Taiwan's democratic system is far from perfect, but it could be much worse, as the coup d'etat in Thailand demonstrates. Yet the Thai coup illustrates two salient points that Taiwanese should bear in mind -- one positive, and one negative.
First, the positive: Taiwanese military leaders were quick to assure the public that, despite the deep political divisions here and the current protests against the president, the military had no intention of directly intervening in political affairs.
There is every reason to believe this is true. If the military had wanted to impose its will on the people, then surely it would have done so in 2000, when the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lost power, or in 2004, when the results of the presidential election were so bitterly contested.
Taiwan's military gets a lot of flak from a variety of quarters. Local politicians regularly accuse it of partisanship. Think tank ideologues in the US -- who usually know much about the intricacies of Washington, but little about the realities on the ground in Taipei -- continually question the commitment of Taiwan's armed forces to defending their country.
But what all of these critics ignore are the huge strides that have been made in turning Taiwan's military into a professional fighting force that serves the nation, and not just the KMT.
There is no denying that the military and the KMT were once joined at the hip. It is also beyond doubt that much of the military leadership is sympathetic to the pan-blue camp. But, with rare exceptions, senior officers have kept their political views to themselves, and have refrained from political activism.
Keeping the military under firm civilian control is key to maintaining a viable democratic system, a point the Ministry of National Defense seems to understand. It should be applauded for doing so.
But the negative point is also important: One of the telling results of the coup in Thailand is the fact that it has had a limited impact on the Thai economy. Markets fluctuated slightly, while the Thai baht recovered much of the ground it lost after initial news of the coup. Although tourism -- one of Thailand's key industries -- may suffer in the short term, the peaceful nature of the coup means that tourists have little reason to stay away.
This illustrates a reality that Taiwanese would do well to note: The world -- especially the business world -- cares very little about democracy as a principle. Stability is what matters. Many commentators said a repeat of the 1997 Asian Financial Crisis was far more worrisome than a mere coup.
The fact that people can watch a military junta topple a democratically elected government with such equanimity is a lesson that should not be lost on other struggling democracies. Democracy can only be guaranteed if people and their leaders are firmly committed to the development of their institutions.
And in Taiwan, few people are truly upset when contemplating the campaign to oust the president.
Anyone who steps back from immediate partisan emotions can recognize that using a Philippines-style "People Power" movement to oust an elected leader is a step backwards for Taiwan. "People Power" may be a viable option for overthrowing a dictatorship. But should it be used to supplant established democratic institutions?
How does one rally people around this abstraction, when the demagogues are running loose in the streets and the president is, in fact, hugely unpopular?
The heartbreaking reality is that few people outside of Taiwan will care if this democracy falls apart. All that will matter is whether it peacefully falls apart.
Is it also true that few Taiwanese will care?
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS