Stanford Scholar Praises Taiwan's Democracy, Urges US to Learn from It

Facing powerful external pressure and internal political turmoil, Taiwan’s democratic system has again received affirmation from the international academic community. Dai Yamen, a senior researcher at the Institute for Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law at Stanford University, said on the 9th that despite Taiwan’s current experience of blue‑green political polarization and the need to endure a sustained information war and gray‑zone interference from China, Taiwan’s democracy has displayed remarkable resilience. This observation highlights Taiwan’s unique position in a global wave of democratic backsliding and underscores the effectiveness of the defensive mechanisms the island has built against authoritarian expansion.

Dai pointed out that the core reason for Taiwan’s democratic success and high public trust lies in the independent operation of its Central Election Commission. Elections are the cornerstone of democracy, and the impartiality of election authorities directly determines public confidence in the democratic system. After multiple rounds of party turnover and intense electoral competition, Taiwan’s election administration has consistently been praised for its professionalism and independence, allowing society to quickly return to stability even after highly contested elections. Dai even asserted that the United States should learn from Taiwan in matters of election administration and democratic governance—a commendation that carries particular weight for a country that has long been scrutinizing its own electoral system and democratic quality.

Nevertheless, Taiwan’s demonstrated resilience has not appeared ex nihilo; it has been forged through prolonged pressure and infiltration by China. Beijing’s information warfare against Taiwan has been unrelenting, employing social‑media platforms, local collaborators and the spread of false narratives to undermine confidence in democratic institutions and exacerbate internal political divisions. Beyond the cognitive battlefield, China has increasingly resorted to gray‑zone tactics such as military aircraft and naval vessel incursions, cyber attacks and economic coercion. Though these actions do not meet the threshold of full‑scale war, they drain Taiwan’s societal resources and constitute a persistent test of its democracy.

In response to these external threats, Taiwanese society and government have continued to strengthen democratic defence mechanisms. In the information‑war arena, government agencies have bolstered real‑time fact‑checking, while independent verification groups and civil‑society organisations actively combat disinformation through education and transparent information dissemination, raising public media literacy. Politically, although competition between the pan‑blue and pan‑green parties remains fierce and occasional partisan polarization can hinder major policy initiatives, there remains a strong consensus across society on the overarching goals of national security and democratic way of life. The ability to find baseline agreement amid division is a crucial pillar that sustains Taiwan’s democratic resilience.

Dai’s commentary not only affirms Taiwan’s democratic achievements but also offers a valuable case study for global democratic development. While many established democracies grapple with the rise of populism, social fragmentation and crises of institutional trust, Taiwan—situated at the frontline of geopolitics as a young democracy—demonstrates that democratic systems can survive and deepen even under simultaneous external authoritarian pressure and internal political tension. The suggestion by an American scholar that the United States should emulate Taiwan’s election administration and democratic governance reverses the traditional one‑way flow of democratic export from the West, showing that Taiwan has amassed practical experience in defending democracy that can serve as a reference for the international community.

Looking ahead, Taiwan will continue to confront comprehensive Chinese attacks and gray‑zone challenges, and internal political frictions will not disappear overnight. However, as Dai emphasized, as long as key democratic institutions such as the Central Election Commission maintain their independence and credibility, and as long as civil society remains steadfast in its commitment to democratic values, Taiwan’s democratic system can keep its footing amid stormy conditions. This positive assessment from an American scholar constitutes a national‑level recognition of the Taiwanese people’s long‑standing effort to safeguard democracy and serves as a reminder that Taiwan’s democratic resilience is an indispensable bulwark in the global defence of democratic governance.

(Source: Central News Agency)