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.
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations