The highly anticipated election season drew to a close on Saturday, with Taiwanese giving their vote of confidence to the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) for a historic third term. Winning with a decisive 40.05 percent of the vote, William Lai (賴清德) is on track to continue President Tsai Ing-wen’s (蔡英文) foreign and domestic policies.
International media watched the election with keen interest, flocking to Taiwan with more urgency than in previous votes. The international news conference Lai and running mate Hsiao Bi-khim (蕭美琴) held days before the election was attended by representatives of 128 media outlets from 28 countries, and many more covered the vote over the weekend.
The narrative was dominated by the promise that this decision would upset the direction of cross-strait relations over the next four years, either toward greater confrontation or cooling tensions. In essence, the message aligns with Beijing’s missive to voters that their choice was between “war or peace.” Beijing’s “troublemaker” designation for Lai has even weaseled its way into some headlines, allowing a foreign power to dictate the Taiwanese president-elect’s image, even before he takes office.
Yet anyone who follows Taiwanese politics and cross-strait relations knows it is not that simple. The DPP might have kept the presidency, but it was largely the fault of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) failing to agree on a united ballot. With a combined 59.95 percent of the vote, the opposition could have carried this election on the promise of a routine transfer of power. The result is not so much a “snub to Beijing” as an indictment of the state of the opposition.
For a better understanding, look to the Legislative Yuan. The DPP lost 10 seats and the majority, while the KMT picked up 14 and the TPP gained three. Without anyone passing the 50 percent threshold, the speaker’s gavel is anyone’s for the taking, and the eight TPP legislators find themselves in a powerful swing vote position. The DPP-led government would find it hard to get anything done with a split legislature, especially one that is determined to impose greater oversight on the executive branch, as the TPP has been emphasizing in these first days following the election.
Lai’s victory was decisive, but voters are clearly not satisfied with every facet of the DPP’s performance. Knowing this, the reaction from China has been muted. No unusual People’s Liberation Army movements have yet been reported by the Ministry of National Defense, and creatively worded statements of condemnation were to be expected. China’s biggest message so far came yesterday with Nauru’s termination of diplomatic relations, leaving Taiwan with only 12 formal diplomatic allies. If such theatrics had a large impact, Taiwanese would not have voted to continue the politics of the past eight years. Instead, Beijing is also waiting to see where this undercurrent of discontent leads, and might be content to see a gridlocked legislature.
At the same time, Taiwan should be proud of what it accomplished this weekend. Watched by the world, it proved that “vibrant democracy” really is an accurate description of the way Taiwanese revel in their hard-won right to vote. Citizens traverse miles and oceans to cast their ballots, staying afterward to see each vote read aloud, one by one, echoed thousands of times across the country. Hours later, both opposition candidates showed what it means to concede promptly and graciously, despite the barbs they traded on the campaign trail and the stakes at play. Their gazes are fixed on the future, debating matters of importance such as legislative reform.
This is to be a huge year for democracy, with nearly half of the world’s population choosing new leaders. As one of the first countries to hold an election this year, Taiwan offers an ideal to aspire to.
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s