Tsai Ing-wen's Attempt to Please Everyone is Unsustainable

Tsai Ing-wen's Attempt to Please Everyone is Unsustainable
United Daily News Editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC) 
A Translation 
August 16, 2016

Executive Summary: President Tsai Ing-wen's nominations for Judicial Yuan president have encountered intense resistance. As a result, the President withdrew her nomination of Hsieh Wen-ting and Lin Ching-fang. This is the most serious defeat she has encountered since taking office. Her policy of "one fixed day off and one flexible rest day", and her policy on South China Sea arbitration caused her popularity to plummet. Her nominations for the Judicial Yuan touched off a firestorm within the green camp. Her attempt to curry favor with everyone has hit a brick wall.

Full Text Below:

President Tsai Ing-wen's nominations for Judicial Yuan president have encountered intense resistance. As a result, the President withdrew her nomination of Hsieh Wen-ting and Lin Ching-fang. This is the most serious defeat she has encountered since taking office. Her policy of "one fixed day off and one flexible rest day", and her policy on South China Sea arbitration caused her popularity to plummet. Her nominations for the Judicial Yuan touched off a firestorm within the green camp. Her attempt to curry favor with everyone has hit a brick wall.

Tsai's hasty withdrawal of her nominations humiliated Hsieh Wen-ting and Lin Ching-fang. Tsai Ing-wen realizes her nominations were ill considered. But she is afraid to defend her decision. Even more seriously, the Tsai government trumpeted "judicial reform". But her actions led to heavy casualties, and scorn heaped upon her nominees. They muddied the waters of the judicial system, and left all parties in a state of anxiety.

Tsai Ing-wen's setback is comparable to that suffered by Ma Ying-jeou in 2008. Ma Ying-jeou's victory led to a second change in ruling parties. He nominated non-KMT member Shen Fu-hsiung as vice president of the Control Yuan. But Shen was brutally rejected by blue camp members of the Legislative Yuan. The next day, Chang Chun-yen, Ma's nominee for President of the National Chiao Tung University, was rejected by the blue camp. Chang was implicated in the Wayne Pai suicide incident, and forced to withdraw his name from nomination. Shen Fu-hsiung and Chang Chun-yen were rejected as nominees. Ma Ying-jeou's victory was undermined by anti-Ma blue camp legislators, sowing the seeds for the KMT's downfall.

Tsai Ying-wen withdrew her nominations. Ma Ying-jeou sat back and watched as blue camp legislators rejected his nominations. Eight years later, Tsai Ing-wen is covering the same ground. It is difficult to say which approach was more sensible. Both approaches treated the affairs of state as child's play. Failed nominations represent more than personal defeat. They represent an undermining of authority. The Justice Yuan nomination was supposed to promote "judicial reform". No progress has been made in judicial reform. Meanwhile a bungled nomination humiliated two heavyweights. When the political climate is this vicious, when pitfalls are everywhere, who is going to want to join the cause of reform?

President Tsai announced the withdrawal of her nominations. One the one hand, she sought to appease opponents within the legal profession and the green camp. On the other hand, she “regretted” the attacks against Hsieh and Lin, and said they must bear personal responsibility. Tsai has adopted this "hedging one's bets" tactic consistently during her three months in office. This ambiguous and evasive approach has only made policy making more difficult.

The examples are too numerous to list. For example, when China Airlines flight attendants went on strike, Tsai Ing-wen initially expressed support. But doing so encouraged unions in every industry, particulary the transportation industry, to follow suit. When she publicly called for a "two-day weekend", she created a dilemma for the Executive Yuan, which could not reconcile "one fixed day off and one flexible rest day", with "one day of rest every seven days". When pandered to Washington in the South China Sea case, she undermined our sovereignty over Taiping Island. When she pandered to Tokyo, she elevated Cong Zi Niao Reef to the status of an “island”, while demoting Taiping Island to the status of a “reef”. She persecuted fishermen who asserted our sovereignty over Taiping Island, provoking widespread public outrage.

Tsai Ing-wen has made numerous 180 degree policy reverals. She and her cabinet have committed a long string of faux pas, one after the other. Many say the new government needs more time to coordinate with the party. But President Tsai has been in office for three months, and has yet to achieve anything of substance. The DPP government continues to make political hay from historical grievances. It talks a great game of reform. But talk is all it is. Most disappointing of all, are the personnel changes at state-owned enterprises and foundations. They are pure political patronage among factions within the party. They are textbook examples of the good driving out the bad, per Gresham's Law.

In fact, the president's job is not to please everyone. It is to present a vision to the nation, and to allocate resources to ensure the greatest good for the greatest number. Tsai Ing-wen's over-eagerness to please certain groups, has made her lose sight of the big picture. For example, excessive favoritism towards taxi drivers, may deprive consumers of the convenience provided by Uber. Unscrupulous promotion of solar energy, may bring disaster to agricultural land. Modifying the curriculum to please students may create a educational Frankenstein.  Pandering to certain “ethnic” groups while demonizing others, may perpetuate hatred within society.

Tsai Ing-wen withdrew her nomination for Justice Yuan President. This was more than a failed appointment. It was a badly needed wake up call for her leadership policy. At this point, Tsai really does need to "think again".

聯合／蔡英文面面討好之路線難以為繼
2016-08-16 01:18 聯合報 聯合報社論

由於司法院長提名面對強烈反彈，蔡英文總統宣布撤回謝文定和林錦芳的人事咨文，寫下她就任以來最大挫敗。在勞工「一例一休」及南海仲裁案導致她聲望下跌後，司法院長提名事件更將火勢引回綠營內部，說明蔡英文意圖面面討好的施政路線已面臨碰壁。

倉卒撤回提名，不僅是對謝文定和林錦芳的羞辱，也說明蔡英文承認自己的提名考慮欠周，且怯於為自己的選擇辯護。更嚴重的是，蔡政府這項人事任命原標舉「司法改革」大旗，結果未出師即損兵折將，讓提名者備受攻訐；這也攪動司法體系的一池渾水，使各方均感焦躁。

蔡英文這次受挫，和馬英九二○○八年的遭遇大可一比。當年，馬英九挾締造二次政黨輪替的大勝之姿，提名非國民黨籍的沈富雄出任監察院副院長，卻在國會慘遭藍委杯葛中箭落馬。次日，被提名出任考試院長的交大校長張俊彥，也因藍委反對及遭渲染與白文正自殺案有關，主動宣布退出提名。沈富雄和張俊彥的提名失敗，使馬英九的勝選氣勢受到頓挫，藍軍在國會的反馬勢力也就此集結，種下國民黨分崩離析之禍因。

蔡英文主動撤回人事咨文，比起馬英九坐視藍軍依自由意志否決提名人選，前後八年覆轍重蹈，很難說何者更為明智。因為，兩種作法都不啻將國家名器當成兒戲，提名挫敗不止關係個人榮辱，名器也遭到踐踏，公權力更失去尊嚴。司法院長的異動美其名是為了推動「司法改革」，如今改革一步未邁，卻因手腕太差先蹧蹋兩名大將。當政治氣氛惡劣至此，誰還願投身陷阱四布的改革大業？

蔡總統此次宣布撤回咨文，一方面是為了安撫法界和學界親綠團體的反對者，另一方面她也聲稱對謝、林二人遭攻擊深感「不捨」，並稱責任應由自己承擔。值得注意的是，這種「面面俱到」的行事風格，三個月來在蔡英文的施政中不斷出現；也因此，形成決策上的取巧與曖昧，卻也留下缺乏果斷、出爾反爾的後果，造成許多政策瞻顧難決。

這類的事例，不勝枚舉。例如，蔡英文在華航空服員罷工的第一時間跳出來表示支持，就親手埋下了各行各業──尤其是運輸產業工會群起效尤的導火線；她公開表態要求落實「周休二日」時，就使得行政院「一例一休」和「七休一」的決策陷入有理說不清的地步。她為了討好美國，就在南海仲裁案掉入太平島主權遭矮化的泥淖；為了討好日本，不僅造成「沖之鳥是島、太平島變礁」的錯亂，也因打壓爭主權的漁民而引發社會的不滿。

對於蔡英文上任後的諸多政策「髮夾彎」及閣員的言行失當，許多民眾其實抱著寬容的態度，認為應該多給新政府一些時間，以利黨政磨合。然而，蔡總統就任至今即將滿三個月，民眾其實並未看到多少實質建樹，卻只見到民進黨政府不斷在歷史餘燼中撈取剩餘價值；各種改革大話連連，然只聞口頭許諾，行動卻完全無法跟上。最令人失望的是，許多國營事業乃至基金會的人事異動，不僅充滿討好黨內各派系的酬庸氣味，甚至到了良莠不分及劣幣驅逐良幣的地步。

總統的角色其實不在四面示好，而在整合國家的視野與資源，並作出最符合多數人利益及社會集體前景的配置。就這點看，蔡英文過度急於討好特殊團體的傾向，可能妨礙了她的整體瞻矚。例如，過度偏袒計程車司機，就得犧牲Uber的便捷；推廣太陽能不擇手段，就會給農地帶來災難；為修改課綱而討好學生，就會產生四不像的教育怪獸；不斷向某些族群示好並鬥爭其他族群，就會為社會製造新的戾氣與仇恨。

蔡英文撤回司法院長提名咨文，其實不只是一次人事任命的失敗，也是她領導哲學的一記警鐘。至此，確實需要「再想想」了。