The legislative elections are only two months from now. Voters will choose their candidate, with the districts' needs first in their mind, but given the results of previous legislative elections, the nation's interests may be of greater importance to them.
Over the last eight years some good work has been done. But the list of problems recently named by the president is much greater. Another four years of this and Taiwan would be weakened probably beyond repair.
In the 1990s, the Legislative Yuan changed after changes were made to the Constitution. It gained wide authority in the development of democracy in Taiwan. It is time to change again. The numbers of seats will be halved, the effects of which are difficult to predict. The larger number of districts may well have some influence on the legislature.
In the past, the KMT held the majority, which made it much more knowledgeable in directing its elections -- as did its considerable assets. Times have changed, as have the people and the KMT's budget. That makes the outcome of the elections even more unpredictable.
If, after the next elections, the legislature is still controlled by one party, while the presidency is controlled by another, Taiwan's problems will continue and pressure for democratic change might increase.
If, on the other hand, the Legislative Yuan and the presidency are controlled by the same party, the nation will see either a continued fight to keep its sovereignty or a gradual move toward China.
The media is focusing on the presidential election, not the legislature. That is not unusual in democratic countries. Many countries have legislative and presidential elections at the same time.
Some do not have strong legislatures and focus little on their legislative elections. But considering how wide the differences between the two main parties are, the legislative election is clearly crucial.
The DPP and KMT have three months after the legislative election to campaign for the presidency. The DPP and KMT have party platforms, but neither of them has delivered an election platform. Reaching consensus within a party on an election platform is difficult in any democratic country. Given the strong differences between the nation's two main parties, the voters will need all the information they can get in the next two elections, which will have a clear impact on their future.
The DPP has an election disadvantage of having a lame duck president. Frank Hsieh (
Taiwan is also apparently suffering a lack of urgency in gathering and supporting candidates for the legislative districts. For the DPP, the legislative elections are especially key.
In the KMT, some surprising moves have caught media attention.
The party presented a draft mission statement without any mention of the "one China" policy or the "1992 consensus." Senior party leaders, including presidential candidate Ma Ying-jeou (
Media reports, however, claim that many KMT members are concerned that harping on unification is limiting public support for the party.
It makes it abundantly clear that the party hopes for unification with China.
Negative public reactions to this clearly indicate that voters disagree with the KMT's guiding principles.
As the presidential campaigning heats up, relatively little is being done to highlight the significance of the legislature. Both camps recognize that the public must agree on the nation's future, but few people are paying attention.
Nat Bellocchi is a former chairman of the American Institute in Taiwan and a special adviser to the Liberty Times Group. The views expressed in this article are his own.
In recent weeks, Taiwan has witnessed a surge of public anxiety over the possible introduction of Indian migrant workers. What began as a policy signal from the Ministry of Labor quickly escalated into a broader controversy. Petitions gathered thousands of signatures within days, political figures issued strong warnings, and social media became saturated with concerns about public safety and social stability. At first glance, this appears to be a straightforward policy question: Should Taiwan introduce Indian migrant workers or not? However, this framing is misleading. The current debate is not fundamentally about India. It is about Taiwan’s labor system, its
Japan’s imminent easing of arms export rules has sparked strong interest from Warsaw to Manila, Reuters reporting found, as US President Donald Trump wavers on security commitments to allies, and the wars in Iran and Ukraine strain US weapons supplies. Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi’s ruling party approved the changes this week as she tries to invigorate the pacifist country’s military industrial base. Her government would formally adopt the new rules as soon as this month, three Japanese government officials told Reuters. Despite largely isolating itself from global arms markets since World War II, Japan spends enough on its own
On March 31, the South Korean Ministry of Foreign Affairs released declassified diplomatic records from 1995 that drew wide domestic media attention. One revelation stood out: North Korea had once raised the possibility of diplomatic relations with Taiwan. In a meeting with visiting Chinese officials in May 1995, as then-Chinese president Jiang Zemin (江澤民) prepared for a visit to South Korea, North Korean officials objected to Beijing’s growing ties with Seoul and raised Taiwan directly. According to the newly released records, North Korean officials asked why Pyongyang should refrain from developing relations with Taiwan while China and South Korea were expanding high-level
Minister of Labor Hung Sun-han (洪申翰) on April 9 said that the first group of Indian workers could arrive as early as this year as part of a memorandum of understanding (MOU) between the Taipei Economic and Cultural Center in India and the India Taipei Association. Signed in February 2024, the MOU stipulates that Taipei would decide the number of migrant workers and which industries would employ them, while New Delhi would manage recruitment and training. Employment would be governed by the laws of both countries. Months after its signing, the two sides agreed that 1,000 migrant workers from India would