma’s attack on the health minister.
Since Ma took office, a disturbing pattern has developed in which lower-order government officials shoulder responsibility for disasters created by their superiors. Such Yu Wen figures include then-director-general of highways James Chen (陳晉源) — the only official to take responsibility in September last year when floodwater caused the Houfeng Bridge (后豐橋) to collapse, claiming six lives — and then-deputy minister Andrew Hsia (夏立言), who took the heat for the government’s initial rejection of foreign aid in the wake of Typhoon Morakot in August.
The more “Yu Wen” figures there are, the more Taiwan will suffer as it endures an incompetent government lined with officials who bask in their power but shy away from responsibility.
Will a real decision-maker stand up?
Why is Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) not a “happy camper” these days regarding Taiwan? Taiwanese have not become more “CCP friendly” in response to the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) use of spies and graft by the United Front Work Department, intimidation conducted by the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) and the Armed Police/Coast Guard, and endless subversive political warfare measures, including cyber-attacks, economic coercion, and diplomatic isolation. The percentage of Taiwanese that prefer the status quo or prefer moving towards independence continues to rise — 76 percent as of December last year. According to National Chengchi University (NCCU) polling, the Taiwanese
It would be absurd to claim to see a silver lining behind every US President Donald Trump cloud. Those clouds are too many, too dark and too dangerous. All the same, viewed from a domestic political perspective, there is a clear emerging UK upside to Trump’s efforts at crashing the post-Cold War order. It might even get a boost from Thursday’s Washington visit by British Prime Minister Keir Starmer. In July last year, when Starmer became prime minister, the Labour Party was rigidly on the defensive about Europe. Brexit was seen as an electorally unstable issue for a party whose priority
US President Donald Trump is systematically dismantling the network of multilateral institutions, organizations and agreements that have helped prevent a third world war for more than 70 years. Yet many governments are twisting themselves into knots trying to downplay his actions, insisting that things are not as they seem and that even if they are, confronting the menace in the White House simply is not an option. Disagreement must be carefully disguised to avoid provoking his wrath. For the British political establishment, the convenient excuse is the need to preserve the UK’s “special relationship” with the US. Following their White House
US President Donald Trump’s return to the White House has brought renewed scrutiny to the Taiwan-US semiconductor relationship with his claim that Taiwan “stole” the US chip business and threats of 100 percent tariffs on foreign-made processors. For Taiwanese and industry leaders, understanding those developments in their full context is crucial while maintaining a clear vision of Taiwan’s role in the global technology ecosystem. The assertion that Taiwan “stole” the US’ semiconductor industry fundamentally misunderstands the evolution of global technology manufacturing. Over the past four decades, Taiwan’s semiconductor industry, led by Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), has grown through legitimate means
RSS