“Third force” is commonly used to refer to parties outside the conventional blue-green dichotomy in Taiwanese politics. However, it is not an entirely accurate term, as it ignores a defining issue in the realm of politics here.
Behind each political term lies an implied context. Politics is a means to ensure that society progresses in the right direction, and a political analysis of these changes and the resolution of political problems are necessary for Taiwan to thrive. This is analogous to a medical diagnosis, a determination made on the nature of a patient’s illness following a meticulous scientific evaluation.
To correct a political issue and its causes, understand its true nature, and then the problem and how to address it is revealed.
Referring to small parties that do not fall into the pan-blue or pan-green camps as a “third force” carries with it two main problems, precisely because of the political context behind the term.
First, it is an implicit acknowledgement of the existence of pro-China political parties, such as the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), which is aligned with the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and has an authoritarian structure. Should such parties be allowed in Taiwan when they align with an external threat?
Second, “third force” suggests that it is not a traditional political entity. If voters have lost faith in the festering offerings from the pan-blue and pan-green camps, is it necessarily the case that a third force would represent something more palatable? Is it the answer to the nation’s political problems?
If Taiwan is to divest itself of its problematic political legacy, it needs a second political force to operate alongside the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), possibly as an even more vociferously pro-Taiwan force resisting China’s influence. This would robustly manifest people’s rejection of Beijing’s intimidation.
As long as the KMT remains the main opposition party, the power transitions inherent in a democratic electoral cycle would see regular returns to periods in which people are concerned about the nation’s sovereignty, as Beijing helps the pro-China parties in every major election.
There are 224 political parties in Taiwan, with as many as 98 — more than 43 percent — advocating unification with China.
The sense that the nation’s sovereignty is under siege was not only apparent during the elections on Saturday, it is something that recurs every election season.
Taiwan needs more stringently pro-localization, anti-CCP parties on the ballot, not a “third force” that sees a market niche for itself by virtue of being neither blue nor green, and which indiscriminately courts favor with the US and China.
The most rapid progress for Taiwan’s democracy was made in the 1990s, when then-president Lee Teng-hui’s (李登輝) administration was the dominant localization force, complemented by the DPP. The two parties worked together and democracy surged. Today’s DPP has taken on the role previously performed by the KMT under Lee’s leadership, but which party is going to step up and work with the DPP to resist external interference?
A “third force” cannot bring Taiwan the relief it needs. Only a supplementary pro-localization force that can engage in healthy competition and cooperation with the governing party would be able to overturn the current situation in which Beijing is constantly interfering in Taiwanese politics.
Jiang Fang-yu is a graduate student.
Translated by Paul Cooper
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