Taiwanese people deliver a giant vote for Beijing’s humiliation

KMT candidate Hou Yu-ih, left, and running-mate Jaw Shaw-kong concede in New Taipei City on Saturday night. Picture: AFP

William Lai’s presidential election triumph in Taiwan represents a humiliation for Beijing, a strong refusal by the people of Taiwan to be bulled, a harbinger of increased strategic danger in northern Asia and both a wake-up call and a challenge for the Albanese government.

In a three-way contest, Lai won convincingly, with more than 40 per cent of the vote, well ahead of his two rivals.

Beijing had vilified him throughout the election, saying among other things that he was potentially “the creator of a dangerous war”. It also worked hard through semi-clandestine ­social media efforts to spread disinformation against Lai and magnify digital campaigns against him.

Three times now Beijing has gone all-out to demonise a Taiwanese president or presidential election candidate. Lee Teng-hui in 1996, Chen Shui-bian in 2000, and now Lai all triumphed at the polls after gross campaigns of abuse and intimidation against them from mainland China.

It turns out Beijing is pretty bad at democracy, in practice as well as theory, which may be one reason it never tries it at home.

Lai’s Democratic Progressive Party is seen as marginally more ­inclined to pro-independence rhetoric that the Kuomintang, whose Ho Yu-ih was runner-up. But in truth no DPP president, neither Chen from 2000, nor the incumbent, Tsai Ing-wen, has ever sought to declare formal Taiwanese independence. Similarly no KMT president, whether Lee, nor Ma Ying-jeou, in office from 2000 to 2008, has ever sacrificed Taiwan’s democracy and de facto independence by accepting any path to reunification with Beijing.

In truth, all three candidates at this election had very similar policies towards Beijing: they were keen to pursue dialogue, pursue their de facto alliance with the US, planned no changes to the status quo and would not compromise Taiwan’s self government and de facto independence.

It is Beijing that is trying to strangle Taiwan diplomatically and with increasing military intimidation. Any Taiwanese president would stand up against that.

Nonetheless, this election will usher in a newly dangerous ­period. Beijing has been humiliated, and will surely seek to further intimidate and isolate Taiwan, perhaps through direct military actions. Beijing can also see that America is divided internally: facing shocking Biden-Trump polarisations, its legal system a politicised mess, its Defence Secretary in hospital, and is fully stretched by conflict in Ukraine and Gaza. Beijing could well miscalculate and be tempted to military overreach.

This poses a great challenge to the Albanese government. After the outrageous threats from Chinese ambassador Xiao Qian that Canberra must never speak in favour of Taiwanese democracy, and must never claim that our ­security could be affected by Chinese military action against Taiwan, and that if we do such a thing “the Australian people would be pushed over an abyss”, the Albanese government must respond to the Taiwan election at the highest level.

US President Joe Biden, British Foreign Secretary David Cameron, and other leaders have congratulated Lai, and the Taiwanese people, directly. So far, the Australian government response is restricted to a bland statement from the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade.

Xiao directly threatened the so-called “re-set” in China Australia relations if Canberra was out of line on Taiwan. Exactly ­because Xiao has instructed them to stay silent, Albanese and Foreign Minister Penny Wong, must publicly and explicitly congratulate Lai and the Taiwanese people.

More than that, as it has often claimed to understand, the Albanese government needs to build deterrence in the region. As it won’t do anything to provide Australian military capability, this ­deterrence rests entirely with the US military, which Australia can at least back diplomatically. Canberra must therefore help convince Washington to remain strong on Taiwan partly by supporting the US publicly and effectively.

This will be difficult for the ­Albanese government as it has completely fallen apart on national security issues since it lost the voice referendum. With dereliction in the Red Sea, equivocation on Israel, tepid at best support for Ukraine, absolute failure in augmenting the defence force, and nothing much else to show diplomatically, it clings to the China re-set as the only ­remaining bright speck of a tattered and torn foreign policy fabric.

But that re-set should not be maintained at the expense of fundamental Australian interests and values.