There is an old saying that if there is blood in the water, the sharks will come. In Taiwan’s case, that shark is China, circling, waiting for any sign of weakness to strike. Many thought the failed recall effort was that blood in the water, a signal for Beijing to press harder, but Taiwan’s democracy has just proven that China is mistaken.
The recent recall campaign against 24 Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators, many with openly pro-Beijing leanings, failed at the ballot box. While the challenge targeted opposition lawmakers rather than President William Lai (賴清德) himself, it became an indirect referendum on the country’s political direction. On that count, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) and its president emerged with their legitimacy reinforced, underscoring the strength of Taiwan’s democratic institutions.
I write this as someone who has spent years traveling the globe confronting authoritarianism. From Eastern Europe to Africa and across Asia, I have seen how fragile freedom can be, and how rare it is to find leaders who combine political courage, moral clarity and strategic skill.
The world is facing a dangerous leadership vacuum amid a united authoritarian front led by Russia and China.
Against that backdrop, Lai stands out as one of the few examples of principled, effective democratic leadership. Supported by Vice President Hsiao Bi-khim’s (蕭美琴) deft diplomacy and Minister of Foreign Affairs Lin Chia-lung’s (林佳龍) strategic outreach, Lai has guided Taiwan through this volatile period with a steady hand. Together, they have strengthened Taiwan’s alliances, expanded its international presence, and demonstrated that Taiwan is governed not just by one capable leader, but by a team committed to democratic values and resilience.
Lai inherited a volatile security environment and a legislature where the opposition blocks critical reforms on defense, judicial transparency and economic resilience. The recall’s failure means the KMT retains enough seats to continue obstruction. Still, the more important takeaway is that Taiwan’s democratic process worked exactly as it should: Citizens debated, voted and accepted the result. The DPP respected the outcome, further highlighting the stark contrast between Taiwan’s democratic culture and Beijing’s authoritarian model.
Beijing understands this contrast and fears it. Chinese propaganda has worked tirelessly to frame the recall as a “loss” for the president, part of a coordinated campaign to portray Taiwan’s leadership as weak and divided. Through disinformation, covert funding of political proxies and amplification of internal divisions, Beijing aims to erode public confidence and weaken Taiwan from within.
While China manipulates narratives, Washington has created its own challenge in the form of tariffs. Under US President Donald Trump’s “reciprocal tariff” program, Taiwan initially faced a 32 percent tariff rate on most exports, higher than Japan and South Korea, before the figure was reduced to 20 percent. Even at the reduced rate of 20 percent, Taiwan faces harsher tariffs than other US allies, a troubling signal that a frontline democracy is being penalized while authoritarian threats grow.
Lai’s response has been steady and strategic. In a period when Washington is sending mixed signals and global uncertainty is at its highest in decades, his administration has charted a clear course, seeking dialogue, increasing imports from the US and lowering tariffs on US goods.
This ability to maintain stability amid Beijing’s economic coercion and Washington’s unpredictable policy shifts demonstrates that Taiwan is a reliable, trustworthy partner. It is precisely the kind of leadership that deserves active and vocal support.
The DPP’s record further justifies that support. Under its leadership, Taiwan navigated the COVID-19 pandemic with transparency, strengthened defense cooperation with key allies and kept its economy competitive despite global headwinds. While no democracy is flawless, this is governance grounded in accountability, openness and an unwavering commitment to freedom.
The recall’s outcome is not a setback for the president; it is a reaffirmation that Taiwan’s democracy works as designed. Lai accepted the will of the public and immediately returned to governing. That kind of political maturity should inspire confidence at home and respect abroad. It is also a reminder to allies, especially the US, that Taiwan is not just another trade partner; it is a frontline democracy that deserves aligned policies in trade, security and diplomacy. A democracy that would be destroyed if China were successful in its unification efforts.
Beijing would not stop trying to discredit Taiwan’s leadership. It would continue to push narratives of division, hoping to convince the world that Taiwan’s democracy is unstable and its leaders are ineffective. The best way to counter this is for Taiwanese and the nation’s friends abroad to stand visibly and vocally with the president and the DPP as they confront these challenges.
In my work across the globe, I have seen what happens when democracies are left to fight alone and when the sharks are allowed to attack.
The vacuum of principled leadership on the world stage is being filled by powers that reject human rights and the rule of law. Taiwan, and Lai in particular, offer a rare and urgent counterexample. This is not just Taiwan’s fight; it is the democratic world’s fight.
The world should stand with Taiwan now, and fully recognize and embrace its sovereignty to remind authoritarians everywhere that democracy still has defenders willing to meet the challenge.
M. Dane Waters is a global political strategist, author, and advocate for democracy and human rights. He has advised leaders and movements in more than 80 countries, from Eastern Europe to Africa to Asia, and is the founder of the Humanity for Freedom Foundation.
Taiwan has lost Trump. Or so a former State Department official and lobbyist would have us believe. Writing for online outlet Domino Theory in an article titled “How Taiwan lost Trump,” Christian Whiton provides a litany of reasons that the William Lai (賴清德) and Donald Trump administrations have supposedly fallen out — and it’s all Lai’s fault. Although many of Whiton’s claims are misleading or ill-informed, the article is helpfully, if unintentionally, revealing of a key aspect of the MAGA worldview. Whiton complains of the ruling Democratic Progressive Party’s “inability to understand and relate to the New Right in America.” Many
US lobbyist Christian Whiton has published an update to his article, “How Taiwan Lost Trump,” discussed on the editorial page on Sunday. His new article, titled “What Taiwan Should Do” refers to the three articles published in the Taipei Times, saying that none had offered a solution to the problems he identified. That is fair. The articles pushed back on points Whiton made that were felt partisan, misdirected or uninformed; in this response, he offers solutions of his own. While many are on point and he would find no disagreement here, the nuances of the political and historical complexities in
Taiwan faces an image challenge even among its allies, as it must constantly counter falsehoods and misrepresentations spread by its more powerful neighbor, the People’s Republic of China (PRC). While Taiwan refrains from disparaging its troublesome neighbor to other countries, the PRC is working not only to forge a narrative about itself, its intentions and value to the international community, but is also spreading lies about Taiwan. Governments, parliamentary groups and civil societies worldwide are caught in this narrative tug-of-war, each responding in their own way. National governments have the power to push back against what they know to be
Taiwan is to hold a referendum on Saturday next week to decide whether the Ma-anshan Nuclear Power Plant, which was shut down in May after 40 years of service, should restart operations for as long as another 20 years. The referendum was proposed by the opposition Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) and passed in the legislature with support from the opposition Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). Its question reads: “Do you agree that the Ma-anshan Nuclear Power Plant should continue operations upon approval by the competent authority and confirmation that there are no safety concerns?” Supporters of the proposal argue that nuclear power
RSS