In a teleconference call to a Washington meeting of the Taiwanese Association of America on Saturday, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) urged Taiwanese expatriates to return home to vote in the Nov. 24 elections and “show the rest of the world their commitment to safeguarding the nation’s democracy.”
Her dual role as head of the Democratic Progressive Party no doubt influenced her remarks when she said: “The world is watching whether Taiwanese will vote for a China-leaning party or choose one that is committed to democracy and human rights.”
Putting political partisanship aside, there is merit to her call for Taiwanese to hold firm to the principles of democracy, which include conducting free and fair elections.
Although Chinese officials have repeatedly insisted that Beijing would not meddle in Taiwan’s elections, there have been enough reports to suggest otherwise, including confirmation by Investigation Bureau Director-General Leu Wen-jong (呂文忠) that China has, through funding candidates’ campaigns or offering travel junkets, sought Taiwanese voters’ support for its favored candidates.
There have also been allegations that Chinese authorities have “collaborated” with Chinese airlines to provide exceptionally low-priced tickets for Taiwan-bound flights ahead of the elections, so that the so-called “voting troops” — a term Taiwanese media use to describe China-based Taiwanese who, either of their own accord or feeling coerced, return home to vote for a particular candidate or party — could sway the results in Beijing’s favor.
National Police Agency Deputy Director-General Chiu Feng-kuang (邱豐光) last week said the police had so far seized about NT$9.73 billion (US$315 million) from people suspected of taking bets on the elections.
Given that figure, some political observers have said the other side of the Taiwan Strait should be considered a primary source of the money.
Holding a fair election free of intimidation and outside interference is a basic requirement for a democracy. If that basic ground is not held, Taiwan’s democracy would be fragile and vulnerable.
While the nation’s relatively bloodless transformation from authoritarian rule to democracy has often been touted as a success story worthy of praise and recognition, its road to democratization over the past three decades has not been without challenges.
In terms of free and fair elections, Taiwan has had its share of struggles, given its historical milieu.
Until the Act Governing the Handling of Ill-gotten Properties by Political Parties and Their Affiliate Organizations (政黨及其附隨組織不當取得財產處理條例) was passed by the Legislative Yuan on July 25, 2016, candidates other than those of the Chinese Nationalist Pary (KMT) were at a disadvantage, given the KMT’s enormous wealth. It was not until the passage of that law that all political parties could be sure of a level playing field as they compete for voters’ support.
Taiwan now faces an even more difficult challenge: holding free elections amid clandestine Chinese moves.
A National Security Bureau source earlier this month said that China has been engaged in massive “cognitive hacking” against Taiwanese voters ahead of this month’s elections in practice for manipulating the 2020 elections in favor of Beijing.
Tsai’s call for voters “to safeguard the nation’s democracy” should be taken seriously. Each and every voter should take their ability to cast a free vote seriously. Their collective voice will help consolidate the nation’s young democracy.
Jan. 1 marks a decade since China repealed its one-child policy. Just 10 days before, Peng Peiyun (彭珮雲), who long oversaw the often-brutal enforcement of China’s family-planning rules, died at the age of 96, having never been held accountable for her actions. Obituaries praised Peng for being “reform-minded,” even though, in practice, she only perpetuated an utterly inhumane policy, whose consequences have barely begun to materialize. It was Vice Premier Chen Muhua (陳慕華) who first proposed the one-child policy in 1979, with the endorsement of China’s then-top leaders, Chen Yun (陳雲) and Deng Xiaoping (鄧小平), as a means of avoiding the
The last foreign delegation Nicolas Maduro met before he went to bed Friday night (January 2) was led by China’s top Latin America diplomat. “I had a pleasant meeting with Qiu Xiaoqi (邱小琪), Special Envoy of President Xi Jinping (習近平),” Venezuela’s soon-to-be ex-president tweeted on Telegram, “and we reaffirmed our commitment to the strategic relationship that is progressing and strengthening in various areas for building a multipolar world of development and peace.” Judging by how minutely the Central Intelligence Agency was monitoring Maduro’s every move on Friday, President Trump himself was certainly aware of Maduro’s felicitations to his Chinese guest. Just
A recent piece of international news has drawn surprisingly little attention, yet it deserves far closer scrutiny. German industrial heavyweight Siemens Mobility has reportedly outmaneuvered long-entrenched Chinese competitors in Southeast Asian infrastructure to secure a strategic partnership with Vietnam’s largest private conglomerate, Vingroup. The agreement positions Siemens to participate in the construction of a high-speed rail link between Hanoi and Ha Long Bay. German media were blunt in their assessment: This was not merely a commercial win, but has symbolic significance in “reshaping geopolitical influence.” At first glance, this might look like a routine outcome of corporate bidding. However, placed in
China often describes itself as the natural leader of the global south: a power that respects sovereignty, rejects coercion and offers developing countries an alternative to Western pressure. For years, Venezuela was held up — implicitly and sometimes explicitly — as proof that this model worked. Today, Venezuela is exposing the limits of that claim. Beijing’s response to the latest crisis in Venezuela has been striking not only for its content, but for its tone. Chinese officials have abandoned their usual restrained diplomatic phrasing and adopted language that is unusually direct by Beijing’s standards. The Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs described the
RSS