The July 26 recall elections are over, and the numbers are clear: high turnout, with “disagree” prevailing across the board. The results also revealed something more troubling: a void between voting decisions and recognition of the existential challenge Taiwan faces, seen across blue, green and swing voters.
Many who voted against the recalls cited procedural fairness, resisting political gamesmanship and judging legislators on local performance rather than ideology. Some were offended by being told that they are not truly Taiwanese if they voted against the recalls. Others recoiled at the idea of labeling all Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers “pro-China.”
Some commentators, such as Y. Tony Yang (“Radical moderation of recall voters,” Aug. 3, page 8), interpreted the result as a sign of democratic maturity, as proof that Taiwanese voters reject political purges and value institutional stability.
In a normal political environment, that might be so, but as Taiwan lives next to an authoritarian regime that has openly vowed to end its democracy — by military force if needed — moderation in the name of balance risks becoming complacency in the face of danger.
Besides, would a successful recall election signify democratic immaturity? Not at all.
When each election is treated purely as a local matter — who fixed the roads, who served the district, who plays politics too hard — without weighing the larger reality of Taiwan’s survival, voters play into Beijing’s strategy. That is how democracies are lost: not in one dramatic moment, but through small decisions in which citizens convince themselves the external threat can wait.
Every time Taiwanese vote as if China were irrelevant, they help normalize Beijing’s influence and weaken the defenses that keep Taiwan free. It is like a family arguing over household chores, while gangs are setting fire to the house.
Democracy thrives on debate, on the right to disagree, on the freedom to withhold support from those who voters believe have failed them. However, democracy in a nation under constant threat requires something more: a shared baseline that defending sovereignty is not just one issue among many, but the foundation of every other issue. Lose that foundation, and Taiwan’s democracy would not just be eroded — it would be erased.
Textbook democracy can only exit when all political parties are united in recognizing Taiwan as a sovereign state, in acknowledging China’s aggression, and in agreeing on the measures needed to strengthen the nation’s defense and resilience. It is when everyone, from the president to legislators to civil servants, is sworn to defend the nation against the aggression of a foreign power, first and foremost China.
In that democracy, even the faintest whiff of collusion with China would be condemned without hesitation. Only then can voters safely make their choices based purely on who can govern locally more effectively, without fearing that such choices might undermine the country’s survival.
This is not a call for blind partisanship. Nothing prevents KMT or Taiwan People’s Party members from standing up and condemning China’s aggression, loudly and without ambiguity. If they choose not to, voters should ask themselves why.
Voting decisions cannot be made as if Taiwan’s democracy exists in a vacuum. A vote cast without considering the China factor is not a neutral act, but is a step, however small, toward the outcome Beijing wants.
The July 26 recall elections are over, but the lessons should not be forgotten. Every vote cast either strengthens Taiwan’s resilience or erodes it. We can argue about who should do the dishes later, but first, we must deal with the gang outside.
John Cheng is a retired businessman from Hong Kong living in Taiwan.
In a summer of intense political maneuvering, Taiwanese, whose democratic vibrancy is a constant rebuke to Beijing’s authoritarianism, delivered a powerful verdict not on China, but on their own political leaders. Two high-profile recall campaigns, driven by the ruling party against its opposition, collapsed in failure. It was a clear signal that after months of bitter confrontation, the Taiwanese public is demanding a shift from perpetual campaign mode to the hard work of governing. For Washington and other world capitals, this is more than a distant political drama. The stability of Taiwan is vital, as it serves as a key player
Yesterday’s recall and referendum votes garnered mixed results for the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). All seven of the KMT lawmakers up for a recall survived the vote, and by a convincing margin of, on average, 35 percent agreeing versus 65 percent disagreeing. However, the referendum sponsored by the KMT and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) on restarting the operation of the Ma-anshan Nuclear Power Plant in Pingtung County failed. Despite three times more “yes” votes than “no,” voter turnout fell short of the threshold. The nation needs energy stability, especially with the complex international security situation and significant challenges regarding
Much like the first round on July 26, Saturday’s second wave of recall elections — this time targeting seven Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers — also failed. With all 31 KMT legislators who faced recall this summer secure in their posts, the mass recall campaign has come to an end. The outcome was unsurprising. Last month’s across-the-board defeats had already dealt a heavy blow to the morale of recall advocates and the ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), while bolstering the confidence of the KMT and its ally the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP). It seemed a foregone conclusion that recalls would falter, as
The fallout from the mass recalls and the referendum on restarting the Ma-anshan Nuclear Power Plant continues to monopolize the news. The general consensus is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) has been bloodied and found wanting, and is in need of reflection and a course correction if it is to avoid electoral defeat. The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has not emerged unscathed, either, but has the opportunity of making a relatively clean break. That depends on who the party on Oct. 18 picks to replace outgoing KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫). What is certain is that, with the dust settling
RSS