Taiwan’s greatest threat isn’t China—it’s political polarisation Article by Foreign Affairs

In its timely and sobering analysis, Foreign Affairs confronts one of Taiwan’s most urgent yet underappreciated vulnerabilities: not the threat of Chinese military invasion, but the internal fracture of its democratic society. Framed around the unprecedented July 26 mass recall vote targeting 24 legislators—ultimately unsuccessful but deeply revealing—the piece unveils the depth of political polarisation threatening to undermine Taiwan from within.

At the heart of the article is a portrait of a democracy at war with itself. Taiwan’s two main political camps—the centre-left Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) and the centre-right Kuomintang (KMT)—are not simply ideological rivals; they are locked in a toxic cycle of mutual demonisation. Each side accuses the other of undermining democracy, selling out to China, or driving Taiwan to war. With DPP President Lai Ching-te labelling opposition lawmakers as “impurities” in society and KMT leaders comparing the DPP to Nazis, the political rhetoric has shifted from adversarial to existential.

This polarisation, Foreign Affairs argues, has paralysed Taiwan’s ability to govern and defend itself. As the DPP pushes for greater military preparedness and closer alignment with the United States, the KMT-TPP coalition has obstructed its efforts—most damagingly by freezing billions in defence spending. The result is a democracy that appears robust on the surface, with free elections and an active civil society, yet deeply fractured beneath. Taiwan is suffering not only from ideological division but “affective polarisation”—a level of distrust where citizens actively despise one another based on political affiliation.

The implications for national security are grave. Taiwan faces escalating aggression from Beijing, including military drills, psychological warfare, and coordinated disinformation campaigns. Yet with such profound internal discord, Taiwan risks being too politically paralysed to mount an effective or unified defence. If war were to break out, it’s unclear whether the population would rally together quickly enough—especially given that support for defending the island splits sharply along party lines.

But the article is not without hope. Drawing on past examples, including Taiwan’s remarkably unified response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the authors point to a latent capacity for national solidarity. Around 40 per cent of Taiwanese voters identify as politically unaffiliated, and among them, a growing number are calling for moderation and compromise. During the recall campaigns, some DPP and KMT moderates found common ground in frustration over legislative dysfunction and concern about Chinese interference—hints of a potential centrist consensus.

The conclusion is clear: Taiwan’s greatest strength—its vibrant democracy—could become its greatest weakness if polarisation is left unchecked. Leaders need not agree on everything, especially regarding China, but they must agree on the basics of national defence, democratic preservation, and civil respect. Without such consensus, Taiwan risks facing a foreign threat while consumed by internal collapse.

By Vugar Khalilov