Beijing defeated Taiwan

With a participation of over 75%, the highest since 2008, the elections in Taiwan confirmed all the forecasts in favor of the candidate Tsai Ing-wen, who won with over 57% of the votes and reached the majority also in the parliament. The winner built her election campaign against Chinese interference and in favor of Taiwan's independence from Beijing. This electoral program, however, in form has never been made explicit, in order not to irritate China too much, but has maintained a de facto ambiguous attitude in favor of the status quo: maintaining independence without officially declaring it. If this is the form, the actual substance presented to the voters is for the maintenance of detachment from Beijing, without providing for bankruptcy solutions such as that of Hong Kong, summarized in the never implemented program: "one state two systems". The majority of Taiwanese voters and above all young people understood this vote as a real referendum for the maintenance of democratic values ​​in the country and against the proposal for a reconciliation with China as proposed by the nationalist party. This election result has many causes, of which the desire to preserve autonomy and democracy represent only internal ones. For external reasons, it is necessary to analyze the Chinese behavior both in the motherland and in Hong Kong and, above all, towards Taiwan itself. To maintain the line set by Xi Jingping, Beijing has repeatedly warned Taiwan not to pursue independence and has repeatedly stressed that the island belongs to China as the country's territorial continuity. The repressions in Hong Kong close to the vote in Taiwan have also contributed to shifting the consensus towards those who have shown themselves in favor of maintaining democratic values. What is surprising is the Chinese approach which is anything but pragmatic and which appears totally unsuitable for exercising the role of great power. Although it is true that Beijing considers entities that do not recognize themselves in Chinese legislation as Chinese territory, China's behavior has shown a conduct censored by a large part of the world public opinion and the capacity for relations with foreign countries has been ensured only by the great financial liquidity available. Taiwan's vote, in reality, seems to frighten Beijing, which fears other demonstrations in Hong Kong and especially in the interior of the Chinese country, already in difficulty due to the repression against Muslims and dissidents. In fact, the intensity of the reaction, carried out with a predictable pattern, because it places the responsibility for the election result on foreign forces, in particular the United States, indicates a disorientation and the absence of arguments capable of justifying the Chinese attitude. On the practical side, China is exerting pressure on Taiwan with threats to resort to the role of force to safeguard territorial integrity also through exercises by the Chinese navy in the sea strait that divides mainland China from Taiwan. From a diplomatic point of view, the victory of the Taiwanese independence activists means that a potentially dangerous scenario for the area's balance is confirmed: the United States could accelerate ties with Taipei and increase military supplies, which have already existed. These supplies, although substantial, are considered insufficient against a potential attack by Beijing; the greatest risk is that the US wants to set up an American base in an area that Beijing considers to be its property. This could also be part of Washington's denial of Washington's official recognition of the Chinese question, which condenses into the definition of a single China. From a Chinese containment perspective, Taiwan could guarantee a strategic factor of absolute importance for the United States, both from a military and a commercial point of view; the point is how advantageous it will be to continue on this path, given Beijing's attitude of total intransigence. For China, however, the management of internal politics is perhaps becoming more difficult than the management of international politics, precisely because it does not appear equipped to manage dissent and this can produce inevitable repercussions at a diplomatic and even commercial level.