While presidential and legislative election campaigns continue to heat up in Taiwan, Hong Kong on Dec. 10 held its first “patriots only” district council elections, which attracted a voter turnout of just 27.5 percent, the lowest since the territory was handed over to China in 1997. It was a massive plunge from the 2019 district elections amid democracy protests, when a record-high 71.23 percent of voters cast ballots, leading to a landslide victory for the democratic camp, which captured more than 85 percent of the seats.
After the 2019 election, Beijing imposed oppressive national security legislation on Hong Kong, while the Chinese National People’s Congress in 2021 revamped the territory’s electoral system, ensuring that only “patriots” could run for office. The number of directly elected district council seats was slashed from 462 to 88, with the other 382 controlled by the Hong Kong authorities and Chinese government loyalists. All candidates must be nominated by Hong Kong government committees, which have shut out all pro-democracy parties and advocates.
China also clamped down on dissent before the Dec. 10 election, while the Hong Kong government spent HK$1.15 billion (US$147.44 million) to promote election campaigns, including providing incentives for voters and asking all civil servants to participate.
However, the low turnout, compounded with a previous record-low turnout of 30.2 percent for the Seventh Legislative Council election in 2021, indicates that quite a few Hong Kongers decided not to bother because there were no real options on the ballots. The low turnout is obviously a “huge humiliation” to Hong Kong and Chinese authorities, as voters made a speechless protest over the China-controlled elections.
It also reflects Hong Kongers’ disillusionment with China’s “one country, two systems” fabrication, which pledged to allow free elections, but turned out to be a Hobson’s choice that contradicts universal democratic principles. “Hong Kongers ruling Hong Kong” has been replaced by “China-assigned patriots administering Hong Kong.”
The territory’s anti-democratic elections should be a warning for Taiwanese, especially as Beijing ramps up its efforts to manipulate Taiwan’s elections, aiming to help the pro-China camp acquire power and leadership, just like it did in Hong Kong.
One major component of China’s interference is deploying coercive military drills while depicting Taiwan’s elections as a choice between war and peace, hoping to scare Taiwanese into voting for pro-China candidates and parties, such as the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and Taiwan People’s Party, both of which echo China’s language and call for closer cross-strait relations to ensure peace. Meanwhile, amid Chinese trade bans designed to suppress Taiwan’s economy, KMT presidential candidate New Taipei City Mayor Hou You-yi (侯友宜) has proposed resuming the Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement to deepen the nation’s reliance on the Chinese market, and vowed to open up for more Chinese to study and work in Taiwan. The proposals ignore the international trend of decoupling from China, which itself is undergoing economic hardships, and could sacrifice the welfare and rights of Taiwanese.
China has offered incentives to Taiwanese as part of its attempts to influence the elections, including underwriting trips for Taiwanese to visit China and providing benefits to encourage Taiwanese to relocate to Chinese coastal provinces. All of Beijing’s “united front” tactics are part of Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) proposal of a new “one country, two systems” framework and deepening cross-strait integration for “peaceful unification,” which aims to eventually make Taiwan another Hong Kong.
Looking at Hong Kong’s anti-democratic election as a lesson, Taiwanese should seek to safeguard Taiwan’s precious democracy and self-determined sovereignty in next month’s polls.
China’s recent aggressive military posture around Taiwan simply reflects the truth that China is a millennium behind, as Kobe City Councilor Norihiro Uehata has commented. While democratic countries work for peace, prosperity and progress, authoritarian countries such as Russia and China only care about territorial expansion, superpower status and world dominance, while their people suffer. Two millennia ago, the ancient Chinese philosopher Mencius (孟子) would have advised Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) that “people are the most important, state is lesser, and the ruler is the least important.” In fact, the reverse order is causing the great depression in China right now,
We are used to hearing that whenever something happens, it means Taiwan is about to fall to China. Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) cannot change the color of his socks without China experts claiming it means an invasion is imminent. So, it is no surprise that what happened in Venezuela over the weekend triggered the knee-jerk reaction of saying that Taiwan is next. That is not an opinion on whether US President Donald Trump was right to remove Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro the way he did or if it is good for Venezuela and the world. There are other, more qualified
This should be the year in which the democracies, especially those in East Asia, lose their fear of the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) “one China principle” plus its nuclear “Cognitive Warfare” coercion strategies, all designed to achieve hegemony without fighting. For 2025, stoking regional and global fear was a major goal for the CCP and its People’s Liberation Army (PLA), following on Mao Zedong’s (毛澤東) Little Red Book admonition, “We must be ruthless to our enemies; we must overpower and annihilate them.” But on Dec. 17, 2025, the Trump Administration demonstrated direct defiance of CCP terror with its record US$11.1 billion arms
The immediate response in Taiwan to the extraction of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro by the US over the weekend was to say that it was an example of violence by a major power against a smaller nation and that, as such, it gave Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) carte blanche to invade Taiwan. That assessment is vastly oversimplistic and, on more sober reflection, likely incorrect. Generally speaking, there are three basic interpretations from commentators in Taiwan. The first is that the US is no longer interested in what is happening beyond its own backyard, and no longer preoccupied with regions in other
RSS