The highly anticipated election season drew to a close on Saturday, with Taiwanese giving their vote of confidence to the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) for a historic third term. Winning with a decisive 40.05 percent of the vote, William Lai (賴清德) is on track to continue President Tsai Ing-wen’s (蔡英文) foreign and domestic policies.
International media watched the election with keen interest, flocking to Taiwan with more urgency than in previous votes. The international news conference Lai and running mate Hsiao Bi-khim (蕭美琴) held days before the election was attended by representatives of 128 media outlets from 28 countries, and many more covered the vote over the weekend.
The narrative was dominated by the promise that this decision would upset the direction of cross-strait relations over the next four years, either toward greater confrontation or cooling tensions. In essence, the message aligns with Beijing’s missive to voters that their choice was between “war or peace.” Beijing’s “troublemaker” designation for Lai has even weaseled its way into some headlines, allowing a foreign power to dictate the Taiwanese president-elect’s image, even before he takes office.
Yet anyone who follows Taiwanese politics and cross-strait relations knows it is not that simple. The DPP might have kept the presidency, but it was largely the fault of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) failing to agree on a united ballot. With a combined 59.95 percent of the vote, the opposition could have carried this election on the promise of a routine transfer of power. The result is not so much a “snub to Beijing” as an indictment of the state of the opposition.
For a better understanding, look to the Legislative Yuan. The DPP lost 10 seats and the majority, while the KMT picked up 14 and the TPP gained three. Without anyone passing the 50 percent threshold, the speaker’s gavel is anyone’s for the taking, and the eight TPP legislators find themselves in a powerful swing vote position. The DPP-led government would find it hard to get anything done with a split legislature, especially one that is determined to impose greater oversight on the executive branch, as the TPP has been emphasizing in these first days following the election.
Lai’s victory was decisive, but voters are clearly not satisfied with every facet of the DPP’s performance. Knowing this, the reaction from China has been muted. No unusual People’s Liberation Army movements have yet been reported by the Ministry of National Defense, and creatively worded statements of condemnation were to be expected. China’s biggest message so far came yesterday with Nauru’s termination of diplomatic relations, leaving Taiwan with only 12 formal diplomatic allies. If such theatrics had a large impact, Taiwanese would not have voted to continue the politics of the past eight years. Instead, Beijing is also waiting to see where this undercurrent of discontent leads, and might be content to see a gridlocked legislature.
At the same time, Taiwan should be proud of what it accomplished this weekend. Watched by the world, it proved that “vibrant democracy” really is an accurate description of the way Taiwanese revel in their hard-won right to vote. Citizens traverse miles and oceans to cast their ballots, staying afterward to see each vote read aloud, one by one, echoed thousands of times across the country. Hours later, both opposition candidates showed what it means to concede promptly and graciously, despite the barbs they traded on the campaign trail and the stakes at play. Their gazes are fixed on the future, debating matters of importance such as legislative reform.
This is to be a huge year for democracy, with nearly half of the world’s population choosing new leaders. As one of the first countries to hold an election this year, Taiwan offers an ideal to aspire to.
Trying to force a partnership between Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) and Intel Corp would be a wildly complex ordeal. Already, the reported request from the Trump administration for TSMC to take a controlling stake in Intel’s US factories is facing valid questions about feasibility from all sides. Washington would likely not support a foreign company operating Intel’s domestic factories, Reuters reported — just look at how that is going over in the steel sector. Meanwhile, many in Taiwan are concerned about the company being forced to transfer its bleeding-edge tech capabilities and give up its strategic advantage. This is especially
US President Donald Trump’s second administration has gotten off to a fast start with a blizzard of initiatives focused on domestic commitments made during his campaign. His tariff-based approach to re-ordering global trade in a manner more favorable to the United States appears to be in its infancy, but the significant scale and scope are undeniable. That said, while China looms largest on the list of national security challenges, to date we have heard little from the administration, bar the 10 percent tariffs directed at China, on specific priorities vis-a-vis China. The Congressional hearings for President Trump’s cabinet have, so far,
The US Department of State has removed the phrase “we do not support Taiwan independence” in its updated Taiwan-US relations fact sheet, which instead iterates that “we expect cross-strait differences to be resolved by peaceful means, free from coercion, in a manner acceptable to the people on both sides of the Strait.” This shows a tougher stance rejecting China’s false claims of sovereignty over Taiwan. Since switching formal diplomatic recognition from the Republic of China to the People’s Republic of China in 1979, the US government has continually indicated that it “does not support Taiwan independence.” The phrase was removed in 2022
US President Donald Trump, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth have each given their thoughts on Russia’s war with Ukraine. There are a few proponents of US skepticism in Taiwan taking advantage of developments to write articles claiming that the US would arbitrarily abandon Ukraine. The reality is that when one understands Trump’s negotiating habits, one sees that he brings up all variables of a situation prior to discussion, using broad negotiations to take charge. As for his ultimate goals and the aces up his sleeve, he wants to keep things vague for
RSS