Connect with us
[bsa_pro_ad_space id=12]

International

In Taiwan’s election, voters refused to give in to Beijing’s relentless pressure

Published

6 minute read

From the MacDonald Laurier Institute

By J. Michael Cole

Beijing will no doubt regard the results of Saturday’s elections as a further affront to its nationalistic pride.

Amid unprecedented attention from the international community and rising tensions in the Taiwan Strait, the people of Taiwan headed to the polls on Saturday to elect a new president and legislature. After months of intense campaigning and intimidation by China, Taiwanese voters elected to give the ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) a third four-year term – the first time in the island nation’s democratic history that a party has remained in power for more than two consecutive terms.

Despite Beijing’s warning that a vote for the DPP candidate, Lai Ching-te, constituted a vote for “war,” the Taiwanese electorate chose continuity, with Mr. Lai vowing to continue the policies of President Tsai Ing-wen, who successfully navigated a difficult geopolitical environment over the past eight years. (Ms. Tsai will step down on May 20 after reaching her two-term limit.)

Wary of the Taiwan-centric DPP, Beijing has been relentless in its attempts to coerce Taiwan, both militarily and economically, and to isolate it from the international community while using various incentives to foster support for unification with the People’s Republic of China. Those efforts have been largely unsuccessful, and eight years on, Taiwan is arguably much more connected with the international community than it was under more Beijing-friendly governments.

Beijing will no doubt regard the results of Saturday’s elections as a further affront to its nationalistic pride, and we can therefore expect an intensification of its punitive measures at the economic and diplomatic level, as well as an intensification of its already highly destabilizing military activity around Taiwan. In response, the Lai administration will continue to strive to diversify its export destinations to further reduce its economic dependence in China, and, as one of the most vibrant democracies in the region, will remain an important partner to the U.S.-led community of democracies as it pushes back against resurgent authoritarianism. Under Ms. Tsai, Taiwan has played an important role as an example and promoter of liberal democracy, both within the region and abroad. Its government and vibrant civil society have expanded their footprint abroad, often helping other democracies, such as Canada, learn how to better balance their relationship with China so that trade and engagement does not come at the cost of corroded values and institutions.

While many domestic factors also weighed into who the Taiwanese decided to vote for in Saturday’s election, in which the DPP also lost its majority of seats in the Legislative Yuan, their vote for Mr. Lai signalled a desire for Taiwan to continue to play a larger role on the international stage. While potentially reducing tensions in the Taiwan Strait for some time, a victory by his two opponents would nevertheless have come at the cost of retrenchment on the international stage and greater focus on Taiwan’s relations with – and concessions to – China.

Still, despite ongoing efforts to modernize its military and develop a defence posture that is better suited to meet the challenge posed by the Chinese military, Taiwan’s ability to deter an invasion by the much more powerful People’s Liberation Army remains contingent on a U.S. commitment to its defence, as well as pressure from other countries making it clear to Beijing that any attempt to annex Taiwan by force and against the wishes of its 23.5 million people would come at an unacceptable cost.

Potential distractions caused by the ongoing war in Ukraine, the risks of a regional conflagration in the Middle East, an unpredictable North Korea and political instability in the U.S. could undermine American efforts to assist Taiwan and therefore embolden Beijing. The DPP’s loss of its majority in parliament could also complicate the new administration’s ability to secure the budgets it needs to fund defence modernization and foreign policy initiatives, which Beijing will no doubt seek to exploit.

There is every reason to believe that a Lai administration will build upon and continue to expand the course set by his predecessor. In the last eight years, Taiwan shone on the international stage, and consolidated its place as both a bastion of liberal-democratic values and an economic powerhouse whose technological prowess in fields such as semiconductors have positioned the country as an indispensable component of the global supply chain. And yet, this success story continues to be threatened by an authoritarian neighbour that rejects the reality that, whoever they vote for, the people of Taiwan categorically refuse to be ruled by Beijing. They cherish the freedom, democracy and way of life they have built over decades of arduous work. And they want their rightful place on the international stage.

J. Michael Cole is a Taipei-based senior fellow with the Macdonald-Laurier Institute in Ottawa and a senior adviser on countering foreign authoritarian influence with the International Republican Institute. He is also a former analyst with the Canadian Security Intelligence Service.

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

espionage

Declassified evidence reveals Obama admin meddling to undermine Trump’s 2016 win

Published on

From LifeSiteNews

By Doug Mainwaring

Tulsi Gabbard released documents that ‘detail a treasonous conspiracy by officials at the highest levels of the Obama White House to subvert the will of the American people.’

President Barack Obama and his national security cabinet members manufactured and politicized intelligence to lay the groundwork for what was essentially a years-long coup against President Donald Trump, according to Director of National Intelligence (DNI) Tulsi Gabbard, who just released a trove of newly declassified documents providing hard evidence of the Obama administration’s subterfuge.

On Friday, Gabbard released a series of statements making damning claims about the Obama administration’s actions “subverting the will of the American people and undermining our democratic republic.”

“For months preceding the 2016 election, the Intelligence Community shared a consensus view: Russia lacked the intent and capability to hack U.S. elections,” Gabbard wrote on X. “But weeks after President Trump’s historic 2016 victory defeating Hillary Clinton, everything changed.”

“On Dec 8, 2016, Intelligence Community officials prepared an assessment for the President’s Daily Brief, finding that Russia ‘did not impact recent U.S. election results’ by conducting cyber attacks on infrastructure,” Gabbard continued. “Before it could reach the President, it was abruptly pulled ‘based on new guidance.’ This key intelligence assessment was never published.

“The next day, top national security officials including FBI Dir James Comey, CIA Dir John Brennan and DNI James Clapper gathered at the Obama White House to discuss Russia,” Gabbard said. “Obama directed the Intelligence Community to create a new intelligence assessment that detailed Russian election meddling, even though it would contradict multiple intelligence assessments released over the previous several months.”

 

“Obama officials immediately leaned on their allies in the media to advance their falsehoods,” she noted. “Anonymous Intelligence Community sources leaked classified information to The Washington Post and others that Russia had intervened to hack the election in Trump’s favor.”

“On January 6, 2017, just days before President Trump took office, DNI Clapper unveiled the Obama-directed politicized assessment, a gross weaponization of intelligence that laid the groundwork for a years-long coup intended to subvert President Trump’s entire presidency,” Gabbard explained. “According to whistleblower emails shared with us today, we know Clapper and Brennan used the baseless discredited Steele Dossier as a source to push this false narrative in the intelligence assessment.”

“This betrayal concerns every American. The integrity of our democratic republic demands that every person involved be investigated and brought to justice to prevent this from ever happening again,” she averred.

“The issue I am raising is not a partisan issue. It is one that concerns every American. The information we are releasing today clearly shows there was a treasonous conspiracy in 2016 committed by officials at the highest level of our government. Their goal was to subvert the will of the American people and enact what was essentially a years-long coup with the objective of trying to usurp the President from fulfilling the mandate bestowed upon him by the American people,” Gabbard said in a statement. “Their egregious abuse of power and blatant rejection of our Constitution threatens the very foundation and integrity of our democratic republic. No matter how powerful, every person involved in this conspiracy must be investigated and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, to ensure nothing like this ever happens again. The American people’s faith and trust in our democratic republic and therefore the future of our nation depends on it. As such, I am providing all documents to the Department of Justice to deliver the accountability that President Trump, his family, and the American people deserve.”

The declassified files cited by Gabbard have been available to the public at DNI.gov.

Continue Reading

Great Reset

U.S. rejects WHO pandemic amendments, citing threat to sovereignty

Published on

MXM logo MxM News

Quick Hit:

The U.S. has officially rejected the WHO’s 2024 pandemic rule changes. In a joint statement, Secretaries Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and Marco Rubio said the amendments threaten American sovereignty, free speech, and privacy—handing too much power to unelected global bureaucrats.

Key Details:

  • The U.S. State Department and HHS transmitted the official rejection of the 2024 amendments to the WHO’s IHR.
  • Officials cited threats to national sovereignty, vague terminology, and the WHO’s political susceptibility—particularly to China—as grounds for rejection.
  • The amendments would have mandated WHO-led responses, digital health documentation, and “equitable access” initiatives regardless of U.S. withdrawal from the WHO.

Diving Deeper:

The rejection represents a sharp rebuke of the World Health Assembly’s 2024 amendments to the International Health Regulations (2005), which sought to centralize global pandemic decision-making power within the WHO. Kennedy and Rubio emphasized the amendments’ “vague and broad” language and their potential to create policy rooted in politics and global “solidarity” rather than science and national interest.

Among the most controversial changes were new authorities for the WHO to unilaterally declare health emergencies, coordinate international responses, and guide member states toward “equitable access” to vaccines and other health commodities. The amendments also encouraged countries to implement digital health documents—raising red flags for privacy and surveillance concerns.

“The amendments risk unwarranted interference with our national sovereign right to make health policy,” the joint statement read. Kennedy and Rubio specifically criticized the lack of public input in drafting the new rules and warned that WHO directives could suppress legitimate scientific debate and restrict Americans’ freedom of speech under the guise of “controlling misinformation.”

The officials pointed to the WHO’s well-documented failures during the COVID-19 pandemic, including its deference to the Chinese Communist Party, as a stark example of why international bodies should not be granted binding authority over U.S. domestic policy. “These amendments… fail to adequately address the WHO’s susceptibility to political influence and censorship—most notably from China—during outbreaks,” the statement noted.

Even more alarming, the statement highlighted that the amended rules would have bound the U.S. regardless of its current status in the WHO, essentially imposing obligations on a nation that is no longer part of the organization. This drew particular concern from Rubio, who has long warned against ceding U.S. autonomy to global institutions.

In reaffirming their commitment to “put Americans first,” Kennedy and Rubio vowed to continue resisting international encroachments on U.S. freedoms. “We will not tolerate international policies that infringe on Americans’ speech, privacy, or personal liberties,” they declared.

This formal rejection marks a victory for critics of globalism and top-down health mandates, signaling that under the current administration, American decision-makers are prioritizing sovereignty, transparency, and constitutional protections over global consensus driven by unelected bureaucrats.

Continue Reading

Trending

X