“China will surely be reunified, and all Chinese on both sides of the Taiwan Strait should be bound by a common sense of purpose and share in the glory of the rejuvenation of the Chinese nation.” Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) New Year’s message leaves little room for doubt concerning his resolve to take Taiwan, “by force if necessary,” as he has repeatedly said over the past decade.
Democracies across the world are alarmed by Beijing’s growing assertiveness, especially in light of Taiwan’s presidential election on Saturday. Under Xi’s rule, China has threatened peace and stability in the Indo-Pacific region and beyond, challenging the rules-based international order, while promoting an authoritarian alternative governance model. This has deteriorated China’s global image.
Responding to shifting perceptions, international media coverage of Taiwan’s elections has centered on the existential threat from China, but failed to pay enough attention to other pressing issues in public debates.
In European media, that narrow focus reveals ignorance of Taiwan beyond cross-strait relations, hence an inability to take a comprehensive view of the elections considering the domestic issues that Taiwanese voters face. Everyday problems are the ones Taiwanese voters care about most.
These include socioeconomic issues related to high living costs (particularly for housing), low wages, a declining birthrate, insufficient care for preschool children and the elderly, road safety, corruption, and Taiwan’s energy transition and its pollution implications. While threats from China have increased, demands for socioeconomic reforms have played a more significant role than in previous elections.
The outcome of the race between Democratic Progressive Party candidate Vice President William Lai (賴清德), Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) candidate New Taipei City Mayor Hou You-yi (侯友宜) and Taiwan People’s Party Chairman Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) could more significantly affect the country’s democratic governance than cross-strait relations. Yet, European commentators are ignoring these key election issues.
Taiwan has already moved up the EU’s political agenda and risen in its discourse, while the bloc has started to pursue economic and political de-risking of its relations with China. The latter has created space for the former in current European narratives. It is essential that the EU pursues these two dynamics together.
While its relationship with China is defined by mutual distrust rather than strategic trust, the EU now sees Taiwan as a like-minded and trustworthy partner, one it can engage with as they both rethink their relations with China. EU-Taiwan relations can be a genuine win-win, but only through strategic mutual engagement and investment.
The EU must invest more in bringing Taiwan closer to Europeans with all of its diversity and the challenges it faces, many of which they share, namely how to enhance social justice, address demographic shifts and improve economic structures to benefit all, and achieve economic security. Without a better understanding of Taiwan’s domestic landscape, Europe cannot improve the mutual awareness necessary to contribute to each other’s resilience — economically and democratically.
As the largest foreign investor in Taiwan facing Chinese threats, Europe has reason to worry about its interests in the country. Europe also has good reason to continue to engage Taiwan as a democracy that faces the homegrown challenges this election reveals, but also external threats. The future of democracy is at stake if Xi pursues his ambitions to annex Taiwan.
For the past three decades, Taiwanese have worked hard — and bottom-up — to establish a democratic system that is rooted in transparency, rule of law and human rights. The system they have built is the opposite of Xi’s top-down, opaque, authoritarian rule. Maintaining and improving on their democracy defines Taiwanese identity. Losing it would mean being stripped of that identity.
It is in Europe’s interest to support democratic efforts and prevent such a loss.
Also, regardless of who Taiwan’s next leader is, it remains in the interest of the Taiwanese to keep Europe, its fourth-largest trading partner, close as an ally that has contributed significantly to expanding its internationalization.
From June 6 to June 9, it would be Europeans’ turn to exercise their democratic rights to shape their future. At a time of significant geopolitical shifts, the European Parliament elections would likely be dominated by socioeconomic issues, concerns that European voters deal with in their everyday lives: cost of living and inflation, job creation, migration and increasing fuel prices, among others.
By engaging Europe on these issues, Taiwan can improve its understanding of the bloc’s diversity and complexity. It would serve the interests of both sides to help each other tackle the domestic problems they both face through international collaboration.
Rather than allowing China to dominate — and constrain — the discourse, Europe and Taiwan should be coming together about their shared domestic concerns. Through strategically planning and implementing economic and diplomatic exchanges, Taiwan and Europe can continue contributing to the pursuit of shared goals — economic and political, international and domestic.
Zsuzsa Anna Ferenczy is assistant professor at National Dong Hwa University in Hualien and a former political adviser in the European Parliament.
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (傅?萁) has caused havoc with his attempts to overturn the democratic and constitutional order in the legislature. If we look at this devolution from the context of a transition to democracy from authoritarianism in a culturally Chinese sense — that of zhonghua (中華) — then we are playing witness to a servile spirit from a millennia-old form of totalitarianism that is intent on damaging the nation’s hard-won democracy. This servile spirit is ingrained in Chinese culture. About a century ago, Chinese satirist and author Lu Xun (魯迅) saw through the servile nature of
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
Monday was the 37th anniversary of former president Chiang Ching-kuo’s (蔣經國) death. Chiang — a son of former president Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), who had implemented party-state rule and martial law in Taiwan — has a complicated legacy. Whether one looks at his time in power in a positive or negative light depends very much on who they are, and what their relationship with the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is. Although toward the end of his life Chiang Ching-kuo lifted martial law and steered Taiwan onto the path of democratization, these changes were forced upon him by internal and external pressures,
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,
RSS