Chinese interference in Taiwan’s elections almost always backfires.
Right before the 2016 elections, China-based Taiwanese singer Huang An (黃安), who has made a name for himself by appeasing China, reported that Taiwanese K-pop star Chou Tzu-yu (周子瑜) supported Taiwanese independence when she held a Republic of China (ROC) flag on a South Korean TV show.
Chou was forced to apologize in public for her actions just before election day, which caused an immediate public outcry in Taiwan and resulted in a massive defeat for the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) in the presidential and legislative elections.
Earlier this month, Taiwanese YouTuber Potter King’s (波特王) Chinese agent demanded that he delete all videos in which he addresses President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) as “president.” The Internet celebrity defiantly responded by saying that he would rather let go of the Chinese market than kneel down before it, showing real backbone.
What effect the incident will have on the Jan. 11 elections will soon be evident.
It is well-known that China has been using carrot-and-stick tactics to infiltrate countries with the help of huge funds, its cyberarmy, the Belt and Road Initiative, and military expansion. This constitutes a national security threat to the EU, the US, Australia, Canada and other democracies.
China’s infiltration of Taiwan is even more ubiquitous, as it adopts every possible means and works particularly hard to deploy its “united front” tactics at Taiwanese temples, in organized crime and with non-governmental organizations, to the extent that the red shadow of communism now looms in almost every corner of Taiwanese society.
On the other hand, China’s rise gives Beijing an abundance of bargaining chips to be used as bait as it directs its “united front” tactics against Taiwan, while its enormous market and business opportunities conjure up expectations and fantasies in some people’s minds.
All these factors contribute to the emergence of a discourse in Taiwanese society according to which reliance on China is the only way to revive the economy. Politically, this means strongly supporting the so-called “1992 consensus” and refraining from provoking China.
Economically, it means stressing the idea that “politics is politics and economy is economy,” and that as long as politics is avoided, it is possible to make money in China where “the streets are paved with gold.”
The idea of a flawless China in the mind of some Taiwanese is just a fantasy created by wishful thinking that cannot stand the test of reality.
Fundamentally, Beijing does not approve of or acknowledge the “one China, different interpretations” aspect of the “1992 consensus.” Its bottom line is clear: It is the “one China” principle, which means that there is only one China in the world and it is called the People’s Republic of China.
Although the KMT acknowledges the “1992 consensus,” the ROC name and flag — crucial symbols of the “different interpretations” version of the “1992 consensus” — are not allowed in China.
Similarly, any official personnel or institution, from the president and legislators down to local government leaders, council members and their institutions also cannot be mentioned in China, and Taiwan has to compete under the name “Chinese Taipei” in international competitions, even those held in Taiwan. All national symbols and signs of nationhood are taboo.
By now, Taiwanese clearly understand that the “1992 consensus” is a scam, and that only KMT politicians still view it as sacred and pay tribute to the phrase faithfully without daring to raise the slightest doubt over its validity.
After Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) proposed his version of the “one country, two systems” formula for Taiwan on Jan. 2, there is no ambiguity left in China’s suppression of the ROC.
Under these circumstances, Taiwan would have to accept the “one country, two systems” formula or continue to be suppressed, as the absence of that framework means that China will persist in its view that Taiwan seeks “independence” even if it continues to call itself the ROC.
Moreover, after six months, the pro-democracy protests in Hong Kong further underscore the failure of the formula.
All these aspects constitute a problem that the KMT will not be able to break free of through its cross-strait policies.
Admittedly, China — the largest emerging market — is economically attractive to the West and even more so to a small economy like Taiwan. In terms of domestic demand, Taiwan only has a population of 23 million, a market that is hardly able to rival China, with its population of 1.4 billion.
In particular, Taiwan’s declining entertainment industry, as well as rapidly rising online video-streaming services and other start-up sectors, aim to find a way to succeed in China’s huge domestic market.
Some people naively think that they will be able to succeed in China without any interference if they separate economics from politics, and refrain from touching upon or challenging China’s political dogmas and ideology.
Sadly, such thinking follows the unwritten rules of soft authoritarianism and opens a window outside of politics to satisfy people’s material needs and ease intense political pressures.
In other words, rulers relying on soft authoritarianism leave people in peace as long as they do not challenge their legitimacy.
However, rulers relying on hard authoritarianism are not satisfied by passive obedience: they deploy advanced surveillance technology to incorporate all citizens into a system of digital totalitarianism. The passive attitude of not objecting is not enough, and people are instead required to proactively show their support for the policies formulated by the regime and the ideology espoused by its leader.
Chou and King, as well as Taiwanese businesses that have been a source of controversy, such as baker Wu Pao-chun (吳寶春), cafe chain 85°C and Yifang Taiwan Fruit Tea, are clear examples that Beijing’s pressure has deprived Taiwanese entertainers and enterprises of the freedom to remain silent. If they want to be able to do business in China, they must openly and publicly express their support for China and belittle Taiwan.
More horrendously, China’s domestic political censorship has extended overseas with its exertion of sharp power.
The videos of King with Tsai that he was asked to remove — even those that were not uploaded to Chinese platforms — along with China’s pressure on the NBA are conspicuous examples of Beijing’s attempts to expand its digital authoritarianism to the world.
King is an Internet celebrity known for his characteristically cheesy pickup lines, and his farcical style represents what can be tolerated in Taiwan’s diverse and free social environment. Seen in this light, China’s attempt to impose its political censorship on King is an infringement on Taiwan’s democracy and sovereignty.
If Beijing is allowed to repeatedly get away with such threats and intimidation, Taiwan has already been defeated by China’s red infiltration.
Translated by Chang Ho-ming
President William Lai (賴清德) attended a dinner held by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) when representatives from the group visited Taiwan in October. In a speech at the event, Lai highlighted similarities in the geopolitical challenges faced by Israel and Taiwan, saying that the two countries “stand on the front line against authoritarianism.” Lai noted how Taiwan had “immediately condemned” the Oct. 7, 2023, attack on Israel by Hamas and had provided humanitarian aid. Lai was heavily criticized from some quarters for standing with AIPAC and Israel. On Nov. 4, the Taipei Times published an opinion article (“Speak out on the
Most Hong Kongers ignored the elections for its Legislative Council (LegCo) in 2021 and did so once again on Sunday. Unlike in 2021, moderate democrats who pledged their allegiance to Beijing were absent from the ballots this year. The electoral system overhaul is apparent revenge by Beijing for the democracy movement. On Sunday, the Hong Kong “patriots-only” election of the LegCo had a record-low turnout in the five geographical constituencies, with only 1.3 million people casting their ballots on the only seats that most Hong Kongers are eligible to vote for. Blank and invalid votes were up 50 percent from the previous
More than a week after Hondurans voted, the country still does not know who will be its next president. The Honduran National Electoral Council has not declared a winner, and the transmission of results has experienced repeated malfunctions that interrupted updates for almost 24 hours at times. The delay has become the second-longest post-electoral silence since the election of former Honduran president Juan Orlando Hernandez of the National Party in 2017, which was tainted by accusations of fraud. Once again, this has raised concerns among observers, civil society groups and the international community. The preliminary results remain close, but both
Beijing’s diplomatic tightening with Jakarta is not an isolated episode; it is a piece of a long-term strategy that realigns the prices of choices across the Indo-Pacific. The principle is simple. There is no need to impose an alliance if one can make a given trajectory convenient and the alternative costly. By tying Indonesia’s modernization to capital, technology and logistics corridors, and by obtaining in public the reaffirmation of the “one China” principle, Beijing builds a constraint that can be activated tomorrow on sensitive issues. The most sensitive is Taiwan. If we look at systemic constraints, the question is not whether
RSS