The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) are colluding in the legislature, creating a reality resembling a train racing down the tracks at full speed, with the passengers bound and gagged as ransomed hostages.
The opposition parties appear intent on upsetting the total operations of the government, demanding that everything from personnel affairs to budgeting go through them first.
They will not accept any other proposals: It is their way or nothing. They want to keep barreling forward, and they are not going to slam on the brakes anytime soon.
The people in the engine room might fear that suddenly hitting the brakes would cause the train to derail. Maybe they forgot there is a kill switch right next to them, but they dare not use it. Thus, their response is to hope that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) minority in the legislature could use rational communication to implore those at the helm to respect the “rules of the game,” “put safety first” and “consider the concerns of the majority.”
The problem with such responses is that the bad actors who have so easily stormed the train conductor’s cabin have revealed their shamelessness. They believe that “good things will happen only so long as all things are chaotic.”
Consequently, when moral and ethical persuasion fall upon deaf ears and indifference; when benevolence and conciliation run abreast of increasing aggravation and a ravenous desire for power; when idealistic dialogue runs up against brutal raw despotism; when there is no rationalism to clean up the mess; and when forbearance is seen as a weakness and becomes sustenance for wreaking havoc, the KMT and TPP, in their polarized confrontation, become a force that might determine the demise or survival of Taiwan’s democracy.
The opposition parties need to be reckoned with directly if Taiwanese want democracy to survive. People cannot shirk away, as it is only a matter of time. Without a direct confrontation, the public’s will could become the final arbiter in judging who is right or wrong in this situation. What other means do people have?
Viewing the relationship between the executive branch and the opposition-ruled legislature as a magnified version of the relationship between county and municipal governments, how could President William Lai (賴清德) not be a moving and inspiring figure as he was as former Tainan mayor? It was then that he confronted former Tainan city council speaker Lee Chuan-chiao (李全教), convicted of vote-buying, by refusing to allow corruption to ruin the local government’s integrity by standing up to city “audits” and “inquiries.”
What an excellent example Lai has set. Even after moving from the role of mayor to president, he should have no reason not to expand his integrity and anti-corruption efforts, to take a stand against the legislature’s unbridled despotism.
As for copying Kaohsiung residents — who after finally having enough of his antics, recalled their then-mayor Han Kuo-yu (韓國瑜), now the legislative speaker — recalling the opposition legislators who are acting against the public good could spread far and wide into a nationwide democratic movement. Who is to say it could not happen?
Most importantly is whether the executive branch misinterprets the saying of “playing host without creating a scene” as ignoring bad guests causing a stir around them. If the DPP adopts strict neutrality while civic groups are in the middle of running recall motions without getting all hands on deck and providing ample financial resources to those efforts, and instead watches from the sidelines with arms folded, ostensibly to avoid dirtying their hands from fighting corruption or perhaps to avoid looking inelegant while doing so, then such an image of virtuous inaction would make the DPP appear unserious in the legislature. That might end up being their just deserts.
Chang Kuo-tsai is a retired National Hsinchu University of Education associate professor.
Translated by Tim Smith
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