According to the most recent My Formosa poll released on Dec. 1, 26.4 percent of respondents agreed that “both sides of the Taiwan Strait belong under one China,” up from 17.4 percent in March from the same pollster.
The proportion of those who disagreed fell from 76.4 to 65.7 percent over the same period — nearly 20 percent over just eight short months. This is not a random fluctuation. It is a sign that Taiwan’s social and psychological defenses are fracturing.
Cross-analysis suggests that the shift was primarily driven by supporters of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP). The proportion of respondents supportive of the KMT who agreed with “one China” increased significantly, likely a reflection of the party’s recent election of Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) as its chairwoman.
Cheng has long advocated for a Chinese national identity. Her election has consolidated the party’s base and sent a signal to wider society in Taiwan: The KMT has shifted from an ambiguously defensive position to one that embraces a “one China” narrative.
The Dec. 1 poll, which covered last month, showed that 46.9 percent of respondents view her as inclined toward cross-strait unification, an otherwise exceptionally rare position for a mainstream politician to hold.
When opposition leaders can promote a Chinese identity without incurring a ruinous backlash, their supporters can become psychologically entrenched in their identification with “one China” — a view perhaps once held in private, but now expressed explicitly.
Even more concerning is the rapid shift among supporters of the TPP, a party that brands itself as being rational, pragmatic and outside the traditional blue-green divide, but lacks a clear stance on cross-strait relations. The poll showed that the proportion of respondents supportive of the TPP who agreed with “one China” increased by more than 20 percent from March, suggesting that it is a lack of position itself that might pose the greatest risk.
In the information war, these supporters are among the most vulnerable and are easily swayed by narratives that prioritize pragmatic conflict avoidance and the economy.
A broader issue was revealed when respondents were asked what they see the cross-strait relationship ultimately evolving to. Regardless of voting tendency, 37.4 percent said a business partnership, while only 16.9 percent said enemies. This naive economization of the cross-strait relationship is a primer to the most insidious form of cognitive warfare and neatly avoids acknowledging the risks of annexation or erosion of sovereignty. Some people, who might not be explicitly in favor of unification, are perhaps beginning to feel that it would not be entirely unacceptable.
The fear is that these shifts in polling numbers are just the beginning. When politicians cozy up to China, the social consensus can shift faster than expected. If the proportion of support for “one China” breaches the 30 percent threshold and the effects of the Chinese Communist Party’s “united front” campaign fully take shape, Taiwan’s ability to bargain for sovereignty at the international negotiating table will be severely undermined.
This is no longer a question of party politics — it is about whether Taiwan can still distinguish between true peace and being absorbed. Taiwan cannot afford to sit and watch as its sovereign defenses erode. If the crisis is ignored, it is Taiwanese who will pay the price. As a matter of urgency, we must solidify our defenses by strengthening democratic education and information literacy. Civil society must remain vigilant and come together to defend Taiwanese agency. Once lost, freedom is not easily regained.
Yang Chih-chiang is a teacher.
Translated by Gilda Knox Streader
The image was oddly quiet. No speeches, no flags, no dramatic announcements — just a Chinese cargo ship cutting through arctic ice and arriving in Britain in October. The Istanbul Bridge completed a journey that once existed only in theory, shaving weeks off traditional shipping routes. On paper, it was a story about efficiency. In strategic terms, it was about timing. Much like politics, arriving early matters. Especially when the route, the rules and the traffic are still undefined. For years, global politics has trained us to watch the loud moments: warships in the Taiwan Strait, sanctions announced at news conferences, leaders trading
Eighty-seven percent of Taiwan’s energy supply this year came from burning fossil fuels, with more than 47 percent of that from gas-fired power generation. The figures attracted international attention since they were in October published in a Reuters report, which highlighted the fragility and structural challenges of Taiwan’s energy sector, accumulated through long-standing policy choices. The nation’s overreliance on natural gas is proving unstable and inadequate. The rising use of natural gas does not project an image of a Taiwan committed to a green energy transition; rather, it seems that Taiwan is attempting to patch up structural gaps in lieu of
The Executive Yuan and the Presidential Office on Monday announced that they would not countersign or promulgate the amendments to the Act Governing the Allocation of Government Revenues and Expenditures (財政收支劃分法) passed by the Legislative Yuan — a first in the nation’s history and the ultimate measure the central government could take to counter what it called an unconstitutional legislation. Since taking office last year, the legislature — dominated by the opposition alliance of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and Taiwan People’s Party — has passed or proposed a slew of legislation that has stirred controversy and debate, such as extending
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators have twice blocked President William Lai’s (賴清德) special defense budget bill in the Procedure Committee, preventing it from entering discussion or review. Meanwhile, KMT Legislator Chen Yu-jen (陳玉珍) proposed amendments that would enable lawmakers to use budgets for their assistants at their own discretion — with no requirement for receipts, staff registers, upper or lower headcount limits, or usage restrictions — prompting protest from legislative assistants. After the new legislature convened in February, the KMT joined forces with the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) and, leveraging their slim majority, introduced bills that undermine the Constitution, disrupt constitutional
RSS