It is fascinating how an otherwise sophisticated united front campaign initiated by Beijing to win the “hearts and minds” of Taiwanese can, in some instances, descend into a crude and self-defeating tirade — and nothing draws the worst out of Chinese officials like the idea that democracy could generate outcomes that depart from Beijing’s plans.
The latest instance came over the weekend, when Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference Chairman Jia Qinglin (賈慶林) told Taiwanese during a cross-strait forum that they should “choose the right person” and “vote for the right people” in next year’s presidential and legislative elections.
There is little doubt that by “right person,” Jia meant President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) and that the “right people” are Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) candidates.
Of course, it is beyond Jia’s comprehension, along with that of his political masters, that he has no right to decide for Taiwanese who the “right” person to represent them might be. It is also ironic that an official operating in an authoritarian system where the party, then the state, dictates what is “best” for its citizens, would presume to educate a polity that has cultivated democracy — and used it as an instrument of empowerment — for 15 years.
Farce aside, the remark, which could not have been made without official approval from Zhongnanhai, highlights what can only be interpreted as a growing sense of insecurity in Beijing. With Ma’s re-election far from being a foregone conclusion, Beijing is aware that despite warmer ties, tour groups and spending sprees, it has fallen well short of converting Taiwanese to the idea that China is a friend. In fact, the closer contacts that have resulted from Ma’s cross-strait policies have in several ways merely highlighted the myriad little ways, some trivial, others less so, in which Taiwan and China differ.
It is the right of every Taiwanese to use his or her vote to calibrate government behavior, from the minutiae of everyday life all the way to interactions with authoritarian Beijing. For people like Jia, only the “right person” can ensure continuity in cross-strait exchanges, which underpins Beijing’s plans for eventual unification. However, to Jia’s chagrin, Taiwanese may see things otherwise.
His warning also contains a reminder that in the lead-up to the elections on Jan. 14, the Chinese Communist Party will do its utmost to assist its friends in the KMT, which is likely to translate into wide-ranging political interference in the nation’s domestic affairs. It remains to be seen whether KMT officials, fearing for their political survival, will give in to the allure of Chinese assistance. One test will be whether the Government Information Office, which went on the offensive last week over the light-hearted designation of Taipei as a city of gluttony, will react with similar energy to the naked attempt by another country to influence Taiwan’s democratic system.
Tsai Ing-wen’s (蔡英文) Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) has a gargantuan challenge on its hands. Not only must it prevail in an electoral system that already favors the KMT and an elite bureaucracy that is largely beholden to the KMT, it will also have to do so in an environment that is increasingly being shaped by Beijing.
Nevertheless, Jia may have unwittingly given the DPP a boost, as warnings and scare tactics have time and again backfired with Taiwanese voters. While more diplomatic than the lobbing of ballistic missiles into the waters off Taiwan in the run-up to the presidential election in 1996, the result of Jia’s ill-veiled threat is likely to be the same: Taiwanese do not like to be told what to think or how to vote.
When I was in Ukraine filming for an upcoming documentary, I was surprised at how frequently my mind naturally tended to map Ukraine’s war experience onto Taiwan, where I have lived for the past 10 years. There are obvious parallels of an imperial nuclear superpower asserting itself over a smaller non-nuclear state, but there are also small mundane things that would impact everyday life. When I saw Ukrainian elderly people filling jugs of water at a church in sub-zero temperatures and hauling it back to their homes which might not have electricity, I imagined the difficulty of a Taiwanese senior
This is the Year of the Dragon. At the beginning of the year, the Chinese government announced that “dragon” is to be translated as long (龍), in a move meant to erase the supposed negative connotations of dragons. In many Western cultures, dragons are often seen as wicked or demonic. This is not just a mere linguistic adjustment. It is symbolic, representing a change in China’s current political culture. Under the overbearing leadership of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), the Chinese government has been undergoing a cultural policy of “de-Westernization.” Although this change in semantics is just one of many
An online petition started by a doctor in Taichung called on lawmakers to halt an amendment that would shorten the time needed for Chinese spouses of Taiwanese to gain citizenship in Taiwan. The amendment could put a strain on Taiwan’s already burdened National Health Insurance (NHI) system, Cheng Ching Hospital thoracic surgery division doctor Tu Cheng-che (杜承哲) said. Doctors have seen many Chinese spouses bring their relatives to hospital emergency rooms, asking for full checkups, he added. “They [Chinese spouses] even tell their relatives that healthcare in Taiwan is free and is easily accessible, and that healthcare providers in Taiwan
On Feb. 15, the UK’s Economist Intelligence Unit released its latest report on the state of democracy around the world. Out of the 167 countries and territories covered by the report, titled Democracy Index 2023: Age of conflict, Taiwan is considered a full democracy, ranking first in Asia and 10th around the world. The index showed that global democracy regressed last year, yet Taiwan countered this trend, a fact that all Taiwanese should take pride in. The report sheds light on the rising tide of authoritarianism, with groups consolidating power within and forming alliances with authoritarian powers without. The international order