It falls to us to put Taiwan-watchers overseas on notice about a development that will have lasting repercussions.
International media outlets do a good job of reporting on events in Taiwan, as long as there is a sexy cross-strait or business angle.
But when it comes to pedestrian issues, such as political reform, most news outlets fall short. Correspondents for international wire, print or broadcast media who approach their overseas editors with a story lacking a "China angle" have a tough fight on their hands.
This is why almost no major media outlet has reported on the cross-party compromise that was reached on Wednesday over changes to electoral districts. It doesn't sound like a compelling story.
This would only be slightly irritating if it were not for the fact that perceptions and policy are in part driven by media coverage. So when the international media simply do not bother to report on significant changes to a country's political situation, it has a deleterious effect on the international community's understanding of, and policy toward, that country.
When policymakers from, say, the US are left in the dark about basic aspects of Taiwan's society and political system, they cannot be expected to formulate meaningful policy.
Much of the think-tanking and analyzing that goes on in Washington is mere regurgitation of what is reported in major media outlets. Only a handful of specialists possesses in-depth knowledge of Taiwan. Meanwhile, most "experts" who write or comment widely on the US' foreign policy toward Taiwan, China or East Asia have only superficial knowledge of Taiwanese politics.
This is not always a serious problem. However, it becomes worrying when the one-dimensional portrait painted by the international media begins to lead policymakers toward erroneous assumptions.
An example of this is how the international media generally treats Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Ma Ying-jeou (
Election returns over the past decade in no way support the conclusion that the KMT is going to glide to power next year. The electorate is almost evenly split between the KMT and the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), and voters seem largely unperturbed when a scandal rocks their chosen party.
But with all of the fawning over Ma, a person outside of Taiwan could be forgiven for thinking that his presidency is inevitable.
Which brings us back to the development that the international media has ignored.
The changes to the legislature and electoral districts will have a profound effect on the political system. No one, not even the major political parties, is able to predict what kind of legislature the December elections will bring to power.
First, half of all sitting legislators will lose their jobs, as the legislative seats will be slashed from 225 to 113. Next, many popular and prominent figures will be left on the street, because politicians must now compete with each other for first place, rather than being guaranteed a seat by earning a high number of votes. In addition, small political parties face a fight for their survival.
Why will any of this matter outside of Taiwan? Given the changes, it is possible that a party could win a legislative super-majority, enabling it to do all kinds of things, such as write a new constitution.
Or declare independence. Even the international media would notice that.
The National Immigration Agency on Monday confirmed that the majority of foreign residents in Taiwan would once again be excluded from the government’s stimulus voucher program. The NT$5,000 Quintuple Stimulus Voucher would be available to 140,000 foreign spouses of Taiwanese and 16,000 Alien Permanent Resident Certificate holders, but about 870,000 Alien Resident Certificate (ARC) holders would be excluded from the program, regardless of whether they pay taxes. The government has not offered any explanation, but some have speculated that the intention is to prevent migrant workers from receiving the vouchers. Many migrant workers are from Southeast Asian countries and work as
Within the span of a generation, a new super-rich class emerges from a society in which millions of rural migrants toiled away in factories for a pittance. Bribery becomes the most common mode of influence in politics. Opportunists speculate recklessly in land and real estate. Financial risks simmer as local governments borrow to finance railways and other large infrastructure projects. All of this is happening in the world’s most promising emerging market and rising global power. No, this is not a description of contemporary China, but rather of the US during the Gilded Age, from about 1870 to 1900. This
I first met Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) in 1999, when I was Acting Director of AIT, as Darryl Johnson had just left and Ray Burghardt had not yet arrived. She was a young aide for then-President Lee Teng-hui (李登輝). President Lee just had enunciated a new theory, which came to be known as the “state-to-state” principle, in an interview with a German newspaper. Beijing had predictably gone berserk and was trying to get Washington to come down heavily on President Lee. In the midst of all this, Tsai and I met to discuss the situation. I took a liking to this
It might have been an inelegantly, even ineptly, executed pivot, gratuitously alienating key allies, but by leaving Afghanistan and forming a security pact with Australia and the UK in the Indo-Pacific, US President Joe Biden has at least cleared the decks to focus on his great foreign policy challenge — the systemic rivalry with China. Yet the concern now is how quickly this rivalry could escalate, especially regarding Taiwan. The linchpin of the US alliance system in south-east Asia, Taiwan is the biggest island in the first island chain, the group of islands that keeps China blocked in. It is China’s