Taiwanese democracy has weathered many storms — martial law, diplomatic isolation, economic uncertainty and rising authoritarian pressure from Beijing. Yet today, the gravest threat to its survival might come not from across the Taiwan Strait, but from within.
The recent mass-recall effort aimed at ousting 24 Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers might have failed at the ballot box, but it succeeded in revealing a dangerous truth: Taiwanese politics is broken.
The major political parties increasingly view each other not as competitors, but as enemies. Instead of debating policies, they trade accusations of treason. Instead of compromise, they choose sabotage. The legislature, paralyzed by obstruction and mutual contempt, is no longer a site of democratic deliberation — it is a battlefield.
The polarization is no longer just a nuisance; it is a national security risk.
An analysis published on Friday in Foreign Affairs by political analyst Lev Nachman and Academia Sinica Institute of Political Science assistant research fellow Yen Wei-ting (顏維婷) bluntly warned in its headline that “Taiwan’s democracy is in trouble.” The article details how political dysfunction and mutual distrust have eroded the nation’s ability to respond to growing threats from China.
“Taiwan’s leaders are prioritizing defeating one another over defending the nation,” they wrote.
No one who has watched recent brawls in the legislature or witnessed the bitter recall campaigns would disagree.
Beijing has ramped up military threats and coercive pressure, while Taiwanese lawmakers are freezing military budgets, demonizing political opponents and refusing to cooperate, even on matters as existential as defense policy. President William Lai’s (賴清德) administration has called for bolstering deterrence; the opposition has blocked funding. While the Chinese military expands its drills, Taiwan’s politicians sharpen their knives, aimed at each other.
In a democracy, disagreement is natural, but affective polarization — the toxic belief that anyone who disagrees must be corrupt, unpatriotic or dangerous — is corrosive. It eats away at national solidarity.
Nachman and Yen wrote that 85 percent of Democratic Progressive Party supporters said they would fight to defend Taiwan if China invaded; that number drops to 4 percent among KMT voters. What happens in a crisis if half the country blames the other for provoking war?
Beijing knows this. It has already tried to divide Taiwan with online disinformation and whisper campaigns about war and chaos. The truth is that China is not creating the polarization; it is exploiting it, and Taiwanese are making its job easier.
This moment calls for leadership not from one party, but from all sides. Lai must tone down moralistic language about “impurities.” KMT and Taiwan People’s Party leaders must stop comparing democratic rivals to Nazis. Defending Taiwan does not mean agreeing on every policy; it means agreeing on what is worth defending: institutions, freedoms, the right for Taiwanese to decide their own future.
This has been done before. In the early days of COVID-19, the government and civil society set aside their differences to act swiftly and decisively. Lawmakers can do it again, if they choose unity over unification and cooperation over collapse.
Democracy is not just about elections — it is about the ability to govern — and in the face of China’s growing threats, dysfunction is no longer an option. A house divided against itself cannot stand, and it certainly cannot fight.
Simon Tang is an adjunct professor at California State University, Fullerton, who lectures on international relations.
Chinese actor Alan Yu (于朦朧) died after allegedly falling from a building in Beijing on Sept. 11. The actor’s mysterious death was tightly censored on Chinese social media, with discussions and doubts about the incident quickly erased. Even Hong Kong artist Daniel Chan’s (陳曉東) post questioning the truth about the case was automatically deleted, sparking concern among overseas Chinese-speaking communities about the dark culture and severe censorship in China’s entertainment industry. Yu had been under house arrest for days, and forced to drink with the rich and powerful before he died, reports said. He lost his life in this vicious
A recent trio of opinion articles in this newspaper reflects the growing anxiety surrounding Washington’s reported request for Taiwan to shift up to 50 percent of its semiconductor production abroad — a process likely to take 10 years, even under the most serious and coordinated effort. Simon H. Tang (湯先鈍) issued a sharp warning (“US trade threatens silicon shield,” Oct. 4, page 8), calling the move a threat to Taiwan’s “silicon shield,” which he argues deters aggression by making Taiwan indispensable. On the same day, Hsiao Hsi-huei (蕭錫惠) (“Responding to US semiconductor policy shift,” Oct. 4, page 8) focused on
In South Korea, the medical cosmetic industry is fiercely competitive and prices are low, attracting beauty enthusiasts from Taiwan. However, basic medical risks are often overlooked. While sharing a meal with friends recently, I heard one mention that his daughter would be going to South Korea for a cosmetic skincare procedure. I felt a twinge of unease at the time, but seeing as it was just a casual conversation among friends, I simply reminded him to prioritize safety. I never thought that, not long after, I would actually encounter a patient in my clinic with a similar situation. She had
George Santayana wrote: “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” This article will help readers avoid repeating mistakes by examining four examples from the civil war between the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) forces and the Republic of China (ROC) forces that involved two city sieges and two island invasions. The city sieges compared are Changchun (May to October 1948) and Beiping (November 1948 to January 1949, renamed Beijing after its capture), and attempts to invade Kinmen (October 1949) and Hainan (April 1950). Comparing and contrasting these examples, we can learn how Taiwan may prevent a war with
RSS