On the night South Korean President Yoon Suk-yeol declared martial law, the Democratic Progressive Party’s (DPP) legislative caucus wrote a curious post on Threads.
The post, which was later deleted, seemed to compare Yoon’s allegations of pro-North Korean forces operating within his government with the legislative obstruction by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) over the past year. By doing so, the DPP ironically and unwisely positioned itself in alignment with Yoon’s authoritarian actions.
The post concluded with the dramatic statement that the DPP, as “Team Taiwan,” is “at every instant on the vanguard against dark and evil global forces eroding the integrity of our country.”
Although the post was removed within one hour, the damage had been done. The DPP’s later claim that they were simply “crossposting international news to contrast with the domestic situation without any intent of supporting martial law” appeared an unconvincing attempt to downplay the situation by feigning naivete.
Compare that rash and politically damaging statement with the careful and measured tones employed by other governments in response to this incident.
US President Joe Biden’s administration’s initial statement came from US Department of State Deputy spokesperson Vedant Patel, who expressed “grave concern” over “the recent developments in the [Republic of Korea] ROK” on Tuesday last week. Patel’s remarks and all subsequent statements from the US government avoided using inflammatory language or attempting to use the situation to score domestic political points.
The media and public were simply presented with a straightforward and principled statement on the importance of finding a peaceful resolution in accordance with democratic governance and the rule of law.
Meanwhile, Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba on Wednesday last week said his government was observing developments in Korea with “particular and grave concern.”
Kyodo News reported that Ishiba told reporters that he was “not in a position to comment on South Korea’s domestic affairs.” Foreign interference, whether blatant or covert, is a habitual tool of authoritarian governments and therefore it has long been a wise rule to act with non-interventionist restraint when it comes to commenting on affairs in other countries.
While the DPP’s legislative caucus account is intended for a domestic audience, social media has no borders. It is not hard to imagine how South Koreans might perceive a post from another country’s ruling party, seemingly supporting Yoon’s martial law declaration, as deeply unsympathetic. Diplomatic crises have erupted over far more trivial incidents, and Taiwan is not in a situation where it can afford to make more unnecessary enemies.
I personally believe that the rash post was simply a carelessly thought-out opinion by a DPP social media staffer that went unvetted and is not indicative of more disturbing trends within “Team Taiwan” itself.
Nevertheless, the immediate consequence of that message is to provide the opposition with ready-made ammunition. The KMT has already latched on to that statement to accuse the DPP of “supporting martial law.”
The lasting lesson the DPP should take away is that they should not be reactionary when it comes to political messaging on live and ongoing events.
Ultimately, Taiwan’s fragile diplomatic position requires every political party, regardless of affiliation, to exercise extraordinary care when commenting on sensitive incidents abroad.
That is not only a matter of prudence, but of safeguarding Taiwan’s standing among like-minded democratic countries.
JC Shen is a Taiwanese student at Princeton University.
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS