Whether in a unicameral or bicameral system, the legislature is always considered the highest representative body in a democratic country. As lawmakers represent the people, it is hoped that the legislature truly represents the political diversity of the country, with lawmakers from different parties.
In 2020, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) of the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) triumphed in Taiwan’s presidential election with 8,170,231 votes.
Four political parties passed the 5 percent threshold in the simultaneously held legislative election — the DPP, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), the Taiwan People’s Party and the New Power Party, together garnering 12.22 million votes. The two major parties — the DPP and the KMT — together had more votes than Tsai’s presidential votes.
As the legislature represents a diverse constituency with various interests and values, that phenomenon is common in any democratic country.
However, for a country under the control of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), where no second voice is allowed in the National People’s Congress, it is not understandable that US House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi is not an extension of the administration of US President Joe Biden, but instead represents one of the US’ two highest legislative bodies.
Similar to other national legislatures, the House is tasked with supervising the US government, and reviewing and passing legislation.
It also engages in diplomatic exchanges with other nations on behalf of US interests. To realize its legislative and check-and-balance functions, it also needs to account for different opinions and interact with US expatriates.
Following the principle of separation of powers, the governing party in a democratic country usually respects exchange events between the country’s legislators and those from other nations.
In Taiwan, KMT legislators, and city and county councilors have been free to visit China in the past, without asking for the president’s approval. Therefore, it is baffling that any Taiwanese politician would dance to China’s tune and oppose Pelosi’s visit.
Following the same logic, the government would have to cut the budget for official visits to other countries, because those visits would be against Beijing’s “one China” principle.
As Pelosi is second in the line of succession to the US president after US Vice President Kamala Harris, she is the third-most powerful politician in the US. As the US Congress has multiple purposes, such as supervision, civic education and conflict resolution, it is no doubt the main hub of politics in the country, not to mention that it holds the power to declare war.
In response to Pelosi’s potential trip to Taiwan, China’s warning that it would react with “firm and resolute measures” could be regarded as a barbaric and provocative move, almost akin to declaring war on the US.
This kind of “wolf warrior” diplomacy would not deter the US, but instead create the opposite effect, with more US politicians and citizens seeing the CCP’s true colors and realizing that it not only threatens Taiwan, but democracy and freedom worldwide.
Other countries would likely come to realize that they mistakenly believed that China would democratize after it has undergone economic reform.
The truth is that the once-sleeping dragon is using its economic clout to threaten the US-led democratic order with its newly gained wealth.
Leo Chang is executive director of Citizen’s Congress Watch.
Translated by Rita Wang
In their New York Times bestseller How Democracies Die, Harvard political scientists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt said that democracies today “may die at the hands not of generals but of elected leaders. Many government efforts to subvert democracy are ‘legal,’ in the sense that they are approved by the legislature or accepted by the courts. They may even be portrayed as efforts to improve democracy — making the judiciary more efficient, combating corruption, or cleaning up the electoral process.” Moreover, the two authors observe that those who denounce such legal threats to democracy are often “dismissed as exaggerating or
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus in the Legislative Yuan has made an internal decision to freeze NT$1.8 billion (US$54.7 million) of the indigenous submarine project’s NT$2 billion budget. This means that up to 90 percent of the budget cannot be utilized. It would only be accessible if the legislature agrees to lift the freeze sometime in the future. However, for Taiwan to construct its own submarines, it must rely on foreign support for several key pieces of equipment and technology. These foreign supporters would also be forced to endure significant pressure, infiltration and influence from Beijing. In other words,
“I compare the Communist Party to my mother,” sings a student at a boarding school in a Tibetan region of China’s Qinghai province. “If faith has a color,” others at a different school sing, “it would surely be Chinese red.” In a major story for the New York Times this month, Chris Buckley wrote about the forced placement of hundreds of thousands of Tibetan children in boarding schools, where many suffer physical and psychological abuse. Separating these children from their families, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) aims to substitute itself for their parents and for their religion. Buckley’s reporting is
Last week, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), together holding more than half of the legislative seats, cut about NT$94 billion (US$2.85 billion) from the yearly budget. The cuts include 60 percent of the government’s advertising budget, 10 percent of administrative expenses, 3 percent of the military budget, and 60 percent of the international travel, overseas education and training allowances. In addition, the two parties have proposed freezing the budgets of many ministries and departments, including NT$1.8 billion from the Ministry of National Defense’s Indigenous Defense Submarine program — 90 percent of the program’s proposed
RSS