Taiwan Public Interest and Taiwan Think Tanks recently jointly organized a symposium titled “The Significance and Prospects of Large-scale Recalls: The Next Step of Civic Action,” inviting scholars and experts to discuss. Experts pointed out that the large-scale recall demonstrated the continuous opposition of Taiwan’s civil society to pro-China stances and concerns about the infiltration of Chinese Communist influence.
The visit of Fu Kun-chi, the convener of the Kuomintang (KMT) legislative caucus in Taiwan, leading 17 KMT legislators to Beijing to meet with Wang Huining, Chairman of the National Committee of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference, has raised concerns among the public about China’s united front strategy toward Taiwan. Civic groups criticized the parliamentary expansion bill led by certain blue and white coalition legislators as “constitutional destruction and political chaos,” ignoring public opinion, prompting a large-scale recall movement. The first wave of recalls targeting 24 KMT legislators and the suspended mayor of Hsinchu City, Lin Chih-chien, on July 26 did not pass.
Chen Li-fu, the chairman of the Taiwan Youth Generation Exchange Association and host of the symposium, stated that it is rare for almost half a country to simultaneously hold recall votes, which is a unique characteristic of Taiwan. Some regions are yet to vote, while others have already reached results, hoping for exchange of experiences to further mature and progress civil society.
Lin Tsung-hung, a researcher at the Taiwan Institute of Social Research, analyzed the recall vote, finding that those who support increased defense spending for Taiwan and oppose the “Four-year Residency for Chinese Spouses” policy change, even if they support the KMT, tended to cast affirmative votes. Therefore, the failure of the recalls does not reflect public opposition to the “resist China, protect Taiwan” approach, but rather the control exerted by blue camp factions over local (especially rural) areas.
Lin Tsung-hung noted that in seven villages in Hualien and Taitung, no affirmative votes were cast, and in areas where the number of affirmative votes greatly exceeded the negative votes, there were still around one-third of negative votes. In other words, the return to party confrontation was the primary determining factor for the recall not passing, showing that the efforts of civic groups, while unsuccessful, have been fruitful.
Lin Tsung-hung pointed out that males and older age groups seemed inclined to vote against the recall, and the issue of “Universal 10,000” (giving NT$10,000 to every citizen) that was fermenting before the vote was not included in the survey. However, the impact of income on the recall outcome was not significant. He stressed that local factional control should be used to explain the results of the large-scale recall, and internationally, it must be clarified that this does not signify a change in public attitudes towards cross-strait relations and national defense, or even leaning towards pro-China sentiments.
Hu Han-wen, a researcher at a Taiwanese think tank, commented that on July 26, Taiwan simultaneously held a rare recall vote for 24 KMT legislators and one county mayor, which, although unsuccessful, still marked a new chapter in democracy. This recall action continued from the Sunflower Movement and Blue Bird Movement, demonstrating Taiwan’s civil society’s continued opposition to pro-China stances and concerns about Chinese Communist influence.
Hu Han-wen pointed out that recalls, referendums, demonstrations, and online opinions are all important channels for the public to supervise politics and express their opinions. Although the recall on July 26 was unsuccessful, the recall vote on August 23 and the nuclear referendum would once again provide an opportunity for Taiwanese society to demonstrate civic will. Hu Han-wen encouraged everyone to actively vote, take action against the Chinese Communist threat, and safeguard democratic values.
Huang Hsiang-hsien, Chairman of the National Substitute Teachers’ Union, emphasized that recalls are not driven by hatred, as politicians should be subject to scrutiny and choice by voters, which is their basic right. In her advocacy for the rights of substitute teachers, she realized the importance of legislators’ duties, paying attention to parliamentary affairs and participating in the recall of incompetent legislators.
Huang Hsiang-hsien believed that areas like Nantou, similar to Miaoli and Hualien, with significant outflow of young population due to geographical isolation, experience limitations in political development. Therefore, civic groups strategically initiated petitions in areas where the Democratic Progressive Party had high voting rates in previous years. She mentioned that volunteers have launched the “Mountain City Public Affairs Association,” aiming to sustain the valuable civic power in Nantou for the long term.
Savungaz Valincinan, Chairman of the Taiwan Indigenous Youth Public Participation Association, shared that the recent recall activity showcased an unprecedented level of civic society power, labeling it as a “true democratic movement.” Dozens of recall groups nationwide are all composed of volunteers, showcasing diverse contributions of various professionals to bring Taiwan closer to their ideal vision.
Savungaz Valincinan stated that although data shows the recall vote reflects the blue-green base, there are many “non-quantifiable” experiences in the process that deserve attention. He emphasized that while results matter, it is also essential to focus on the process and see that Taiwan has not given up on the power of civic participation.
Savungaz Valincinan urged all citizens to continue taking action, communicate actively, listen attentively, understand differing opinions among Taiwanese people, sow the seeds, and wait for them to sprout.