Whether in a unicameral or bicameral system, the legislature is always considered the highest representative body in a democratic country. As lawmakers represent the people, it is hoped that the legislature truly represents the political diversity of the country, with lawmakers from different parties.
In 2020, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) of the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) triumphed in Taiwan’s presidential election with 8,170,231 votes.
Four political parties passed the 5 percent threshold in the simultaneously held legislative election — the DPP, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), the Taiwan People’s Party and the New Power Party, together garnering 12.22 million votes. The two major parties — the DPP and the KMT — together had more votes than Tsai’s presidential votes.
As the legislature represents a diverse constituency with various interests and values, that phenomenon is common in any democratic country.
However, for a country under the control of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), where no second voice is allowed in the National People’s Congress, it is not understandable that US House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi is not an extension of the administration of US President Joe Biden, but instead represents one of the US’ two highest legislative bodies.
Similar to other national legislatures, the House is tasked with supervising the US government, and reviewing and passing legislation.
It also engages in diplomatic exchanges with other nations on behalf of US interests. To realize its legislative and check-and-balance functions, it also needs to account for different opinions and interact with US expatriates.
Following the principle of separation of powers, the governing party in a democratic country usually respects exchange events between the country’s legislators and those from other nations.
In Taiwan, KMT legislators, and city and county councilors have been free to visit China in the past, without asking for the president’s approval. Therefore, it is baffling that any Taiwanese politician would dance to China’s tune and oppose Pelosi’s visit.
Following the same logic, the government would have to cut the budget for official visits to other countries, because those visits would be against Beijing’s “one China” principle.
As Pelosi is second in the line of succession to the US president after US Vice President Kamala Harris, she is the third-most powerful politician in the US. As the US Congress has multiple purposes, such as supervision, civic education and conflict resolution, it is no doubt the main hub of politics in the country, not to mention that it holds the power to declare war.
In response to Pelosi’s potential trip to Taiwan, China’s warning that it would react with “firm and resolute measures” could be regarded as a barbaric and provocative move, almost akin to declaring war on the US.
This kind of “wolf warrior” diplomacy would not deter the US, but instead create the opposite effect, with more US politicians and citizens seeing the CCP’s true colors and realizing that it not only threatens Taiwan, but democracy and freedom worldwide.
Other countries would likely come to realize that they mistakenly believed that China would democratize after it has undergone economic reform.
The truth is that the once-sleeping dragon is using its economic clout to threaten the US-led democratic order with its newly gained wealth.
Leo Chang is executive director of Citizen’s Congress Watch.
Translated by Rita Wang
The image was oddly quiet. No speeches, no flags, no dramatic announcements — just a Chinese cargo ship cutting through arctic ice and arriving in Britain in October. The Istanbul Bridge completed a journey that once existed only in theory, shaving weeks off traditional shipping routes. On paper, it was a story about efficiency. In strategic terms, it was about timing. Much like politics, arriving early matters. Especially when the route, the rules and the traffic are still undefined. For years, global politics has trained us to watch the loud moments: warships in the Taiwan Strait, sanctions announced at news conferences, leaders trading
Eighty-seven percent of Taiwan’s energy supply this year came from burning fossil fuels, with more than 47 percent of that from gas-fired power generation. The figures attracted international attention since they were in October published in a Reuters report, which highlighted the fragility and structural challenges of Taiwan’s energy sector, accumulated through long-standing policy choices. The nation’s overreliance on natural gas is proving unstable and inadequate. The rising use of natural gas does not project an image of a Taiwan committed to a green energy transition; rather, it seems that Taiwan is attempting to patch up structural gaps in lieu of
The Executive Yuan and the Presidential Office on Monday announced that they would not countersign or promulgate the amendments to the Act Governing the Allocation of Government Revenues and Expenditures (財政收支劃分法) passed by the Legislative Yuan — a first in the nation’s history and the ultimate measure the central government could take to counter what it called an unconstitutional legislation. Since taking office last year, the legislature — dominated by the opposition alliance of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and Taiwan People’s Party — has passed or proposed a slew of legislation that has stirred controversy and debate, such as extending
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators have twice blocked President William Lai’s (賴清德) special defense budget bill in the Procedure Committee, preventing it from entering discussion or review. Meanwhile, KMT Legislator Chen Yu-jen (陳玉珍) proposed amendments that would enable lawmakers to use budgets for their assistants at their own discretion — with no requirement for receipts, staff registers, upper or lower headcount limits, or usage restrictions — prompting protest from legislative assistants. After the new legislature convened in February, the KMT joined forces with the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) and, leveraging their slim majority, introduced bills that undermine the Constitution, disrupt constitutional