This year could be called the Year of Asian Democracy. It is difficult to keep up with all the elections in East and Southeast Asia: the presidential election in Taiwan, the parliamentary elections in Malaysia in March, parliamentary elections in South Korea and Indonesia last month, the elections to Japan's upper house in July, and the presidential elections in the Philippines on Monday and Indonesia in July. Although the economic and educational standards of most of these countries fall behind those of Taiwan, Taiwan has, through the behavior of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Lien Chan (連戰) and People First Party (PFP) Chairman James Soong (宋楚瑜), provided one of the worst examples of democracy in Asia.
The two have acted arbitrarily and irresponsibly for the sake of personal benefit, and they can only be described as villains of Asian democracy.
First, their behavior has had a great influence on China. People in China working hard for the country's democratization have all along used Taiwan as a reference. However, Lien and Soong have disregarded Taiwan's tradition of letting the ballot decide the winner, and, without a shred of proof of the election having been rigged, mobilized the public for illegal protests. This has had a great impact on the Chinese people's confidence in democracy, and made them see democracy as a source of chaos.
The democratization of China would further peace and stability in Asia, but Lien and Soong's behavior has clearly damaged its development.
Second, demands in Hong Kong for the direct election of their chief executive and democratization have been dealt a blow thanks to Lien and Soong.
The past two months have shown that we still have a long way to go before achieving true democracy, and it has made it impossible for democracy in Taiwan to serve as a beacon for those in Hong Kong and China. It has also given Beijing an excuse to block liberalization in Hong Kong.
Lien and Soong have also disregarded the capability of the democratic mechanism to resolve disputes, instead relying on extralegal means to threaten the president and bring unsubstantiated complaints to the international press. This has created an image of Taiwan as incapable of democratic self-management and in need of foreign assistance to maintain social stability.
Because the pan-blue leaders have been bringing their complaints directly to the international community, they have caused the US role to become highly politicized. Not only that -- the outside world's questioning of Washington's involvement in Taiwan's domestic affairs has offered Beijing an opportunity to interfere in the workings of Taiwan's democracy, with China's Taiwan Affairs Office issuing strongly worded statements on the election.
Taiwan's democracy no longer shines brightly in the eyes of the international community, and the country's international image has been ruined.
Although most governments have given in to pressure from China to different degrees, public opinion in these countries is still supportive of Taiwan's democratic achievements. Public pressure has often led to other parliaments supporting Taiwan.
Refusing to concede defeat, Lien and Soong have used irregular means to challenge the election -- a judicial ballot recount, making statements to the international media about vote-rigging and suggesting the March 19 assassination attempt on President Chen Shui-bian (
The international community is largely unaware of the true situation and unable to verify these statements. Some friends of Taiwan, unwilling and unable to gain a deeper understanding, have come to the mistaken conclusion that the statements are true.
Understanding that elections are about counting heads and not about breaking them allows for the peaceful transfer of power without the need for military force to decide the winner. This wisdom is the result of thousands of years of political development.
Because the result of the presidential election did not suit the taste of Lien and Soong, however, they have resorted to savagery in order to destroy this wisdom. Lacking support from a majority of the public, and with the international media not buying their explanations, their strategy of using the international community to reach their goals has failed.
Yet the March 26 attack on Central Election Commission offices and the violent scenes in front of the Presidential Office on April 10 received widespread international coverage, which lead to global disappointment with Taiwan, a nation that calls itself a democratic model. For Taiwan, the broken glass outside the commission is symbolic of the country's broken dream of democracy.
Holmes Liao is an adviser to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
Translated by Perry Svensson
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS