Since the 1990s, southern Taiwan has become a pan-green political stronghold. As a result, people often believe that support for Taiwanese independence is far more prevalent in the south. However, this conception is merely a stereotype.
According to polls conducted by Focus Survey Research, in Yunlin, Chiayi, Nantou, Kaohsiung and Pingtung counties, 77.6 percent of the population believe that Taiwanese sovereignty belongs to Taiwan's 23 million people. However, even more than that -- 80.4 percent -- in Taipei believe the same thing.
Pan-blue support in northern Taiwan is not a matter of anti-independence. According to cross analysis, the higher the education level and the lower the age group, the more one is likely to support Taiwanese independence. Therefore, although the Taipei region has the highest concentration of Mainlanders, it also has the highest concentration of youngsters from every ethnic group receiving a higher education. Therefore, the reasons behind southern Taiwan's pan-green and northern Taiwan's pan-blue predilections must be sought outside of the independence issue.
There are two explanations for this.
First, the backlash from the Chinese Nationalist Party's (KMT) long-term support of the north over the south. Before 2000, KMT election results in the south maintained a 60 percent advantage. After President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) come to power in 2000, his subsequent policy for equal development in north and south created a strong response in the south resulting in a major change in voting patterns.
Second, there are the effects of globalization on Taiwan -- the gap between winners and losers is increasing, with the north winning and the agricultural south losing. Taiwan's economy was already integrating with the global economy when China joined the world production line in the 1990s, resulting in the export of industry and the rise of unemployment in Taiwan. Like other regions on the losing side, many in southern Taiwan reject further globalization, with the added implication that support is sliding for the KMT's continual encouragement of China-bound investment.
Figures provided by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics show Taipei City ranked highest in annual disposable income in 2002 at around NT$38,000 followed in descending order by Hsinchu City, Kaohsiung City, Taipei County, Taichung City and Taoyuan County at above NT$26,000. Of these areas, four are northern, with only one from central and one from southern Taiwan. Moreover, in Yunlin, Chiayi, Kaohsiung and Pingtung counties, annual disposable income came in at below NT$23,000 -- only about 60 percent of the annual disposable income in Hsinchu.
Not only does the south have lower disposable income levels, but its income growth is also slower. Along Taiwan's west coast, the highest rate of growth in income is in Hsinchu City, with a NT$7,200 rise between 1988 and 2006. After Hsinchu, the highest areas of growth are in Taipei County, Kaohsiung City, Taipei City, and Miaoli County. The real winner is of course Taipei City, which remained stable even during the 2001 economic slump.
These figures imply that the KMT would be gravely miscalculating the situation if it thought it could oppose Taiwan independence while focusing on the support of the educated population of the north. Now that the pan-blue camp is following DPP initiatives such as the bid to enter the UN, the gap on sovereignty between the two camps has been reduced.
Economic growth and disposable income are likely to become stronger determining factors of public support.
Lin Cho-shui is a former Democratic Progressive Party legislator.
Translated by Angela Hong
A gap appears to be emerging between Washington’s foreign policy elites and the broader American public on how the United States should respond to China’s rise. From my vantage working at a think tank in Washington, DC, and through regular travel around the United States, I increasingly experience two distinct discussions. This divergence — between America’s elite hawkishness and public caution — may become one of the least appreciated and most consequential external factors influencing Taiwan’s security environment in the years ahead. Within the American policy community, the dominant view of China has grown unmistakably tough. Many members of Congress, as
After declaring Iran’s military “gone,” US President Donald Trump appealed to the UK, France, Japan and South Korea — as well as China, Iran’s strategic partner — to send minesweepers and naval forces to reopen the Strait of Hormuz. When allies balked, the request turned into a warning: NATO would face “a very bad” future if it refused. The prevailing wisdom is that Trump faces a credibility problem: having spent years insulting allies, he finds they would not rally when he needs them. That is true, but superficial, as though a structural collapse could be caused by wounded feelings. Something
Former Taipei mayor and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) founding chairman Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) was sentenced to 17 years in prison on Thursday, making headlines across major media. However, another case linked to the TPP — the indictment of Chinese immigrant Xu Chunying (徐春鶯) for alleged violations of the Anti-Infiltration Act (反滲透法) on Tuesday — has also stirred up heated discussions. Born in Shanghai, Xu became a resident of Taiwan through marriage in 1993. Currently the director of the Taiwan New Immigrant Development Association, she was elected to serve as legislator-at-large for the TPP in 2023, but was later charged with involvement
Out of 64 participating universities in this year’s Stars Program — through which schools directly recommend their top students to universities for admission — only 19 filled their admissions quotas. There were 922 vacancies, down more than 200 from last year; top universities had 37 unfilled places, 40 fewer than last year. The original purpose of the Stars Program was to expand admissions to a wider range of students. However, certain departments at elite universities that failed to meet their admissions quotas are not improving. Vacancies at top universities are linked to students’ program preferences on their applications, but inappropriate admission