The uphill battle to critizise the Taiwan administration

 

I’m starting to feel even more sorry for the opposition parties in Taiwan. Every day they hurl criticism at the administration only to make themselves look petty and foolish.

Most of their brickbats serve only to highlight what an excellent job the President and her team are doing. By global standards, a world-beating performance during the entire Covid crisis and an economy that is only intact but doing well is amazing when you compare with what is happening elsewhere in the world. 

I lived through the entire Covid crisis in Taiwan and constantly had messages from friends in the UK about how awful things were there. The UK is a developed G7 country with a fully mature democracy and has three times the population of Taiwan, by contrast,  Taiwan is a young democracy and not even recognised by the United Nations.

The global list of GDP per capita at purchasing power parity, Taiwan ranks 25th, the UK 37th and the US 15th. Make no mistake, Taiwan already plays alongside the big boys when it comes to economic performance when allowing for its size and population.

If you build on this thought and consider Taiwan has political pressures from abroad that would horrify the likes of the UK and the US, it holds its own amazingly well on the world stage. 

There is always room of criticism, but look at the UK where gas prices have just surged over 400 percent, the supermarket shelves are empty because of Brexit and Covid, hospitals are full, taxes are being raised, petrol is being rationed and a major topic in the press is whether there will be enough toys and food for the Christmas celebrations in a few months time. I weep for the country of my birth and the shocking state it finds itself in now...all the fault of the administration.

I hear the opposition in Taiwan saying “We should be like other countries.” Whatever the subject, albeit Covid, vaccinations or the economy...I think not. Other countries are largely getting it wrong for all sorts of reasons. Taiwan is a bastion of stability in a world slowly going mad and becoming more unstable. 

So feel some sympathy for the opposition parties when they rant and rave and stamp their feet. They really don’t have anything to criticize and must be hugely frustrated. 

It’s a little like telling Leonardo da Vinci he didn’t get the eyes quite right on The Mona Lisa.  

Tinkerty Tonk...

《批評台灣政府的苦戰》

我越來越為台灣的在野黨感到悲傷，他們每天都向政府提出批評，但卻只讓自己顯得小氣和愚蠢。

他們大多數的攻擊，其實都只突顯出台灣總統和她的團隊表現其實是很出色的。就全球標準來看，甚至與世界其他地方正在發生的情況相較，台灣對 Covid 病毒的控制，期間維持經濟運作甚至表現良好，令人驚艷。

過去兩年我住在台灣，疫情期間不斷收到來自英國親友的消息，告訴我那裡的一切有多糟糕。英國是 G7 發達國家，有完全成熟的民主，人口是台灣的三倍。相比之下，台灣是一個年輕的民主國家，甚至沒有得到聯合國的承認。

然而全球按購買力平價計算的人均GDP排行榜，台灣排名第25位，英國第37位，美國第15位。不必懷疑，在考慮大小和人口的情況下，台灣在經濟表現方面已經與一些世界大國並駕齊驅。

如果你以這個想法為出發點，並考慮到台灣面臨來自境外的政治壓力，那會讓英國和美國等國感到驚恐。然而台灣在世界舞台上的表現，卻是如此令人驚艷。

沒錯，凡事總有批評的空間。但看看英國，過去一年來油電價格飆升，超市架上因為脫歐和Covid空空如也，醫院人滿為患，加稅勢在必行，運送到加油站的汽油開始配給。至於媒體的主要話題之一，是幾個月後會不會有足夠的玩具和食物來慶祝聖誕節。

我出生的國家和其現在的處境令人震驚，我一想到就幾乎要掉眼淚了，這些都是政府的錯。

所以當我聽說台灣反對黨要求，“我們應該像其他國家一樣”時，不論他們指的是 Covid、疫苗或經濟，我認為他們不知道自己在說什麼。從各方面看來，其他國家在很大程度上都犯了錯誤，在這個正在慢慢變得瘋狂並越來越動盪的世界上，台灣是一個穩定的堡壘。

因此當反對黨抱怨、咆哮和跺腳時，請對他們表示同情，因為他們真的沒有什麼具體的批評，他們一定感覺到非常沮喪。

這有點像告訴達文西，他在畫《蒙娜麗莎》時，眼神畫得不太對。

Tinkerty Tonk...掰掰

Economics 101- 2

It is seldom edifying to listen to a politician when it comes to economics. I would argue that it is even less edifying to listen to a doctor, who almost by definition, has little or no knowledge of the subject. 

So when our Pants-up Doc began to hold forth about inflation my ears pricked up. Ah ha, I thought, here comes something stupid. 

I was not disappointed. 

Yet again his team of misfits led him towards a huge pile of shit which Doctor Daft stamped into by confidently stating that the government’s voucher scheme will cause problem inflation. 

What his merry band of Hobbits fail to understand is the idea of pumping money into the economy is to help reflate it. Yes, that’s right, reflate.

I can only imagine his microscopic knowledge of economics had him thinking.. Inflation BAD, as he remembers years back when high inflation was bad. To criticize the government now for stimulus measures aimed at reflation is the economic analysis of a poodle, and a dimwitted  poodle at that.    

As with the 2008 crisis and the US adding several zeros to the Federal Reserve’s balance sheet, effectively printing money, was aimed at heading off deflation. In other words what they needed to be doing was reflating. 

Yes, runaway inflation is bad when economies are hot, right now they are not...they need the stimulus of reflation because of the hit to growth caused by the pandemic. 

There was a famous quote at the time by a Fed official who said something like “the only way we can pump more money into the economy now is by flying over New York in a helicopter shovelling dollar bills out of the door.”

Did it lead to inflation? Yes but only enough for the economy to recover to something more normal. Has there been a problem with high inflation since, no.  

Any economy which is growing has an element of inflation. If you have a growing economy you will have a level of inflation. During difficult times when an economy is slowing or under pressure, there are the opposite forces of disinflation at work as the economy is strained, or in extreme cases shrinking, in which case you will get deflation.

Stimulating the Taiwan economy by the addition of funds via vouchers is aimed at boosting growth to the benefit of all. 

To scream THIS WILL CAUSE A INFLATION PROBLEM IN THE NEXT FEW MONTHS from the sidelines does not only display an almost total lack of any understanding of economics of the current situation, but is dangerous scaremongering by someone who should be a responsible official. 

Here is a graph of Taiwan inflation which I hope will reassure anyone who thinks this sensible economic stimulus by the government will create an inflation issue in the coming months. It won’t. 

This kind of scaremongering by an elected official is absurd and irresponsible. 

 

Captain Obvious AKA Captain Kovid

We are all guilty of stating the obvious from time to time. For the British, by far the most common is, of course, weather related. “It’s a nice day” or “Nice to see a bit of sunshine for a change” is likely uttered millions of times when Solis makes a rare appearance in the sky over my soggy homeland. 

Likely more common is “More rain!” or “I can’t believe this weather!” or “Well the garden needs it!” which again would be uttered probably millions of times a day across the country. 

These are forgivable obvious statements as they are intended to simply begin a conversation with a friend, neighbour or stranger, like opening a door before entering a room.

Things start to get mildly irritating when stating the obvious goes a notch lower with “I see you have smashed in the front of your car!” or “You got home late last night!” or “Your cat is always shitting on my flowerbeds!”

These are statements of the obvious aimed at sometimes containing information the speaker wants to hint at ie. don’t slam your car doors when you come home late as it wakes us up, or maybe when someone may not realise that their cat is a serial defecator on a neighbour’s prize Chrysanthemums. 

The above is just part of conversation and forgivable to a degree. 

Stating the obvious really starts to get irritating when it descends to the level of speaking to someone like they are two years old and reaches the level of Grandma and said child with “Does you like your teddy bear then?” or “Oh, you like ice-cream, don’t you?” or “Is you tired then?” when said child has been gently sleeping for the past three hours.  

When this happens in the UK it is generally met with “No Shit Sherlock!” Which broadly translates to...Yes you are insulting me by telling me something that is mind-bogglingly obvious to anyone who is not two.  

Enter Captain Obvious AKA Captain Kovid with his latest  absurd utterances. During his latest press conference he excelled himself. “I think the infection of the EVA pilot may be due to going abroad,” the towering genius opined. 

In case he thought us too stupid to even understand that, he added “In fact, there are still about 600,000 new confirmed cases every day in the world, so infection in foreign countries is possible.” 

Oddly enough, with this piece of gold-plated statement of the obvious, he is actually admitting the current administration has done a fantastic job in keeping Covid from these shores. 

I also liked the fact his hard working department has taken the time to work out for us that 4 was 80 percent of 5. “We have calculated that in the past 7 days in Taipei City, there were 5 confirmed cases and 4 of unknown sources of infection, and the proportion of unknown sources of infection is 80 percent.”

Phew, it’s just as well his team of intellectuals were on hand to spend a few hours with their calculators working that out for us. Where would we be without these people to guide us through the intricacies of advanced mathematics. 

Small wonder Doctor Dimwit, his team of numbskulls and sad little party is lagging in the polls.

Tinkerty Tonk.

我們常犯的一個毛病就是不時陳述一些明顯的事實，直接點說，就是廢話。就英國人而言，最常見的當然是談論天氣。當太陽罕見地出現在我潮濕的故鄉上空時，「今天天氣很好！」或「難得看到一點陽光真好！」這類的句型，大概會出現幾百萬遍。

可能更常聽見的句型是「還在下雨！」 或「我簡直不敢相信這種鬼天氣！」或「好吧花園總是需要澆點水！」 不必懷疑，這種句型一天之內也會在全國被說出數百萬次。

這些是可以原諒的明顯陳述，因為說這些話只是為了與朋友、鄰居或陌生人開始對話，就跟進入房間之前得先開門一樣。

這個標準再降低一點時，事情就會開始變得有點惹人厭，例如「我看到你車子前面撞爛了！」 或者「你昨晚很晚才回家！」 或是「你的貓總是在我的花圃上拉屎！」 。這些明顯的陳述，有時包含了說話者想要暗示的訊息，那就是當你回家晚了，不要用力關車門，因為會把我們吵醒。或者暗示你跟自己的貓不熟，不知道它是總是在鄰居種了得獎菊花的花圃上連續排便。

不過以上也只是談話的一部分，在一定程度上還是可以原諒。

當說廢話的程度下降到把對方當成兩歲小孩時，那就開始令人火大了。就像老奶奶對小孩說，「你喜歡你的泰迪熊嗎？」 或者「哦，你喜歡冰淇淋，是嗎？」，或者「那你累了嗎？」，而她說這話時，那個孩子在過去的三個小時一直安安穩穩地在睡覺。

這種情況發生在英國時，通常會遇上「當然呢，福爾摩斯! 」(No Shit Sherlock!)這樣的反應。翻譯成白話就是：對，你正在告訴我一些對任何不是兩歲的人來說都是令人難以置信的廢話，那就是在侮辱我。

說到這裡， Captain Obvious，又名 Captain Kovid 最近的荒謬發言不得不提。在最近一次記者會上，他又超越自己了。「 長榮機師的感染我想是有可能因為到國外去，」這個自認智商高聳雲霄的天才如此發表了他的見解。

接著好像他擔心我們太愚蠢了以致無法理解，他補充說：「目前事實上全世界大概每天還是60萬確診案例新發生的，所以在外國感染是有可能。」

奇怪的是，通過這個顯而易見的鍍金廢話，他實際上是在承認現任政府在阻擋 Covid 於境外方面，做得非常出色。

我也喜歡他辛勤工作的幕僚，花時間為我們計算出4是5的80％這件事。Captain Obvious 說，「我們統計了一下臺北市在過去7天確診案例是5個，不明感染源是4個，算起來不明感染源佔比是80%。」

呼，他的知識份子團隊花幾個小時，用他們的計算機為我們解決這個問題也不錯。如果沒有這些人來指導我們了解複雜的高級數學題，我們恐怕會茫然失措。

也難怪這位才智黯淡的醫生和他那不聰明又可悲團隊，在民意調查中總是落後。

 Tinkerty Tonk。。。掰掰

Meep, Meep (DPP)

Watching the opposition parties going up against the DPP is reminding me more and more of the Road Runner cartoon where the hapless Wile E. Coyote is forever trying to best the Road Runner, but constantly failing. 

His dogged persistence is to be admired, but he is clearly up against a superior intellect, coupled with which the Road Runner seems to have luck on its side. 

The other thing Wile E. keeps doing is trying the same thing over and over, and failing over and over, and in most attempts he ends up falling a huge distance off a mountain or smashing face first into a rock and getting badly hurt in the process.

Take the latest from Mr Wannabe who has suggested the government offer 1,000 Afghan women asylum in Taiwan. Why just women, you ask? So did I, and I’m still a little puzzled.

This had my own ‘woman’ with her claws firmly embedded in a slowly revolving ceiling fan yesterday, and was only tempted down later in the day by the promise of an out-of-season Hot Pot. 

My best guess is that somewhere in his addled brain is the idea that women in Afghanistan will suffer under the Taliban regime, which is a correct assumption. Ah-ha, he thinks, this will go down well with the voters as I’m championing women’s rights and suggesting saving 1,000 of them, that will make me look good.

Particularly as he won’t have to be the one arranging for EVA Air flight to a chaotic Kabul airport where shots are being fired and and chose 1000 women from the panicked masses, presumably only with girl children and who are willing to be separated from sons and husbands, and bring them back to Taiwan. I’m assuming there would be a second flight with fully armed Taiwanese soldiers to help make all this happen.  

Or to go to another country who has offered to take in Afghan refugees and separate women from husbands and sons, get them all in one place and fly them back here. 

Oh yes, let’s bring 1,000 frightened women to Taiwan where they don’t speak the language and won’t have the support of a husband or male family members. Does he think Afghans are like chicks in the hands of a chicken sexer where males are tossed in one box and females in another. If nothing else it displays a massive lack of respect for Afghan women, and women in general come to that, to think they will just walk away from husbands and sons to save themselves.  

It is a Wile E. moment where what he thought was a good idea, is in fact a spectacularly stupid one and he has just run off a cliff. How could he not think this through for just one minute and see it is all but impossible to achieve. No, the first thought is ‘I can score a political point’ The stupidity of it leaves me speechless, and unless the opposition gets its collective brain into gear they will continue to let the DPP have an easy ride. 

A similar thing is the TMD pathetically pointing out that the policy of asking only families to gather for meals is flawed. How, they ask, can you police that friends and not family will attend. Answer, you can’t, and it is a guideline they hope people will follow. It’s happening all over the world and many Covid policies are unenforceable and rely on the majority of the public to do the right thing. Taiwan is no different in that regard. 

This is obvious to everyone but the TMD, I guess, who will pick on the tiny issues because overall the government is doing such a good job they find it difficult to criticise. I feel sorry for them as it is tough, but they surely need to sharpen up their act and start thinking more analytically if they want the majority to start taking them seriously.      

One of the other issues with the TMD is that Ko is a budding Autocrat, which you can tell by the way he talks about “rooting out” Covid carriers and “closing the doors and beating the dogs” that he thinks he can talk about people without respect. Autocrats typically don’t think much of the general population over which they have power. He may say it was just a figure of speech, but his almost total lack of political acumen shines through at times like these. A sensible politician would choose their words more carefully and never refer to Covid victims as “dogs.” 

Ko’s constant trashing of the domestically produced vaccine is also worrying. Why would someone with supposedly the county’s best interests at heart be so down on something he has zero involvement in. He sets himself up as an expert, but he’s not, he’s a specialist in one medical field. He says he is a scientist, he isn’t, and he is certainly not an epidemiologist, nor an expert on public health. It’s all smoke and mirrors, and frankly, bullshit. Worryingly, some people are actually taken in by his self-aggrandisement.

But as long as he and the other opposition parties keep making themselves look ridiculous, or dangerously inept, they will keep running full-tilt off cliffs, or face-first into large rocks...long may it continue.  

 Tinkerty tonk...

看著台灣反對黨與執政黨對抗，讓我越來越想起《威利狼與嗶嗶鳥》(The Road Runner) 那部卡通片，其中不幸的威力狼永遠在試圖擊敗嗶嗶鳥，卻不斷失敗。

威力狼頑強的毅力值得欽佩，但他顯然沒有超群的智力，加上運氣也似乎總是站在嗶嗶鳥這邊。

威力狼一遍又一遍地嘗試同樣的事情，然後一次又一次地失敗。在大多數的例子裡，他都是從懸崖上墜落，直直頭先落地撞上岩石滿臉豆花，當然在這個過程中他總是滿身是傷。

以 Mr Wannabe 肖想先生為例，他最近建議台灣接納 1,000 名阿富汗女性難民。你應該會問，為什麼只有女性？我也是，而且我真的有點疑惑。

如果我以那些人的心態來說話，「我的女人」聽到他這樣說的時候，立刻又怒不可遏衝上天花板黏在緩慢旋轉的吊扇上了，直到我說我們還有一包不合時令的冷凍麻辣鍋可以當晚餐，才把她引誘下來。

我合理猜測，在他迷迷糊糊的大腦裡某個角落有這麼一個念頭，就是阿富汗的婦女將在塔利班政權下受苦，這是正確的。啊哈，他興奮地想，這將會受到選民的歡迎，因為我支持女性權利並建議拯救其中的 1,000 人，這會讓我看起來很棒。

當然很棒，特別是他不必安排長榮航空飛往子彈亂飛混亂的喀布爾機場，從恐慌的群眾中挑選 1,000 名婦女，這只有女童，還有願意與兒子和丈夫分開的已婚婦女，然後把他們帶回台灣。我假設會有全副武裝的台灣士兵進行第二次任務，才能拯救1,000 名阿富汗女性。

再不然台灣必須去另一個已經接納阿富汗難民的國家，把婦女與男性家人分開，把她們全部集中在一個地方，然後再把她們載回台灣。

哦，是的，讓我們把 1,000 名受驚的阿富汗女性帶到台灣，她們不會說當地語言，不會得到男性家庭成員或是丈夫的支持。請記住，這些是來自阿富汗的女性，其中有許多這輩子出門都必須要有男性家人陪同。

肖想先生是否認為阿富汗人就像那些在養雞場裡等著被挑選性別的小雞，雄性被扔在一個盒子裡，雌性被扔在另一個盒子裡？其他的就先別說了，這顯示對阿富汗婦女甚至所有的女性嚴重缺乏尊重，認為她們會離開家人來拯救自己。

這是一個威力狼時刻，肖想先生認為是個好主意，實際上卻是一個非常愚蠢的主意，於是他就這麼直直地從懸崖邊墜落了。即使花一分鐘思考一下就可以發現這幾乎是不可能實現的，但是他連花一分鐘想一想都辦不到。他的第一個念頭應該是是「此事可以讓我在政治上得分」，這種愚蠢讓我無語。除非反對黨集思廣益，否則他們將繼續讓執政黨一路輕鬆。

類似的例子還有 TMD 可悲地指出，政府打算開放同住家人餐廳內用規定是有問題的。他們提出質疑：你如何能確定他們是家人而不是朋友？答案是沒錯，你不能從表面上分辨，但這是政府希望人們遵循的準則。類似的規範在世界各地發生，許多 Covid 的政策無法強制執行，只能依靠大多數民眾來做正確的事情，台灣在這方面也不例外。

這對每個人來說都是顯而易見的，除了 TMD。我猜他們會選擇小問題來攻擊批評，是因為總體而言政府做得很好，他們發現很難批評。我為他們感到難過，因為這的確很艱難，但如果他們希望大多數人開始認真看待他們，他們一定要聰明點辦事並開始更具分析性地思考問題。

TMD 的另一個問題是黨主席看起來似乎是個初露頭角的獨裁者 (autocrat)，這可以從「被我消滅掉」知道感染源的確診者，或是「關門打狗」等等言論中看出端倪，他認為他可以毫不尊重地談論他人，獨裁者通常不會過多考慮在他們權力統治之下的普通民眾。

當然他可能會說這只是一種修辭手法，但是可以很清楚看見他幾乎完全缺乏政治敏銳性。一個明智的政治家會更謹慎地遣詞用句，永遠不會將 Covid 受害者和狗相提並論。

台北市長對台灣國產疫苗的持續輕蔑批評也令人擔憂。為什麼一個寄望坐上全國最高位，理應心存全民最大利益的人，會在他零參與的​​事情上如此輕蔑？他自詡為專家，但他不是，他的專業只是在某一個特定醫學領域。他說他是科學家，他不是。他不是流行病學家，也不是公共衛生專家。

這都是霧裡看花，坦率地說，都是胡說八道。令人擔憂的是，有些人居然被他的自負所吸引。

但只要他和其他反對黨繼續讓自己看起來很可笑，或者無能到一個危險的地步，他們就會繼續全力衝下懸崖，或者頭朝地衝向岩石滿臉豆花……讓我們希望這個情形一直持續下去。

Tinkerty tonk… 掰掰。

Afghanistan saga and America's place in the world

A short while ago I wrote about the tragic consequences I thought the US decision to pull out of Afghanistan would have on its population. It is unfolding as badly as I thought it would. 

I am by no means an oracle on Afghanistan, nor a historian, so please bear this in mind. But I did oversee the news output from Afghanistan for a total of six years as well as looking after the safety and welfare of my staff, both international and local, who were stationed both in the main office in Kabul and in various cities and regions around the country. 

I apologise if I repeat some of the points I made in the last article in this one. For me this is somewhat of an emotional journey as I am still close to many of my ex-colleagues there. I am deeply saddened by what is currently happening as I know it will have a major impact on their lives. 

It was the author’s birthday during one trip to Kabul. The Reuters bureau staff threw a party and baked a cake.

It is clear the United States has made yet another of its massive foreign policy mis-steps with the intelligence services, yet again, getting it seriously wrong. In fact they got it so wrong that when President Biden announced the troop withdrawal was going ahead and a reporter asked. “Is the Taliban takeover of Afghanistan now inevitable?” Biden confidently replied “No, it is not,” Because you have the Afghan troops have 300,000 well equipped, as well equipped as any army in the world, and an Air Force, against something like 75,000 Taliban. It is not inevitable.”

He even went further saying it was not only not inevitable but actually unlikely. “The likelihood there is going to be the Taliban overrunning everything and owning the whole country is highly unlikely,” he said.

It would be funny if the consequences were not so tragic in terms of the human cost. 

The hillsides around Kabul are packed with shanties which house those who have fled the Taliban strongholds, mainly in the south, over the years of the US occupation. Of the near 400 districts in Afghanistan before the US pullout the Government controlled 35%, the Taliban 23% and 42% were contested. The Government, nor the US ever fully controlled the country.

This has made the US look extremely foolish in the eyes of a shocked world that is looking on askance and wondering how the most powerful nation on earth with 20-years experience in Afghanistan could have got it so disastrously wrong. 

Bear in mind the troop pullout was negotiated by the Trump administration, although the Republicans are trying to pretend it wasn’t, but the Biden administration must take the blame for the appallingly botched way it has been carried out.

Frankly there is nothing left to be said really. It is what it is. The country is back in the hands of the Taliban as it was before the Americans invaded on October 7, 2001 as part of its Global War on Terrorism, just a month after the 9/11 attack on the World Trade Centre in New York.

The rights and wrongs of the so-called Global War on Terror are endlessly debatable, but the United States has for years set itself up as the world’s policeman and has put itself on somewhat of a pedestal as the saviour of freedom and democracy. So this latest rash act, which seems to be anything but about freedom and democracy, has rightly sparked a debate about US commitment. 

Particularly in any country with more than just a regular relationship, of which Taiwan is clearly one. There has been much talk here about whether it is a good idea to be as close to the US as Taiwan undoubtedly is, although the obvious answer is...What is the alternative?”

Most countries have different types of relationships with other countries. Some talk about ‘special relationships’ which can be based in history or because of shared interests. When you think about it the European Union is really just an extremely strong grouping of special relationships between countries where they all agree on some very strong legal and economic bonding. As we have seen with Brexit, even these extremely strong special relationships can be broken.  

Take the UK and the US as another example. They share a massively strong historical bond having both joined a conflict against the shared enemy of Germany in both World Wars, and Japan in the second. 

Is it any wonder the two countries, having had soldiers fighting side-by-side against a common enemy with many buried side-by-side in the same cemeteries, have such a strong bond? But even here, neither side can totally rely on the other and cracks are beginning to show. The days of the UK Prime Minister Thatcher/US President Regan love-fest are long gone. 

Indeed, UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson has said he dislikes the phrase special relationship.

According to one of Johnson’s aides he considers it to be “needy and weak.” How about “indestructible relationship,” Johnson suggested in an interview with the BBC around the time of the last G7 meeting in June. Biden called it a special relationship, Johnson wants to call it an indestructible relationship. This is called diplomacy.  

Johnson is desperate for a trade deal with the US after Brexit and keen to reinforce ties to the US. But the point is that all relationships are viewed differently by the countries involved and both sides have their own agenda which can change over time.

Any diplomatic ties have to be, to use that awful phrase, a win-win. But clearly one side will win more than the other in any relationship - ask any married couple. 

So Taiwan has huge historical ties to the US and its relationship is arguably even closer than the UK’s, because it is enshrined in US law. This is in the form of the Taiwan Relations Act enacted on April 10, 1979 after the US recognized the People’s Republic of China and established diplomatic relations with it as the sole legitimate government of China.

Taiwan’s relationship with the US is about as different from Afghanistan as it is possible to be, and to say Taiwan should rethink its relationship with the US because of what has happened in Afghanistan begs the question. Well, if you think that, what’s the alternative? 

Could Taiwan, through diplomatic channels develop a close relationship with a superpower who would provide up to date military equipment and training and "consider any effort to determine the future of Taiwan by other than peaceful means, including by boycotts or embargoes, a threat to the peace and security of the Western Pacific area and of grave concern to the United States." As the Taiwan Relations Act stipulates. 

Where could Taiwan find that kind of deal in terms of security? The answer is no-where. Would it be wise to say to America...Hey, we don’t really trust you any more so let’s forget all this? 

Nothing is guaranteed to last forever. The world’s diplomats are not climbing into photo booths together and taking Best Friends Forever snaps with cartoon hearts popping out of their heads. That’s not actually how diplomacy works, surprisingly enough. 

Those urging caution when dealing with the US are right to do so. But telling a diplomat or a government that is akin to teaching your granny to suck eggs. 

Maybe a few brave souls here will suggest getting closer to China, but I doubt it, as it would be political suicide. Reading between the lines, it’s obviously what some in opposition think, but they will never say it out-loud. 

It was a mistake to invade Afghanistan in the first place, and 20 years later the US has botched its withdrawal, hence the widespread comparison with their Vietnam venture. I can’t see how that equates to being anything other than normal diplomatic caution when dealing with the US in Taiwan’s relationship with the Americans. 

And that is just run of the mill, day-to-day normal diplomacy. It is happening now, and will continue to happen. The Afghanistan situation changes nothing in Taiwan’s case and it would be sheer folly to in any way sour a relationship which clearly benefits Taiwan more than it does the US.

There is a famous last line from a poem written in the early twentieth century by Hilaire Belloc in his Cautionary Tales for Children which included the story of Jim, who ran away from his nurse, and was eaten by a lion. 

“Always keep tight hold of nurse, for fear of finding something worse.” 

阿富汗事件激發的疑美論

上個月底我寫了一篇文章〈阿富汗悲歌〉，認為美國撤出阿富汗的決定將會導致悲劇性的後果，接下來的發展和我想像的一樣糟糕。

我絕不是阿富汗問題的神諭，也不是歷史學家，請記住這一點。不過擔任路透社南亞總編輯六年期間，我的確必須對所有從阿富汗向全球發出的新聞負責，還要負責境內本國籍外國籍員工的安全和福利。除了首都喀布爾的主要辦公室，路透社在阿富汗全國各地還有許多合約記者。

悲哀已開始

如果在此我重複了上一篇文章中提出的一些觀點，我深表歉意。討論阿富汗在情感上對我而言是困難的，因為我仍然與在那裡的許多前同事保持密切聯繫。有一次進入阿富汗剛好是我的生日，同事們訂了一個有機關槍和手榴彈圖案的蛋糕，我們在辦公室的院子裡烤肉喝酒一直到深夜。

目前正在發生的事讓我十分悲傷，因為我知道他們的生活即將產生難以想像的巨變。

很明顯美國在重大外交政策中，再度犯了一個嚴重的錯誤，尤其在情報方面。美國總統拜登宣布撤軍時有記者提問：「塔利班接管阿富汗現在是不可避免的嗎？」拜登自信地回答：「不，不是。因為阿富汗有三十萬裝備精良的軍隊，和世界上任何裝備精良的軍隊一樣，還有一支空軍可以對抗七萬五千名塔利班，這並非不可避免。」

拜登甚至進一步說，這不僅不是必然，實際上是不太可能。「塔利班統治並擁有整個國家的可能性極小，」他說。

如果後果不是以人命為代價，他這番話是好笑的，但現在這讓美國在震驚的世界眼中顯得極其愚蠢。這個世界正疑惑地看著，想知道這個在阿富汗擁有 20 年經驗，地球上最強大的國家，怎麼會犯下如此災難性的錯誤。

儘管共和黨人試圖假裝不是這樣，請記住撤軍是川普政府交涉定案的，但拜登政府必須為令人震驚的拙劣執行方式承擔責任。

其實現在真的沒有什麼可說，事情就是這樣了。這個國家又回到了塔利班的手中，就像 2001 年 10 月 7 日美國發起全球反恐戰爭之前一樣，那是在 9／11 紐約世貿中心恐攻一個月後。

姑且不論所謂的全球反恐戰爭的對與錯，美國多年來一直將自己定位為世界警察，並在某種程度上將自己置於自由和民主的救世主地位。因此，最近的這一輕率行為似乎與自由和民主無關，理所當然也引發了關於美國承諾的辯論。

如何看待美國的承諾

這種辯論在與美國不僅僅是一般關係的國家中特別明顯，台灣就是其中之一。這幾天有不少關於台灣和美國關係密切是否是個好主意的討論，儘管顯而易見的答案是：其他選擇是什麼？

多數國家與他國有不同類型的關係，有些「特殊關係」是基於歷史或共同利益。只要想一想，就知道歐盟實際上只是一個非常強大的國家之間的「特殊關係」群體，這些國家都同意他們之間有一些非常強大的法律和經濟連結。但是從英國脫歐的例子看來，即使是非常牢固的「特殊關係」也可能被打破。

以英國和美國為例，他們有著深厚的歷史淵源，在兩次世界大戰中打擊共同的敵人德國和日本。兩國士兵並肩作戰，毫無疑問在對抗共同敵人後產生了強烈的情感連結。但他們依舊不能完全依賴對方，裂痕開始出現，前英國首相柴契爾夫人和前美國總統雷根如情侶般在全世界眼前翩翩起舞的日子，早已一去不復返。

現任英國首相強生已經表示他不喜歡「特殊關係」這個詞。據強生的一位助手說，他認為這個詞讓人覺得「有需要而且軟弱」。強生在 6 月份G7會議期間接受 BBC 採訪時建議用一個別的詞，「堅不可摧的關係怎麼樣？」

拜登稱之為特殊關係，強生希望稱之為堅不可摧的關係，這就是外交。

現在強生迫切希望在英國脫歐後與美國達成貿易協議，他當然只看見英國的利益，但重點是相關國家對關係的看法不同，雙方都有自己的目標，這些目標也可能會隨著時間而改變。

任何外交關係，用那個可怕的詞來說吧，都必須是雙贏，但很明顯在任何關係中，一方都會比另一方贏得更多，問問任何已婚夫婦就知道這個道理。

台灣與美國的關係是極具歷史意義的，台美關係某種角度看來甚至可以說比英美關係更密切，因為它以 1979 年 4 月 10 日美國總統簽署生效的《台灣關係法》形式載入美國法律。

台灣能脫美入中嗎？

台灣與美國的關係和阿富汗與美國的關係更是大不相同，要說因為阿富汗發生的事情，台灣就應該重新考慮與美國的關係是很有問題的。好吧，就算你這麼認為好了，你的選擇是什麼？

台灣是否可以通過外交管道與另一個超級強國建立密切關係，而且後者將提供台灣最新的軍事武器，並如《台灣關係法》明載，「任何企圖以非和平方式來決定臺灣的前途之舉──包括使用經濟抵制及禁運手段在內，將被視為對西太平洋地區和平及安定的威脅，而為美國所嚴重關切」？

在安全方面，哪裡可以找到這種交易？答案是沒有。你覺得對美國說：嘿，我們真的不能再信任你了，所以讓我們忘記這一切吧，是明智之舉嗎？

當然我們都知道沒有什麼保證是永垂不朽的，世界各國的外交官不會一起爬進可以印上卡通圖案的快照機裡拍下死黨大頭照，然後在上面貼滿愛心。外交不是如此運作。

希望在與美國打交道時謹慎行事是正確的態度，但告訴外交官或政府要怎麼做，這真的就像打算教數學博士一加一等於二。也許一些勇敢的靈魂會建議更接近中國，但我懷疑這會是政治自殺。仔細推敲顯然這是一些反對黨的想法，但他們不會大聲說出來。

 一開始入侵阿富汗是錯誤的，20年後美國又搞砸了撤軍，這是正在發生的事，但我看不出為什麼這可以和對台美關係如常保持謹慎相提並論。

這只是普通的日常外交，台美關係正在發生並將繼續發生。阿富汗的局勢對台灣的情況沒有任何改變，而且以任何方式破壞台灣和美國的關係都是十分愚蠢的。

貝洛克（Hilaire Belloc）於 20 世紀初在他的《告誡兒童的故事》書中寫了一首詩，描述淘氣的吉姆逃離護士，最後被獅子吃掉的故事，其中最後一行是最著名的。

「始終緊緊牽住護士的手，否則可能會發現更糟的情況。」

At the Market

Captain Kovid loses it again...

The more I see and hear about Captain Kovid the more I see someone frustrated with his chosen path in life, and someone unable to cope with that chosen path.

Aside from often stating the blindingly obvious to an audience he can only consider to be morons, displays a staggering level of contempt. This, with almost tantrums on camera that he is right and everyone else is wrong brings to mind an unruly toddler refusing to go to bed. 

For someone with Presidential ambitions, as misguided as they may be, this kind of behaviour looks sad and desperate, and demonstrates that he really thinks he deserves to be in that position, no matter what the electorate thinks. I’ve written about this complex in earlier pieces. 

To see someone start to lose it like this so early in the campaign is telling. He is already turning into Mr Angry and that’s because he is trying to criticise an administration that’s actually doing a great job and that he really has no better ideas. Look at the US, look at the UK, look at Europe if you want to see administrations that are letting their populations down over the Covid issue.

I’m still extremely glad I’m here, not in one of these other places.  

Earlier in the Parliament, Minister Chen said he took full responsibility for the controversy over the short Covid isolation for pilots which may have contributed to the latest little outbreak.

Ko attacked this quite gracious acceptance of accountability by saying “The minister said in parliament that he would take full responsibility. Not until yesterday I realised why he said he would be responsible. Because it seems he doesn't have to be responsible. I'm done. Huh!”

Then he slammed down the microphone. This from someone who appears to never want to be accountable for anything and always blames someone else when things go wrong for him.  

Decorum is a useful English word that means - behaviour in keeping with good taste and propriety. It is more often used in English prefaced with the word ‘lack’ to describe someone who behaves badly and with little respect. Ko certainly lacks decorum. 

Many people let their tempers get the better of them at times. I just wonder if someone who can’t seem to control himself and act with a little more decorum in a minor press conference will be able to control himself if he ever manages to gain a higher position.

Can you imagine someone with such a short fuse in the same room as another world leader? What might he blurt out, what might he get angry at and say something disrespectful?

Whether these little temper tantrums are a symptom of frustration that he is way behind in the polls, that he just can’t cope with the pressure and responsibility of his current job, or that his God Complex is getting so out of control that he’s really not thinking all that straight, is open to question. 

To my mind...it’s likely all three.

Tinkerty Tonk…  

《 Captain Kovid 又發脾氣了》

關於 Captain Kovid，我看到和聽到的越多，就越發現到有人似乎對他選擇的人生道路感到沮喪，他似乎也無法面對所選擇的道路。

除了經常向人們陳述顯而易見週所周知的內容，他也許認為那些觀眾是白痴，因此他也展現出驚人的蔑視。在鏡頭前他似乎總是在發脾氣：他是對的，其他人都是錯的。這讓人想起一個不守規矩蹣跚學步的孩子，拒絕上床睡覺。

對於有總統野心的人來說，儘管他們的野心可能被誤導了，但這種行為看起來令人悲傷和絕望，說明了無論選民怎麼想，他堅信他應該擔任那個職位。我在之前的文章中已經寫過這種複雜的情結。

有人在競選活動甚至還沒開始就像這樣失控，跟我們說明了點什麼。他已經變成了憤怒先生，因為他試圖批評一個實際上做得很好的政府，而且他真的沒有更好的想法。如果你想看到政府在處理 Covid 問題上如何讓人民失望，你可以看看美國看看英國，看看歐洲也可以。

至今我仍然非常高興疫情期間我在台灣，而不是在以上任何一個地方。

衛福部長曾經在立法院表示，他會對飛行員隔離政策引發的爭議負全部責任，因為這個政策可能導致了最近那些小規模的疫情爆發。

台北市長抨擊了衛福部長優雅概括承受全責一事，他說陳時中在立法院說要對 3＋11負責，「我到昨天才知道為什麼他說他負責，因為他看起來是不用負責的嘛，講完了，哼。」然後他砰的一聲放下麥克風。 

這是來自一個似乎從不想對任何事情負責，並且總是在出現問題時責怪別人的人。

Decorum 是一個有用的英語單字，意思是符合良好品味和禮儀的行為，英語中常用在以 lack 缺乏一詞為前提的句子，用來形容行為惡劣且不尊重他人的人。台北市長當然是缺乏禮貌的。

許多人有時會讓壓抑不住自己的脾氣而發怒，我只是想知道在小型記者會上，似乎無法控制自己並表現出一點品味和禮儀的人，如果有朝一日他更上一層樓，是否能夠控制自己。

你能想像有人和另一位世界領導人在同一個房間裡，忽然之間保險絲短路就大發雷霆嗎？他可能會脫口而出什麼，或是可能因為生氣而說出不尊重的話？

這些小脾氣是否是他在民意調查中遠遠落後的沮喪症狀，或是他無法應對當前工作的壓力和責任，還是他的上帝情結變得如此失控，以至於他無法頭腦清醒地思考，是值得商榷的。

在我看來……這三種可能性都是。

Tinkerty Tonk…  掰掰。