A concerted campaign by China’s ruling Communist Party to interfere in Taiwan’s presidential and legislative elections has failed — and perhaps even backfired — after President Tsai Ing-wen was overwhelmingly reelected at the weekend.
She captured a record 8 million votes and a majority of 57.1% in an election that had been increasingly seen as a referendum on ties with mainland China.
Tsai’s Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) also increased its majority in the country’s parliament. It has an outright majority of 61 seats versus the opposition Kuomintang’s (KMT) 38 and will no longer need smaller parties and independents to pass laws.
It’s been remarkable comeback for Tsai, whose popularity collapsed during her first term. She resigned as party chairman following disastrous mid-term local elections in 2018 which saw the DPP lose key mayoral races.
KMT populist Han Kuo-yu was elected mayor of Kaohsiung, Taiwan’s number two city and a DPP stronghold, and was subsequently selected as the pro-Beijing party’s presidential candidate. A year ago he seemed destined to limit Tsai to one term.
But just as Tsai began to creep back up in polls, Chinese leader Xi Jinping urged Taiwan to embrace unification under the “one country, two systems” Beijing uses to govern Hong Kong.
The message was ill-received, especially by younger Taiwanese. It was to prove a greater blunder once protests in nearby Hong Kong began in June. Han was forced to backpedal on his pro-Beijing message and never recovered. Tsai turned the screw by reasserting her party’s pro-independence message amid an economy benefiting from the US/China trade war.
While Australia should be cheered by this strong rebuff against China’s influence-peddling, Canberra has expressed next to no public support for the result, despite Australia’s strong trading relationship and close ties with Taiwan.
In contrast the United States voiced satisfaction, with a statement from Secretary of State Mike Pompeo congratulating Taiwan “for once again demonstrating the strength of its robust democratic system” which is “a model for the Indo-Pacific region and a force for good in the world”.
The American people and the people of Taiwan are not just partners — we are members of the same community of democracies, bonded by our shared political, economic, and international values.
Yet, despite the positive response in those countries concerned about an increasingly aggressive China — particularly in the South China Sea — Tsai’s win ensures that the Taiwan Strait remains the region’s most potent flashpoint.
China’s reaction to the election result has been furious. State media has issued its usual dark warnings, claiming “dirty tricks” had propelled Tsai’s victory, and that her reelection was “no doubt a development that deeply worries people who hope for peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait”. It asserted that China has “a full policy toolbox” to curb “Taiwan independence secessionist activities or to benefit Taiwan compatriots”.
Beijing is expected to extract further retribution by continuing to pressure allies and isolate Taiwan from major international forums under the so-called One-China policy.
Beijing’s economic heft mean many are unwilling to directly challenge its position on Taiwan. Certainly, countries — like Australia — that are overly dependent on trade with China are not ready to take the risk of challenging Xi Jinping.
The question is, if some plucky countries do begin rejecting the formula, will China’s diplomatic anger spill into military action? In the meantime, there is no reason that closer public relationships with Taiwan could not be part of a more gradualist global effort to realise Taiwan’s sovereignty.
Australia can play a constructive role here, and should be heartened by the election result. Taiwan has shown at the ballot box that its people have no desire to fall under the rule of the Chinese Communist Party, whose claims upon its sovereignty have always been highly questionable.
It’s bizarre times when the Kuomintang, historically an anti-CCP party are now pro-CCP and a more progressive candidate is anti-CCP.
Spare us the ‘plucky countries’ using ‘public relationships’ as part of a ‘more gradualist global effort to realise (insert country here) sovereignty’, with Australia being sufficiently ‘plucky’ to play a ‘constructive role’.
‘Insert’ “Iraq” in the parentheses, and see how that looks.
Early last week, the Iraq parliament said ‘on yer bikes’ to Amerika & Co. Trump immediately said ‘Nup, not without you paying us $Billions for the base(s) we built, for ourselves (with your money). Anyway, we’ll just sanction you lot, like you’ve never been sanctioned before’ (He’s probably using Maddy Albright’s ‘Yes, it was worth it’ sanctions, of the ’90’s, that sanctioned over half a million Iraqi kids to death).
By Wednesday or Thursday, Schlo had fallen into line behind Donnie, and we were staying in Iraq, to finish the ‘mission to eradicate Daesh’ – which Donnie has been bellowing for Yonks is done and dusted, thanks solely to the US of A.
And, dutifully, the Australian stenographer class immediately put the whole issue to bed – Schlo ‘had spoken!’
Yeah, well, on Friday (our time), the day after Schlo’s pronouncement;
“Iraq asks US to prepare troop pullout, send team to Baghdad
Caretaker Prime Minister Adil Abdul-Mahdi has asked the United States to send a delegation to Iraq to begin preparing for a troop pullout, his office said on Friday.
In a phone call late on Thursday with US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, Abdul-Mahdi “requested that delegates be sent to Iraq to set the mechanisms to implement parliament’s decision for the secure withdrawal of [foreign] forces from Iraq,” AFP reports.”
As for China’s ‘diplomatic anger spilling into military action’, I suggest you consult the form guide and understand, even if they did, they are coming from a very long way behind any and all ‘US coalitions’.
The minute we show respect for the sovereignty of other nations, is the time we might be able to lecture others – after a suitable period of penance.
“The American people and the people of Taiwan are not just partners — we are members of the same community of democracies, bonded by our shared political, economic, and international values.” Yet the US formally recognises only Beijing and maintains an “Amrican Institute” in Taipei, not an embassy. Sainsbury dreaming about some “plucky” countries recognising the ROC instead of Beijing just illustrates how inappropriate it is for Crikey to be giving him space. Get someone who reports what’s actually happening.
Better and more politely put than what I had in mind Rais.
Can’t we just congratulate a democratic election without resorting to triumphalist wasp nest poking. Let’s not forget the Taiwanese (and South Korean) people had to fight and die for their democracy and freedom from dictators in living memory. I don’t remember any militarist hawks complaining about the previous dictatorships.
Any link (moral, solicitous or otherwise) with the events in HK over the last six months Michael?
I accept that you had the idiotic headline forced upon you (i.e. you did not create it) but when some subscribers (D. Thompson in this case) can jot a perspective that renders yours puerile at best I wonder what i am doing here.
With Sainsbury’s efforts below par at best and much better offerings from The Guardian, The Conversation and others I do wonder at the way the Crikey editorial staff ignore frequent criticisms of this contributor and just persist with him. I guess they just have so many subscribers now that if a few of us drop away it won’t bother them.
Crikey could improve with fewer but better read subscribers and a higher subscription but then the writers would also have to be “up to it”. I regret to convey for the nth time that Crikey is little more than NewsCorp on the other side of the coin.
More often than not the terminology employed in the articles is not correct. If anyone is interested I’ll use an example from the future rather than the past; I’ll just set my stopwatch.
Hey Kyle, what are you up to these days? Still in Guangdong? Just curious.