After Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi last week announced her plans to dissolve the Japanese parliament and call a snap election, some people saw this as a potential model for institutional reform. However, what people should pay attention to is whether Taiwan’s political parties have the capacity to ensure the country’s regular functioning.
Taiwan and Japan share the conundrum of the governing party holding a minority of seats. However, unlike in Taiwan, the Japanese prime minister can dissolve parliament in the event of a political deadlock and call snap elections to seek a new mandate.
Taiwan’s system is closer to a presidential model with separation of powers. It features checks and balances between the government branches, but lacks institutional mechanisms for resolving deadlocks. Once political parties refuse to cooperate, governance grinds to a halt.
The budget debacle last year was evidence enough. The opposition made history with the scale of their budget reductions, and forced the Executive Yuan to file for reconsideration six times. Meanwhile, procedural committees have repeatedly blocked filings and raised black-box proposals, gradually paralyzing democratic controls. The outcome has not been bolstered oversight, and checks and balances, but a stagnation of government functions.
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and Taiwan People’s Party must take their positions seriously. Being in opposition does not necessitate blanket rejections, and oversight need not equal total paralysis.
Multi-party democracies have long demonstrated that cooperation and policy negotiations are key to preventing national derailment. When the opposition always angles for confrontation and indiscriminately blocks whatever they can, it comes at the expense of Taiwanese.
The challenge is not whether Taiwan could recreate Japan’s mechanism for parliamentary dissolution, but whether it could bring politics and the legislature back to reality.
An unwillingness to shoulder governance responsibility only exacerbates systemic failures. Democracy is not a race to shut down the government, it is a test of who can work together to keep the country moving forward despite disagreements.
Yang Chih-chiang is a teacher.
Translated by Gilda Knox Streader
The cancelation this week of President William Lai’s (賴清德) state visit to Eswatini, after the Seychelles, Madagascar and Mauritius revoked overflight permits under Chinese pressure, is one more measure of Taiwan’s shrinking executive diplomatic space. Another channel that deserves attention keeps growing while the first contracts. For several years now, Taipei has been one of Europe’s busiest legislative destinations. Where presidents and foreign ministers cannot land, parliamentarians do — and they do it in rising numbers. The Italian parliament opened the year with its largest bipartisan delegation to Taiwan to date: six Italian deputies and one senator, drawn from six
Recently, Taipei’s streets have been plagued by the bizarre sight of rats running rampant and the city government’s countermeasures have devolved into an anti-intellectual farce. The Taipei Parks and Street Lights Office has attempted to eradicate rats by filling their burrows with polyurethane foam, seeming to believe that rats could not simply dig another path out. Meanwhile, as the nation’s capital slowly deteriorates into a rat hive, the Taipei Department of Environmental Protection has proudly pointed to the increase in the number of poisoned rats reported in February and March as a sign of success. When confronted with public concerns over young
Taiwan and India are important partners, yet this reality is increasingly being overshadowed in current debates. At a time when Taiwan-India relations are at a crossroads, with clear potential for deeper engagement and cooperation, the labor agreement signed in February 2024 has become a source of friction. The proposal to bring in 1,000 migrant workers from India is already facing significant resistance, with a petition calling for its “indefinite suspension” garnering more than 40,000 signatures. What should have been a straightforward and practical step forward has instead become controversial. The agreement had the potential to serve as a milestone in
China has long given assurances that it would not interfere in free access to the global commons. As one Ministry of Defense spokesperson put it in 2024, “the Chinese side always respects the freedom of navigation and overflight entitled to countries under international law.” Although these reassurances have always been disingenuous, China’s recent actions display a blatant disregard for these principles. Countries that care about civilian air safety should take note. In April, President Lai Ching-te (賴清德) canceled a planned trip to Eswatini for the 40th anniversary of King Mswati III’s coronation and the 58th anniversary of bilateral diplomatic
RSS