This year could be called the Year of Asian Democracy. It is difficult to keep up with all the elections in East and Southeast Asia: the presidential election in Taiwan, the parliamentary elections in Malaysia in March, parliamentary elections in South Korea and Indonesia last month, the elections to Japan's upper house in July, and the presidential elections in the Philippines on Monday and Indonesia in July. Although the economic and educational standards of most of these countries fall behind those of Taiwan, Taiwan has, through the behavior of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Lien Chan (連戰) and People First Party (PFP) Chairman James Soong (宋楚瑜), provided one of the worst examples of democracy in Asia.
The two have acted arbitrarily and irresponsibly for the sake of personal benefit, and they can only be described as villains of Asian democracy.
First, their behavior has had a great influence on China. People in China working hard for the country's democratization have all along used Taiwan as a reference. However, Lien and Soong have disregarded Taiwan's tradition of letting the ballot decide the winner, and, without a shred of proof of the election having been rigged, mobilized the public for illegal protests. This has had a great impact on the Chinese people's confidence in democracy, and made them see democracy as a source of chaos.
The democratization of China would further peace and stability in Asia, but Lien and Soong's behavior has clearly damaged its development.
Second, demands in Hong Kong for the direct election of their chief executive and democratization have been dealt a blow thanks to Lien and Soong.
The past two months have shown that we still have a long way to go before achieving true democracy, and it has made it impossible for democracy in Taiwan to serve as a beacon for those in Hong Kong and China. It has also given Beijing an excuse to block liberalization in Hong Kong.
Lien and Soong have also disregarded the capability of the democratic mechanism to resolve disputes, instead relying on extralegal means to threaten the president and bring unsubstantiated complaints to the international press. This has created an image of Taiwan as incapable of democratic self-management and in need of foreign assistance to maintain social stability.
Because the pan-blue leaders have been bringing their complaints directly to the international community, they have caused the US role to become highly politicized. Not only that -- the outside world's questioning of Washington's involvement in Taiwan's domestic affairs has offered Beijing an opportunity to interfere in the workings of Taiwan's democracy, with China's Taiwan Affairs Office issuing strongly worded statements on the election.
Taiwan's democracy no longer shines brightly in the eyes of the international community, and the country's international image has been ruined.
Although most governments have given in to pressure from China to different degrees, public opinion in these countries is still supportive of Taiwan's democratic achievements. Public pressure has often led to other parliaments supporting Taiwan.
Refusing to concede defeat, Lien and Soong have used irregular means to challenge the election -- a judicial ballot recount, making statements to the international media about vote-rigging and suggesting the March 19 assassination attempt on President Chen Shui-bian (
The international community is largely unaware of the true situation and unable to verify these statements. Some friends of Taiwan, unwilling and unable to gain a deeper understanding, have come to the mistaken conclusion that the statements are true.
Understanding that elections are about counting heads and not about breaking them allows for the peaceful transfer of power without the need for military force to decide the winner. This wisdom is the result of thousands of years of political development.
Because the result of the presidential election did not suit the taste of Lien and Soong, however, they have resorted to savagery in order to destroy this wisdom. Lacking support from a majority of the public, and with the international media not buying their explanations, their strategy of using the international community to reach their goals has failed.
Yet the March 26 attack on Central Election Commission offices and the violent scenes in front of the Presidential Office on April 10 received widespread international coverage, which lead to global disappointment with Taiwan, a nation that calls itself a democratic model. For Taiwan, the broken glass outside the commission is symbolic of the country's broken dream of democracy.
Holmes Liao is an adviser to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
Translated by Perry Svensson
There is much evidence that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is sending soldiers from the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) to support Russia’s invasion of Ukraine — and is learning lessons for a future war against Taiwan. Until now, the CCP has claimed that they have not sent PLA personnel to support Russian aggression. On 18 April, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelinskiy announced that the CCP is supplying war supplies such as gunpowder, artillery, and weapons subcomponents to Russia. When Zelinskiy announced on 9 April that the Ukrainian Army had captured two Chinese nationals fighting with Russians on the front line with details
On a quiet lane in Taipei’s central Daan District (大安), an otherwise unremarkable high-rise is marked by a police guard and a tawdry A4 printout from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs indicating an “embassy area.” Keen observers would see the emblem of the Holy See, one of Taiwan’s 12 so-called “diplomatic allies.” Unlike Taipei’s other embassies and quasi-consulates, no national flag flies there, nor is there a plaque indicating what country’s embassy this is. Visitors hoping to sign a condolence book for the late Pope Francis would instead have to visit the Italian Trade Office, adjacent to Taipei 101. The death of
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), joined by the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), held a protest on Saturday on Ketagalan Boulevard in Taipei. They were essentially standing for the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), which is anxious about the mass recall campaign against KMT legislators. President William Lai (賴清德) said that if the opposition parties truly wanted to fight dictatorship, they should do so in Tiananmen Square — and at the very least, refrain from groveling to Chinese officials during their visits to China, alluding to meetings between KMT members and Chinese authorities. Now that China has been defined as a foreign hostile force,
RSS