Over the past few months, Taiwan’s political landscape has increasingly dominated headlines, resonating with the tumultuous echoes of global counterparts. Amid these turbulent currents, a particular concern looms large: the prospect of a parallel to France’s unexpected dissolution of parliament.
Should the Legislative Yuan rebuff the Executive Yuan’s plea for reconsideration of legislative reform bills, the specter of a vote of no confidence in the Cabinet or even parliamentary dissolution itself could send the nation’s political trajectory into uncertain territory.
This pivotal juncture demands attention to potential ripple effects: from fluctuating investor confidence to potential setbacks in crucial defense policies, and the broader implications for cross-strait relations. These unfolding dynamics underscore a critical moment in Taiwan’s governance, where outcomes would not only shape domestic stability, but also resonate regionally. As Taiwan navigates these uncharted waters, the world watches with vested security and economic interest, mindful of peace and stability in the Strait, and the implications for Taiwan’s democracy and prosperity.
Historically, the Executive Yuan has invoked the reconsideration process for bills in the Legislative Yuan on 12 occasions since 1949, achieving success in more than half of these instances. However, these victories have largely been orchestrated within the confines of the ruling party, showcasing their adeptness at intra-party maneuvers. Inter-party collaboration between the executive and legislative branches, especially across divergent political factions, rarely achieves such consensus.
Notably, the last significant success dates back to 2002, when former premier You Si-kun’s (游錫?) Cabinet steered a successful reconsideration of fiscal appropriation laws, clinching victory in the absence of opposition members — a feat unparalleled during an era with 225 seats, contrasting sharply with today’s 113-seat configuration. Against this backdrop, the challenge of garnering opposition support for the reconsideration of the bills looms as a formidable obstacle. However, the potential ramifications for Taiwan’s political landscape are disproportionately consequential.
Amid this high-stakes standoff, the prospect of Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) legislators contesting the constitutionality of the bills through a petition to the Constitutional Court heralds a contentious legal drama. Should this challenge gain traction, enactment of the law would be suspended pending the ruling — a decision that could sway the balance of power.
A judicial declaration of unconstitutionality could trigger a cascade of retaliatory maneuvers by the blue and white coalition, potentially culminating in budgetary boycotts during the impending legislative review. Such high-stakes brinkmanship risks thrusting Taiwan into a political deadlock, jeopardizing crucial government funding and amplifying public discontent.
Adding to the complexity, the imminent consent of the court necessitates approval by the Legislative Yuan — a process vulnerable to disruptions should the coalition opt for retaliatory measures. The potential fallout includes the stalling of critical legal interpretations, particularly concerning issues such as the ruling on the death penalty, thereby compounding the burden on the populace amid heightened political turbulence.
However, the battlefield stretches well beyond Taipei to encompass the Taiwan Strait. Complicating matters are reports revealing that many Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators spearheading the policy amendments have ambiguous ties with Beijing. Heightening concerns are disclosures of recent visits to China, where meetings with Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference Chairman Wang Huning (王滬寧), overseeing China’s highest-level “united front” operations against Taiwan, have occurred.
The aftermath? A flurry of intense and controversial bills in the legislature, raising unsettling questions about potential directives from Beijing. Recent developments, including calls for a “reunification” referendum across the Taiwan Strait and invitations extended to Taiwanese influencers to promote unification activities in China, underscore Beijing’s multifaceted approach in seeking a “peaceful resolution” to the “Taiwan question,” aiming to achieve unification without resorting to costly conflict.
Furthermore, impending national defense expenditures, procurement of weaponry and scheduled programs aimed at enhancing Taiwan’s self-defense capabilities, notably the development of indigenous submarines, confront the looming threat of boycotts amid escalating tensions across the Taiwan Strait. Over the past eight years, former president Tsai Ing-wen’s (蔡英文) administration drove significant advancements in the nation’s self-defense capabilities, from pioneering the construction of its maiden indigenous submarine to negotiating the procurement of 66 F-16V jets from the US. Such strides were facilitated by legislative and administrative cohesion — a synergy now at risk.
Meanwhile, the situation is being closely monitored by the US and the global community, as Taiwan’s actions, rather than mere rhetoric, would shape perceptions of its resolve to defend its sovereignty. Such perceptions would undoubtedly influence international political will to support Taiwan in the event of a cross-strait conflict. With unified governance potentially in jeopardy, particularly amid a looming political gridlock, the continuity of Taiwan’s crucial defense and security cooperation with the US and other potential partners hangs in precarious balance. The continuity of these collaborations, essential for Taiwan’s defense modernization and regional stability, is now confronted with unprecedented uncertainty. The inherent political unpredictability and its associated costs pose a significant threat to maintaining the “status quo,” a commitment President William Lai (賴清德) has emphatically reassured the international community about.
Taiwan is at a crossroads, where political maneuvering has the power to reshape not only its own governance, but also the balance of regional power dynamics. Indeed, Taiwanese demonstrated the maturity of their hard-earned democracy by voting for a legislature that can maintain checks and balances.
However, alongside democratic aspirations, there is a strong societal desire for a functional and stable political environment, recognized as essential for sustained prosperity and well-being.
Beyond its borders, Taiwan’s domestic political landscape exerts significant influence, impacting regional stability and shaping international alliances. Navigating the path ahead demands the legislative and executive branches to both engage in nuanced diplomacy and exercise strategic foresight. This approach is crucial in safeguarding the nation’s sovereignty amid evolving geopolitical currents.
The stakes are high. Taiwan’s decisions today would have far-reaching effects, influencing the future of democracy and stability in the Indo-Pacific region.
Cathy Fang is as a policy analyst in the Project 2049 Institute. Lin Tzu-yao is from Kaohsiung and holds a graduate degree from National Taiwan University’s Graduate Institute of National Development, majoring in China studies and cross-strait relations.
On Sept. 3 in Tiananmen Square, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) rolled out a parade of new weapons in PLA service that threaten Taiwan — some of that Taiwan is addressing with added and new military investments and some of which it cannot, having to rely on the initiative of allies like the United States. The CCP’s goal of replacing US leadership on the global stage was advanced by the military parade, but also by China hosting in Tianjin an August 31-Sept. 1 summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which since 2001 has specialized
In an article published by the Harvard Kennedy School, renowned historian of modern China Rana Mitter used a structured question-and-answer format to deepen the understanding of the relationship between Taiwan and China. Mitter highlights the differences between the repressive and authoritarian People’s Republic of China and the vibrant democracy that exists in Taiwan, saying that Taiwan and China “have had an interconnected relationship that has been both close and contentious at times.” However, his description of the history — before and after 1945 — contains significant flaws. First, he writes that “Taiwan was always broadly regarded by the imperial dynasties of
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) will stop at nothing to weaken Taiwan’s sovereignty, going as far as to create complete falsehoods. That the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has never ruled Taiwan is an objective fact. To refute this, Beijing has tried to assert “jurisdiction” over Taiwan, pointing to its military exercises around the nation as “proof.” That is an outright lie: If the PRC had jurisdiction over Taiwan, it could simply have issued decrees. Instead, it needs to perform a show of force around the nation to demonstrate its fantasy. Its actions prove the exact opposite of its assertions. A
A large part of the discourse about Taiwan as a sovereign, independent nation has centered on conventions of international law and international agreements between outside powers — such as between the US, UK, Russia, the Republic of China (ROC) and Japan at the end of World War II, and between the US and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) since recognition of the PRC as the sole representative of China at the UN. Internationally, the narrative on the PRC and Taiwan has changed considerably since the days of the first term of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) of the Democratic