Total Recall: Political Tensions Escalate in Taiwan
By Marshall Reid
Taiwan is no stranger to political tumult. Since emerging from authoritarianism in the early 1990s, the island nation has earned a reputation for its lively, often combative democracy. Even so, the last several years have been especially turbulent. Taiwan’s democracy has grown increasingly acrimonious as polarization rises, disinformation proliferates and China works tirelessly to exploit divisions on the island. A series of bitter controversies has also thrown Taiwan’s political processes into disarray.
The latest domestic dispute came to a head in July. In response to a series of legislative reforms proposed by the opposition Kuomintang (KMT) and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), the ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) launched a large-scale campaign to recall dozens of KMT and TPP lawmakers. The move, popularly known as the “Great Recall”, largely failed to achieve its objectives, but it is emblematic of larger, more corrosive trends in Taiwanese political discourse. Given Taiwan’s perilous position in China’s shadow, such dissension could prove consequential.
Controversial Legislation
Taiwan has had divided government since a January 2024 national election. The DPP controls the presidency, but a coalition of the KMT and the TPP holds the parliament, the Legislative Yuan (LY). The divide has created challenges for President Lai Ching-te and his DPP, which had enjoyed unified rule since 2016. The LY under the leadership of the KMT and TPP is a consistent thorn in Lai’s side, blocking key items on the presidential agenda and cutting government spending. Predictably, this has greatly eroded trust between the two branches.
In May 2024, the KMT-TPP coalition introduced a series of bills intended to reform the LY and its role in Taiwan’s governing system. Among other provisions, the bills would greatly expand the LY’s oversight capabilities, providing the legislature with broad latitude to investigate government officials, subpoena documents and issue penalties for noncompliance. Backers of the reforms cited the need for increased transparency and accountability, arguing that the measures were necessary to combat corruption and government overreach. Once news of the bills reached headlines, however, the opposition’s justifications did little to blunt public outrage.
Protests soon broke out across Taiwan. By late May, hundreds of thousands of demonstrators had gathered in major cities, accusing the opposition of subverting democracy and ignoring standard political processes. These protests became known as the “Bluebird Movement”, named for the similarity between the Chinese characters for “bluebird” and Qingdao, the name of the street on which the protests emerged. The DPP, outraged by the opposition’s actions and emboldened by public sentiment, quickly pushed back against the bills. This retaliation soon coalesced around a large-scale push to recall 31 officials associated with the legislation.
Recall and Response
Taiwan’s Constitutional Court annulled many of the most controversial elements of the proposed reforms in October 2024. But backers of the “Great Recall” continued to push forward with their revenge. For the DPP, the effort presented a political opportunity. If even a fraction of the targeted officials were successfully recalled, the party might regain control of the LY. Many DPP officials accordingly threw their support behind the initiative, with some going so far as to accuse KMT lawmakers of colluding with China to undermine Taiwanese democracy.
The Great Recall nevertheless failed to resonate with the broader public. In the first wave of votes, held on July 26, all 24 officials whose fates hung in the balance managed to retain their seats. Many did so with sizable majorities. A further seven recall attempts failed on August 23, bringing a tumultuous campaign to a muted close.
The results thus far undoubtedly constitute a KMT victory. Their implications for Taiwan, however, are unclear. The recall campaign, though unprecedented in scope, was merely the latest in an escalating series of political clashes. Over the last five years alone, Taiwan has seen dozens of political scandals, numerous recall attempts, increasingly violent partisan bickering and repeated revelations of Chinese meddling. Some may dismiss these controversies as signs of a healthy, passionate democracy, but the effect on Taiwanese political discourse and government functionality suggests otherwise. With China pressing on every front, the United States pursuing aggressive tariff negotiations and much of the world distracted by multiple conflicts, Taiwan can ill afford such damaging infighting.
For U.S. and European observers, the recall controversy should be similarly disquieting. Taiwan has long served as a bellwether for the effects of foreign interference on democratic systems, even if the island’s resilience in the face of pervasive Chinese influence operations has been a source of inspiration for many. Taiwan’s recent political struggles may be an indication, however, that resilience is weakening. Like so many other democracies worldwide, Taiwan is straining under the weight of modern-day challenges, internal and external.
Its citizens have been far from complacent. They have recognized that democracy is not a given and have consistently rallied in defense of their democratic institutions. For other states struggling to navigate this age of rising illiberalism, Taiwan’s recent experiences should provide a heartening lesson: Democracy can persevere even in the most challenging of environments with the support of an engaged, passionate electorate.