On Saturday, Taiwanese are to vote in mass recalls targeting Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers. Although the campaign has consumed public attention over the past few months, remarkably, it has barely registered in the international media.
For a democracy often described as “vibrant” and “resilient,” Taiwan is navigating one of its most significant internal democratic crises in recent memory, but with only a few global witnesses. That silence should concern everyone.
The recall movement emerged in response to a controversial legislative push by the KMT and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who together control a majority in the Legislative Yuan. Although the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) retained the presidency, the opposition has used its majority to push through a series of bills that many see as an assault on democratic norms and national security.
Critics, including legal academics, activists and watchdog groups, have voiced serious concerns, saying the bills were rushed through with minimal or no debate. Budgets have been frozen or slashed with little justification, disrupting day-to-day governance. Perhaps most alarmingly, the defense budget has been targeted and national security regulations have been undermined, amid China’s escalating military threats.
The developments have sparked protests and fierce public debate within Taiwan, but beyond its borders, the issue has barely made a ripple. Why the silence?
One explanation might lie in a blind spot shared by much of the international liberal media: a narrative template that instinctively romanticizes the opposition as bearers of democratic virtue. In reporting on social movements and civil resistance, especially in non-Western contexts, Western media attention often gravitates toward the familiar script of brave protesters confronting an unjust ruling party. The Sunflower movement was embraced in precisely that manner.
The KMT and TPP are seeking to cast themselves in a similar light, framing the recall campaign as a vindictive effort by the ruling DPP — an attack on the opposition and a threat to democratic pluralism. However, in this case, the lines are blurry: The opposition wields dominant legislative power and is seeking to expand it.
In a government where the executive and legislative branches are controlled by opposing camps, it is unclear whether “opposition” is even the right word.
In contrast to the KMT’s and TPP’s narrative, the mass recall effort was not initiated by the DPP. It was started by civil society groups deeply alarmed by what they see as an abuse of power by the KMT-TPP bloc. The campaigns are from a grassroots level, decentralized and at times disorganized citizen groups who have taken on the unglamorous work of exercising their legal right to recall politicians they perceive as unfit to serve. They are collecting signatures, navigating legal hurdles, explaining sometimes tedious policy concerns and peacefully holding signs with slogans on the streets.
Their stories do not fit the usual mold. They are not standing in front of tanks or occupying government buildings. They are not university students facing riot police. Their resistance is more procedural than theatrical (although occasionally, hostile passersby do hurl insults).
However, conspiracy theories abound, and such citizens have been cast as attack dogs secretly employed by the DPP. To outside observers, their story can seem confusing and hard to dramatize, as it is not always clear who is the David and who is the Goliath in this political drama.
As such, the citizens who initiated the mass recall movement are doubly marginalized: First, by lawmakers who refuse to engage in deliberative norms, and second, by an international media landscape that too often overlooks defenders of democratic institutions when their story is not easy to package in a familiar framework.
The lack of international engagement is dangerous. This fight belongs to Taiwan, but it also needs the world to document and report.
Taiwan’s internal crisis bears global implications, as it plays out in the shadow of what Pulitzer Prize-winning historian Anne Applebaum calls “Autocracy, Inc” — the loose but formidable network of authoritarian states that lend each other material support and narrative cover to discredit democracy from within.
The world cannot afford to ignore how the crisis in Taiwan was manufactured and is being reckoned with. As an academic from Taiwan now based in the US, I have watched this crisis unfold with urgency and frustration, not only at the democratic erosion at home, but at the silence it has met abroad.
As Taiwan prepares for the first batch of recalls, we are mobilized to vote. We await a turning point — and we must bear witness.
Lo Ming-cheng is a professor of sociology at the University of California, Davis, whose research addresses civil society, political cultures and medical sociology.
In the event of a war with China, Taiwan has some surprisingly tough defenses that could make it as difficult to tackle as a porcupine: A shoreline dotted with swamps, rocks and concrete barriers; conscription for all adult men; highways and airports that are built to double as hardened combat facilities. This porcupine has a soft underbelly, though, and the war in Iran is exposing it: energy. About 39,000 ships dock at Taiwan’s ports each year, more than the 30,000 that transit the Strait of Hormuz. About one-fifth of their inbound tonnage is coal, oil, refined fuels and liquefied natural gas (LNG),
On Monday, the day before Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) departed on her visit to China, the party released a promotional video titled “Only with peace can we ‘lie flat’” to highlight its desire to have peace across the Taiwan Strait. However, its use of the expression “lie flat” (tang ping, 躺平) drew sarcastic comments, with critics saying it sounded as if the party was “bowing down” to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Amid the controversy over the opposition parties blocking proposed defense budgets, Cheng departed for China after receiving an invitation from the CCP, with a meeting with
To counter the CCP’s escalating threats, Taiwan must build a national consensus and demonstrate the capability and the will to fight. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) often leans on a seductive mantra to soften its threats, such as “Chinese do not kill Chinese.” The slogan is designed to frame territorial conquest (annexation) as a domestic family matter. A look at the historical ledger reveals a different truth. For the CCP, being labeled “family” has never been a guarantee of safety; it has been the primary prerequisite for state-sanctioned slaughter. From the forced starvation of 150,000 civilians at the Siege of Changchun
The two major opposition parties, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), jointly announced on Tuesday last week that former TPP lawmaker Chang Chi-kai (張啟楷) would be their joint candidate for Chiayi mayor, following polling conducted earlier this month. It is the first case of blue-white (KMT-TPP) cooperation in selecting a joint candidate under an agreement signed by their chairpersons last month. KMT and TPP supporters have blamed their 2024 presidential election loss on failing to decide on a joint candidate, which ended in a dramatic breakdown with participants pointing fingers, calling polls unfair, sobbing and walking
RSS