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
The Donald Trump administration’s approach to China broadly, and to cross-Strait relations in particular, remains a conundrum. The 2025 US National Security Strategy prioritized the defense of Taiwan in a way that surprised some observers of the Trump administration: “Deterring a conflict over Taiwan, ideally by preserving military overmatch, is a priority.” Two months later, Taiwan went entirely unmentioned in the US National Defense Strategy, as did military overmatch vis-a-vis China, giving renewed cause for concern. How to interpret these varying statements remains an open question. In both documents, the Indo-Pacific is listed as a second priority behind homeland defense and
Every analyst watching Iran’s succession crisis is asking who would replace supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Yet, the real question is whether China has learned enough from the Persian Gulf to survive a war over Taiwan. Beijing purchases roughly 90 percent of Iran’s exported crude — some 1.61 million barrels per day last year — and holds a US$400 billion, 25-year cooperation agreement binding it to Tehran’s stability. However, this is not simply the story of a patron protecting an investment. China has spent years engineering a sanctions-evasion architecture that was never really about Iran — it was about Taiwan. The
For Taiwan, the ongoing US and Israeli strikes on Iranian targets are a warning signal: When a major power stretches the boundaries of self-defense, smaller states feel the tremors first. Taiwan’s security rests on two pillars: US deterrence and the credibility of international law. The first deters coercion from China. The second legitimizes Taiwan’s place in the international community. One is material. The other is moral. Both are indispensable. Under the UN Charter, force is lawful only in response to an armed attack or with UN Security Council authorization. Even pre-emptive self-defense — long debated — requires a demonstrably imminent
Since being re-elected, US President Donald Trump has consistently taken concrete action to counter China and to safeguard the interests of the US and other democratic nations. The attacks on Iran, the earlier capture of deposed of Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro and efforts to remove Chinese influence from the Panama Canal all demonstrate that, as tensions with Beijing intensify, Washington has adopted a hardline stance aimed at weakening its power. Iran and Venezuela are important allies and major oil suppliers of China, and the US has effectively decapitated both. The US has continuously strengthened its military presence in the Philippines. Japanese Prime