The pro-democracy movements in Taiwan and Hong Kong have in the past followed different routes, but recent events in Hong Kong suggest there has been a degree of confluence in their trajectories.
For the past 10 or so days, students have staged hunger strikes to protest plans by the Hong Kong government to introduce Chinese patriotism classes in schools, which people suspect are an attempt to brainwash schoolchildren. Tens of thousands of people gathered on the streets of Hong Kong to protest against the planned curriculum changes and eventually succeeded in getting the government to announce it would withdraw plans to introduce the new classes within the next three years. This was a victory for the people of Hong Kong, who stood up for their rights.
This brings to mind the Wild Lilies Student Movement (野百合學運) of 1990, when more than 6,000 students staged a hunger strike in front of the Chiang Kai-shek Memorial Hall, calling for the disbanding of the National Assembly, the abolition of the Temporary Provisions Effective During the Period of National Mobilization for Suppression of the Communist Rebellion (動員戡亂時期臨時條款), the holding of a state affairs meeting and the setting of a timetable for political and economic reforms. Then-president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) met their demands and put Taiwan on the path to democratic reform.
On Sunday, Hong Kong had its Legislative Council elections. The enthusiastic protests against the patriotism classes failed to translate into the predicted legislative seat gains for the pro-democracy parties, despite a turnout rate of 53 percent. Hobbled by ill-advised tactical voting and infighting, the pan-democracy camp managed to win only 18 seats, while the pro-China, pan-establishment camp got 17. Although the pan-democracy camp’s haul fell short of predictions, it retained more than a third of the seats and will have the right of veto in the new legislative session. Nevertheless, Democratic Party Chairman Albert Ho (何俊仁) fell on his sword to take responsibility for the party’s poor showing.
The political situation in Hong Kong has parallels with that in Taiwan. Both are under threat by China’s “one country, two systems” idea and both are under pressure from Beijing. The pro-China, or pro-establishment camp is like the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) in Taiwan, with the advantage in funding and resources. Taiwanese would have been only too familiar with scenes during Sunday’s election of voters being bused to voting stations, instructions on how best to vote tactically and large adverts splashed across Hong Kong newspapers on election day calling on people to vote for “stability.” The pan-democracy parties in Hong Kong lack the pro-establishment camp’s resources and ability to organize tactical voting, and rely on ideas and their transmission to attract votes, much like the Democratic Progressive Party here. We have more experience of party politics than Hong Kong, where it is still in its early stages and has a long way to go. It can learn from the experience of Taiwan’s democratic movement.
Some people have likened Taiwan’s situation now to that of Hong Kong in 1997, when the former British colony was handed back to China. At that point, China started to pervade all levels of Hong Kong’s politics and society. There are fears that Taiwan is becoming increasingly like Hong Kong in this regard. Now, as the governing and opposition parties work out how best to deal with China and formulate their China policies, Hong Kong is a useful reference. Taiwan and Hong Kong can learn a lot from each other. And for us, this starts with monitoring the mass school strikes organized by the student movement.
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Former minister of culture Lung Ying-tai (龍應台) has long wielded influence through the power of words. Her articles once served as a moral compass for a society in transition. However, as her April 1 guest article in the New York Times, “The Clock Is Ticking for Taiwan,” makes all too clear, even celebrated prose can mislead when romanticism clouds political judgement. Lung crafts a narrative that is less an analysis of Taiwan’s geopolitical reality than an exercise in wistful nostalgia. As political scientists and international relations academics, we believe it is crucial to correct the misconceptions embedded in her article,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
US President Trump weighed into the state of America’s semiconductor manufacturing when he declared, “They [Taiwan] stole it from us. They took it from us, and I don’t blame them. I give them credit.” At a prior White House event President Trump hosted TSMC chairman C.C. Wei (魏哲家), head of the world’s largest and most advanced chip manufacturer, to announce a commitment to invest US$100 billion in America. The president then shifted his previously critical rhetoric on Taiwan and put off tariffs on its chips. Now we learn that the Trump Administration is conducting a “trade investigation” on semiconductors which