EDITORIAL: Chinese spouses in Taiwan’s politics

The growing number of Chinese spouses participating in Taiwanese politics should not, in itself, be cause for alarm, but does warrant scrutiny of candidates, their political networks and their sources of support. Taiwan is a democracy, and voters should ultimately decide who is suitable to represent them — provided that candidates and voters are participating free from coercion, concealed foreign funding and other forms of interference.

The issue has become more prominent ahead of the Nov. 28 local elections.

The Central Election Commission said 26 candidates are naturalized Chinese spouses.

Taiwan places substantial restrictions on the political participation of people from China. Under the Act Governing Relations Between the People of the Taiwan Area and the Mainland Area (臺灣地區與大陸地區人民關係條例), people from China must have established a household registration in Taiwan for at least 10 years before they can register as candidates for public office.

That requirement provides considerable time for them to establish their lives here and become part of Taiwanese society. It also gives them a lengthy period of exposure to Taiwan’s democratic institutions. Residency and integration do not by themselves establish where a person’s loyalties lie, but scrutiny of Chinese-born candidates does not mean demanding that they support de jure Taiwanese independence.

A significant portion of the electorate supports closer relations with China, while some favor eventual unification. A Chinese-born candidate is entitled to appeal to those views, provided they meet all legal requirements. The question is not where a candidate was born, but whether the Chinese government or organizations are using that person to attempt to influence Taiwan’s electoral process.

Last month, the New Taipei District Court convicted Chinese-born spouse Xu Chunying (徐春鶯) of, among other offenses, campaigning for the Taiwan People’s Party’s 2024 presidential ticket under instructions from people linked to Chinese political organizations.

That case does not establish that Chinese spouses as a group are acting on behalf of Beijing, but it does illustrate why political relationships, sources of funding and contacts with Chinese government or organizations deserve scrutiny when there is evidence of possible interference.

This is also worth considering in a broader historical context. Following the administration of former US president Richard Nixon’s opening to China, other Western countries increasingly embraced economic engagement with Beijing under the expectation that greater prosperity, international integration and the growth of a middle class would eventually encourage political liberalization in the country. That expectation has not materialized.

The lesson for Taiwan should not be that Chinese immigrants cannot participate in democratic politics, but that assumptions about political integration should not substitute for evidence about a person’s political activities and relationships.

Taiwan should apply rigorous transparency and enforcement rules to campaign financing and political relationships. Candidates who previously held Chinese nationality or household registration should be subject to the same legal standards as everyone else, and their ties to China should be transparent enough for voters and election authorities to assess.

One question for any candidate is where their political loyalties lie. If a candidate supports closer relations or unification with China, that is a political position voters can accept or reject at the ballot box. However, if there is evidence that a candidate is taking direction from the Chinese government or organizations acting on its behalf, that becomes a matter of election integrity and compliance with laws.

The number of Chinese spouses seeking political office also raises questions worth investigating. That 26 such people have registered as candidates does not demonstrate coordination or outside influence, nor would it be reasonable to assume that Chinese spouses are uniquely susceptible to political influence because of their origins. Nevertheless, authorities and journalists should ask how these candidates became involved in politics, whether they share common organizations or political networks, or have received support from people or groups connected to China; and if there is evidence that they are taking direction from the Chinese government.

The same standards of transparency and scrutiny should apply to other naturalized citizens who seek public office. The goal is to identify foreign interference, not to single out a particular nationality.

Voters decide who represents them. Protecting that principle does not mean treating Chinese spouses as a threat, nor ignoring security concerns, but ensuring that the democratic freedoms that allow new citizens to participate in politics are protected from coercion, foreign funding and attempts by foreign actors to manipulate Taiwan’s electoral process.